UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #5

[BuzzC]

If this is true then I pity the desperate callers.
No qualifications? Wow!

He had a degree in psychology.

 

[notsure]

They weren't. He said that he wished he'd raised them to the coroner but didn't for whatever reason.

I have big issues accepting that a doctor would have reservations about raising concerns relating to a lowly nurse.

Kind of suggests his "concerns" weren't that great at the time. I mean, if he seriously thought somebody was posing a threat to babies' lives, he wouldn't hold his tongue just because somebody in authority told him to keep quiet.

 

[notsure]

I've never bought "conspiracy" theories, to be honest. If, and it's a big IF something similar is going on here then it's definitely not a case of an intentional stitch-up. That would require a bunch of people who are responsible for being in charge of a chronically failing neonatal unit to be closet criminal geniuses in being able to set up some poor nurse for immensely serious crimes.

If she's the by-product of a failing system it's because the failing system was so bad that the blame was likely to fall on someone in the power orders and it's fallen on her. Not because someone planned to set her up. Useless managers aren't tht clever.

No, I wasn't suggesting it was a deliberate scapegoating exercise. However, once someone has pointed the finger and people are possibly led to believe it's true, I imagine some people would follow like sheep.

 

[Marantz4250b]

No, I wasn't suggesting it was a deliberate scapegoating exercise. However, once someone has pointed the finger and people are possibly led to believe it's true, I imagine some people would follow like sheep.

Yes, precisely!

 

[BuzzC]

I’m also not in the belief that people with a normal social mind can be triggered in any way into the murder of multiple innocent babies. It would take a pathological level of envy or hate to make a person do that only present in people of a diagnosable disposition.
I don’t think Anyone has stated that Lucy’s profession necessarily means she can’t do harm, just that her prior work history and seemingly the rest of her history would give no indication that this is a likely behaviour which increases the odds so to speak. It’s also noticeable that a statement that says “I killed the babies because I’m not good enough” might be taken with a pinch of salt because people do say and think things that don’t mean anything. They are also capable of unintentionally offending others and giving a bad image that doesn’t represent who they are sometimes.

The statement said: “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough + I’m a horrible evil person.”

Why have we to take that with a pinch of salt but nothing else in that note?

 

[Marantz4250b]

Kind of suggests his "concerns" weren't that great at the time. I mean, if he seriously thought somebody was posing a threat to babies' lives, he wouldn't hold his tongue just because somebody in authority told him to keep quiet.

Again, precisely. Don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily doubting the guy and I'm certainly not trying to imply that he isn't being honest. But, a statement given years after the events in question, when no notes of same seem to have been made, and that statement given in the context of a murder enquiry, has to be treated with a very healthy level of skepticism.

Human memory is often seen to be highly accurate when, in reality, the studies have shown that to be far from the case.

 

[BuzzC]

No, I wasn't suggesting it was a deliberate scapegoating exercise. However, once someone has pointed the finger and people are possibly led to believe it's true, I imagine some people would follow like sheep.

Very possibly. And that’s been “hinted” at by the defence. I think it’s worth exploring.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I'm not sure the motive is going to be a big part of this case, apart from the human desire to put reason to a situation that seems beyond reason.

LL was arrested twice and then held for a long, long time before the trial. I'd have though it would have been at least a part of the prosecution opening if they had a clear one. Obviously it would hugely strengthen the prosecution case if they do have one, but we shall see.

What do you mean “held”? Yeh that’s what I was saying in a case of circumstantial evidence a clear motive and fitting personality would be damming. They really would have said it already, it’s noticeably absent at this point. Although it might be the case that character comes last aside from statements relevant to events as they happened. Are they going to try and paint the picture of a murderer last of all do you think?

 

[notsure]

The statement said: “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough + I’m a horrible evil person.”

Why have we to take that with a pinch of salt but nothing else in that note?

If we're back to the note again (and why not?), that phrase could easily have been written after interrogation by the police, with LL writing down what they've alleged against her. We've all seen the tv dramas with the cops saying those things - "You killed them on purpose, didn't you, Lucy... etc." Trying to break her down.

 

[BuzzC]

If we're back to the note again (and why not?), that phrase could easily have been written after interrogation by the police, with LL writing down what they've alleged against her. We've all seen the tv dramas with the cops saying those things - "You killed them on purpose, didn't you, Lucy... etc." Trying to break her down.

Sorry, the poster who mentioned we should take this with a pinch of salt had previously said things written in that note suggested an insight into her character.

In my opinion, all or none of that note should be taken with a pinch of salt. Not the bits that suit one’s own view.

 

[Dotta]

Re the note
I remember there was something like
"I don't deserve my parents".

Very interesting IMO.

Trying hard to please them?

Feeling not appreciated enough?

Moo

 

[Sweeper2000]

The statement said: “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough + I’m a horrible evil person.”

Why have we to take that with a pinch of salt but nothing else in that note?

As I said before I believe a potentially different meaning is taken from that sentence when taken as a whole and when taken by itself. I also said the whole note is probably to be taken with a pinch of salt in other words, otherwise it really is cherrypicked. It is also far out of alignment with what other people have said about her.

Edit to say “a potentially different meaning”.

 

[BuzzC]

As I said before I believe a different meaning is taken from that sentence when taken as a whole and when taken by itself. I also said the whole note is probably to be taken with a pinch of salt in other words, otherwise it really is cherrypicked. It is also far out of alignment with what other people have said about her.

Thanks for clarifying. I agree, certainly for the time being, that whole note has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

It can’t all be true for starters, given the huge contradictions in it. So anyone assessing what’s on there, at the moment, has to be selective.

 

[BuzzC]

Again, precisely. Don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily doubting the guy and I'm certainly not trying to imply that he isn't being honest. But, a statement given years after the events in question, when no notes of same seem to have been made, and that statement given in the context of a murder enquiry, has to be treated with a very healthy level of skepticism.

Human memory is often seen to be highly accurate when, in reality, the studies have shown that to be far from the case.

I understand the discussion moved on to the “suspicions” he (allegedly) had - but I mentioned the doctor because I, mistakenly, thought he had raised questions over LL’s character prior to her being arrested/charged with murder. I since accepted that wasn’t actually the case and I’m not sure if I’d made that clear.

 

[Noseyposy76]

I think a few of my posts are being taken out of context here.

I mentioned another nurse killing babies because it was suggested that those in the caring profession couldn’t harm others. Not because I felt the cases were similar in any other way.

I mentioned the references made by the parents because it was stated there was “nothing” to suggest bad character. I maintain this isn’t true - although I also accept that the parents views are not enough to paint a picture of someone capable of such crimes.

I followed that up by pointing out that many, very famous, serial killers are known for their “positive” traits or outward appearance anyway, so the thoughts of her friends/colleagues/others aren’t really pivotal anyway.

I have no idea if she is guilty (based on what I’ve heard so far). I just cannot rule out the possibility she might be based on the fact: she’s a nurse; she’s doesn’t look like the type; or that we can’t pin down a motive based on what we’ve heard so far.

Who knows, there may have been something that triggered her? Pregnancy loss, finding out she can’t have children, killing a child by accident and realising you took some enjoyment out of it. Who knows? I certainly don’t - there’s a million possible reasons she may have done this. One may be put forward, one may be not.

I do fully appreciate the counter points - it’s made me more broad minded in this case, certainly. I hope I’m offering some counter balance to that.

Pregnancy loss and infertility are extremely common and highly traumatic medical conditions, but they are still so stigmatised. For anyone to suggest either as a possible motive, clearly has no experience or understanding of these conditions.

 

[BuzzC]

Pregnancy loss and infertility are extremely common and highly traumatic medical conditions, but they are still so stigmatised. For anyone to suggest either as a possible motive, clearly has no experience or understanding of these conditions.

I certainly have experience of pregnancy loss. On multiple occasions. In fact, that’s very possibly another reason why I feel invested in the case. Because I know how difficult it can be for some families to have children. The thought of them being taken away by negligence, or worse, horrifies me.

They were given as examples of possible “triggers”. Any traumatic life experience could be a trigger to someone. I could have picked literally any number of different ones but, if I’ve offended or upset anyone by naming these two particular issues, I am truly sorry.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I understand the discussion moved on to the “suspicions” he (allegedly) had - but I mentioned the doctor because I, mistakenly, thought he had raised questions over LL’s character prior to her being arrested/charged with murder. I since accepted that wasn’t actually the case and I’m not sure if I’d made that clear.

Would be easy to do considering the actual words he used in that article. Reading them you wouldn’t assume his suspicions were purely related to medical evidence. He said he became suspicious of LL after the events this wouldn’t necessarily imply it was only related to medical issues and not her character but a newspaper might imply it by selective placement in a article.

 

[ShireChe]

What do you mean “held”? Yeh that’s what I was saying in a case of circumstantial evidence a clear motive and fitting personality would be damming. They really would have said it already, it’s noticeably absent at this point. Although it might be the case that character comes last aside from statements relevant to events as they happened. Are they going to try and paint the picture of a murderer last of all do you think?

By 'held' I just meant charged and on remand. Prosecution have had a long time and I'm sure trawled many hours of electronic communications and interviews with colleagues etc. so it would be very strange if setting out their case they just completely left out a motive. Why would they make such a show of the note and FB searches if they had a motive lined up.

My own opinion is the prosecution are confident that the sheer weight of expert opinion and otherwise unexplainable events are strong enough, but there is a lot of evidence yet to be introduced and maybe the defence is waiting for the right moment to introduce their aces (if indeed they have any)

 

[Sweeper2000]

By 'held' I just meant charged and on remand. Prosecution have had a long time and I'm sure trawled many hours of electronic communications and interviews with colleagues etc. so it would be very strange if setting out their case they just completely left out a motive. Why would they make such a show of the note and FB searches if they had a motive lined up.

My own opinion is the prosecution are confident that the sheer weight of expert opinion and otherwise unexplainable events are strong enough, but there is a lot of evidence yet to be introduced and maybe the defence is waiting for the right moment to introduce their aces (if indeed they have any)

That’s a very reasonable interpretation of what’s available. It’s very curious they haven’t mentioned any motive with the best the prosecution having to offer in “setting the scene” being the note and fb searches. Don’t the police need a motive to make a case? If that is all “this happened and we don’t know why so have to blame someone” then I don’t know what to think or if after it’s summed up by the jury they think the same, what then?

Edit. I think we can safely assume that the medical evidence is strong and pointed though. If that is the prosecutions strongest approach and is currently strong.

 

[Tortoise]

They weren't. He said that he wished he'd raised them to the coroner but didn't for whatever reason.

I have big issues accepting that a doctor would have reservations about raising concerns relating to a lowly nurse.

"Dr Jayaram told Ben Myers KC, representing Letby, that he and his colleagues had become increasingly worried about a run of 'very unusual and seemingly inexplicable' collapses in the neonatal unit from June 2015.[...]

Following half an hour of intense cross-examination, he told the barrister: 'At the time of the coroner’s report, we as a group of clinicians had already begun to raise concern about the association that we’d seen with an individual being present in these situations.

'And at the time we were being told that really we shouldn’t be saying such things and not to make a fuss.

'My concern is that had I suggested this - that this could have been happening – I didn’t have any hard evidence.' "

Lucy Letby trial hears TV doctor and his colleagues 'raised concerns'