UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, murder of babies, 7 Guilty of murder verdicts; 8 Guilty of attempted murder; 2 Not Guilty of attempted; 5 hung re attempted #35

[Sweeper2000]

It's thirteen deaths over the two years excluding the murders that leaves 3 per year which is about what was expected. The disparity in total is due to the counting of deaths "at the hospital" the other ones in that total of fifteen were shipped out and died at other hospitals leaving a remainer of 13. 13 - 7 equals 6 over the two years.

 

[iamshadow21]

It's thirteen deaths over the two years excluding the murders that leaves 3 per year which is about what was expected. The disparity in total is due to the counting of deaths "at the hospital" the other ones in that total of fifteen were shipped out and died at other hospitals leaving a remainer of 13. 13 - 7 equals 6 over the two years.

Also - and I can't recall the source, but I think something like this was stated at trial, but don't quote me - but those figures include stillbirths and conditions incompatible with life. So they wouldn't be related to quality of care, necessarily.

I'm wrong, ignore me!

MOO

 

[Sweeper2000]

Also - and I can't recall the source, but I think something like this was stated at trial, but don't quote me - but those figures include stillbirths and conditions incompatible with life. So they wouldn't be related to quality of care, necessarily.

MOO

The stillbirths are a separate category, that's considered pre neonatal. Think the stillbirths are upper twenties by themselves. Anything after birth is nnu. There is also a window of viability that is considered NNU after which a separate category again.

 

[iamshadow21]

The stillbirths are a separate category, that's considered pre neonatal. Think the stillbirths are upper twenties by themselves. Anything after birth is nnu. There is also a window of viability that is considered NNU after which a separate category again.

Okay, thank you. I will edit my post.

 

[JosieJo]

An increase in death by itself can occur due to random chance though. Or it could be down to many unknown factors converging. Without a full table showing who was present for all deaths and serious collapses then it is not possible to read much into her presence for those 7 deaths. That's the point. There may have been up to 17 deaths in the period I believe. What about the other 10 deaths? That's still a big increase. If she wasn't present for those other deaths that lends credence to the defences claim that the hospital was failing. If she was present, then that makes her look even more guilty. It's really important to know imo.

I agree it's important to know but if the other deaths had clear cause it would be wrong to include them.
What we need to know is who was present for all the "unexpected" / unusual progression deaths

 

[Jazmania]

It's thirteen deaths over the two years excluding the murders that leaves 3 per year which is about what was expected. The disparity in total is due to the counting of deaths "at the hospital" the other ones in that total of fifteen were shipped out and died at other hospitals leaving a remainer of 13. 13 - 7 equals 6 over the two years.

Please can you link to the source or say where you heard this? I don't believe it was a 2 year period. Thought it was just over 1 year. So the remaining deaths were at other hospitals?

Just think it would shut these conspiracy theorists up somewhat if we had the full data. There's no reason to name the other children, but I think it is important evidence.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Please can you link to the source or say where you heard this? I don't believe it was a 2 year period. Thought it was just over 1 year. So the remaining deaths were at other hospitals?

Just think it would shut these conspiracy theorists up somewhat if we had the full data. There's no reason to name the other children, but I think it is important evidence.

There is a freedom of information request available online from "what do they know" website. All I did was g search "foi coch" and it was available. Not the "bank use 15/16" though. I stand corrected it's actually 15 in total but I believe some of those babies did indeed get moved to other hospitals. The hospital of birth is recorded as where the baby died but only within a certain time frame, baby k for example.

FOI 4568.docx

www.whatdotheyknow.com

Bare in mind these are also statistics that have absolutely no detail whatsoever.

 

[Jazmania]

There is a freedom of information request available online from "what do they know" website. All I did was g search "foi coch" and it was available. Not the "bank use 15/16" though. I stand corrected it's actually 15 in total but I believe some of those babies did indeed get moved to other hospitals. The hospital of birth is recorded as where the baby died but only within a certain time frame, baby k for example.

FOI 4568.docx

www.whatdotheyknow.com

Bare in mind these are also statistics that have absolutely no detail whatsoever.

Thanks that's really interesting. There were 14 deaths in 13 months. On first glance a massive increase from before.

 

[callmehenry]

It’s been mentioned that there were 6 other deaths that occurred when Letby wasn’t on shift. Any inkling as to why that wasn’t mentioned in the trial? Surely they could have used that as part of her defence when she was implying someone else must be behind the deaths

 

[Sweeper2000]

It’s been mentioned that there were 6 other deaths that occurred when Letby wasn’t on shift. Any inkling as to why that wasn’t mentioned in the trial? Surely they could have used that as part of her defence when she was implying someone else must be behind the deaths

Ask Mr myers. Think we covered it ages ago figured it was due to that not bearing any relation to the charges.

 

[callmehenry]

Ask Mr myers. Think we covered it ages ago figured it was due to that not bearing any relation to the

Apologies, I wasn’t on here ‘ages ago’ so didn’t realise it had already been discussed.

 

[marynnu]

An increase in death by itself can occur due to random chance though. Or it could be down to many unknown factors converging. Without a full table showing who was present for all deaths and serious collapses then it is not possible to read much into her presence for those 7 deaths. That's the point. There may have been up to 17 deaths in the period I believe. What about the other 10 deaths? That's still a big increase. If she wasn't present for those other deaths that lends credence to the defences claim that the hospital was failing. If she was present, then that makes her look even more guilty. It's really important to know imo.

These deaths and near-misses were not due to 'many unknown factors converging'. If it happens, it happens for a reason. Certainly in neonatal care it would be bizarre in the extreme to have no idea why so many serious incidents occurred, in fact even one case would be highly unusual. I can't emphasise this enough. The numbers are significant but the mysterious nature of the incidents even more so.

 

[Jazmania]

These deaths and near-misses were not due to 'many unknown factors converging'. If it happens, it happens for a reason. Certainly in neonatal care it would be bizarre in the extreme to have no idea why so many serious incidents occurred, in fact even one case would be highly unusual. I can't emphasise this enough. The numbers are significant but the mysterious nature of the incidents even more so.

I agree that the the unexplained and unexpected collapses were key to the case. However the statistical report by the RSS about health care killers does explain that increases in deaths can occur purely by chance, or for unknown reasons. The Telegraph article points out that one rise in baby deaths in a hospital was eventually found to have been caused by them changing their supplier of infant forumula. An example of multiple factors converging would be:

The hospital was struggling, and was understaffed + they taking in more babies with serious needs + they were admitting more ill babies because the maternity unit was not adequately monitoring pregnant mothers.

That is the defence case. Now I'm not saying that's what I think. But I think it's important to know who was present for all deaths on the unit. Because if there were an extra 8 deaths in the June 2015-June 2016 period that Letby wasn't present for, then that suggests there was something else going on at the hospital causing the spike in deaths (as 8 is still very high). If she was present for a majority of the extra deaths, then that raises questions as to whether she was involved in those too. After all, the fact that she hasn't been charged for them just means there wasn't enough evidence. Perhaps she was more subtle. I think it's important to know either way, because if it was confirmed she was present for them, that would be the end of people like Richard Gill's argument.

 

[JosieJo]

It’s been mentioned that there were 6 other deaths that occurred when Letby wasn’t on shift. Any inkling as to why that wasn’t mentioned in the trial? Surely they could have used that as part of her defence when she was implying someone else must be behind the deaths

Presumably because they were deaths with obvious causes of natural cause?

 

[marynnu]

I agree that the the unexplained and unexpected collapses were key to the case. However the statistical report by the RSS about health care killers does explain that increases in deaths can occur purely by chance, or for unknown reasons. The Telegraph article points out that one rise in baby deaths in a hospital was eventually found to have been caused by them changing their supplier of infant forumula. An example of multiple factors converging would be:

The hospital was struggling, and was understaffed + they taking in more babies with serious needs + they were admitting more ill babies because the maternity unit was not adequately monitoring pregnant mothers.

That is the defence case. Now I'm not saying that's what I think. But I think it's important to know who was present for all deaths on the unit. Because if there were an extra 8 deaths in the June 2015-June 2016 period that Letby wasn't present for, then that suggests there was something else going on at the hospital causing the spike in deaths (as 8 is still very high). If she was present for a majority of the extra deaths, then that raises questions as to whether she was involved in those too. After all, the fact that she hasn't been charged for them just means there wasn't enough evidence. Perhaps she was more subtle. I think it's important to know either way, because if it was confirmed she was present for them, that would be the end of people like Richard Gill's argument.

You're right to think not one of those 'factors' are of the slightest relevance.
As I understand it there are just 2 references to her presence for the other deaths.
It has been stated that there were 13 deaths in her final year on the unit, for which she was present for either 13 (Operation Hummingbird documentary) or 12 (Vanity Fair article, which has been shown on Reddit).

 

[May72031]

It’s been mentioned that there were 6 other deaths that occurred when Letby wasn’t on shift. Any inkling as to why that wasn’t mentioned in the trial? Surely they could have used that as part of her defence when she was implying someone else must be behind the deaths

Perhaps those deaths, while tragic, were perfectly explainable or expected? Or, in other words, natural.

 

[marynnu]

It’s been mentioned that there were 6 other deaths that occurred when Letby wasn’t on shift. Any inkling as to why that wasn’t mentioned in the trial? Surely they could have used that as part of her defence when she was implying someone else must be behind the deaths

We have no official information that she was on shift or not, although it has been stated in the media that she was present for 12 or 13 (all) of them.

 

[ColourPurple]

.

I agree that the the unexplained and unexpected collapses were key to the case. However the statistical report by the RSS about health care killers does explain that increases in deaths can occur purely by chance, or for unknown reasons. The Telegraph article points out that one rise in baby deaths in a hospital was eventually found to have been caused by them changing their supplier of infant forumula. An example of multiple factors converging would be:

The hospital was struggling, and was understaffed + they taking in more babies with serious needs + they were admitting more ill babies because the maternity unit was not adequately monitoring pregnant mothers.

That is the defence case. Now I'm not saying that's what I think. But I think it's important to know who was present for all deaths on the unit. Because if there were an extra 8 deaths in the June 2015-June 2016 period that Letby wasn't present for, then that suggests there was something else going on at the hospital causing the spike in deaths (as 8 is still very high). If she was present for a majority of the extra deaths, then that raises questions as to whether she was involved in those too. After all, the fact that she hasn't been charged for them just means there wasn't enough evidence. Perhaps she was more subtle. I think it's important to know either way, because if it was confirmed she was present for them, that would be the end of people like Richard Gill’s argument

It’s been mentioned that there were 6 other deaths that occurred when Letby wasn’t on shift. Any inkling as to why that wasn’t mentioned in the trial? Surely they could have used that as part of her defence when she was implying someone else must be behind the deaths

During the first trial the LL fans were up in arms because there had been further deaths at the hospital in the time period that she was accused of causing deaths. There was an assumption by them that she wasn’t present for those other deaths and that it was unfair not to confirm that at the trial.

When the trial ended the only confirmation of whether she was or wasn’t present at the other deaths was reported by the BBC, who said that she was actually on shift for all 13 of the deaths that year. As far as I’m aware it has never been reported that she wasn’t on shift for any of them.

I’d imagine there was legal discussion about whether or not to include information about other deaths in the trial or whether it would risk prejudicing the trial and that it was agreed/decided not to include it. Just my assumption .

 

[Sweeper2000]

Surprising to see so many articles on the safety of the conviction. Again most are not including all of the evidence specifically the datix forms.

Lucy Letby Murder Conviction: Key Evidence May Be Unreliable | National Review

Lucy Letby verdict: ‘There’s a chance this is a terrible miscarriage of justice’

As experts take a closer look at the evidence, Telegraph readers weigh in on Lucy Letby’s guilty verdict

www.telegraph.co.uk

Letby case ‘has echoes’ of wrongly accused Canadian nurse, says expert

Eminent neonatologist says ‘same flawed statistical methodology’ that led to wrongful accusation of nurse Susan Nelles used in Letby case

www.telegraph.co.uk

Former Cabinet ministers concerned by Letby case, Telegraph understands Former Cabinet ministers concerned by Letby case, Telegraph understands

Concerns raised over safety of Letby conviction – The Justice Gap

www.thejusticegap.com

 

[Dotta]

Surprising to see so many articles on the safety of the conviction. Again most are not including all of the evidence specifically the datix forms.

Lucy Letby Murder Conviction: Key Evidence May Be Unreliable | National Review

Lucy Letby verdict: ‘There’s a chance this is a terrible miscarriage of justice’

As experts take a closer look at the evidence, Telegraph readers weigh in on Lucy Letby’s guilty verdict

www.telegraph.co.uk

Letby case ‘has echoes’ of wrongly accused Canadian nurse, says expert

Eminent neonatologist says ‘same flawed statistical methodology’ that led to wrongful accusation of nurse Susan Nelles used in Letby case

www.telegraph.co.uk

Former Cabinet ministers concerned by Letby case, Telegraph understands Former Cabinet ministers concerned by Letby case, Telegraph understands

Concerns raised over safety of Letby conviction – The Justice Gap

www.thejusticegap.com

And it all exploded after the RETRIAL.