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]

Really rate that podcast by the dm crew, they really back it and say it wasn't about stats etc. The statistician objecting seems to be spouting conjecture really, seems to miss the drastic and sudden nature of many of the events that seemed to signify harm.

 

[ColourPurple]

Jane Hutton should have a coffee with the parents, police and CPS and see how long she lasts spouting her utter word salad.
She infuriated me.

On the plus side she’s clearly demonstrated that despite how it’s being portrayed in the media, this isn’t a case of a load of experts having access to all of the evidence from the trial and then raising concerns about it.

It’s not even a case of a load of experts all going away after the trial ended, to thoroughly research all of the factual court reporting, like the daily news reports, live tweets from journalists in court and the narrated cross examination transcripts, and then raising concerns…

It’s a case of a load of experts raising concerns after reading a largely inaccurate version of events, that originated from the misinformation, twisting of facts and in some cases outright lies that a small group of Letby sympathisers have been spreading since the early days of the trial!

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

Oh I agree. I wasn’t suggesting that the jury aren’t or shouldn’t be, made up of random members of the public.

Cross wires!
I wasn't suggesting that at all, I worried you might think that, that's why I said Great Post! (not that it wasn't a great post!). I was just hoping to add to your words about the jury.

 

[Marantz4250b]

This is interesting as it clarifies the situation as regards her legal team; Ben Myers apparently has not been dismissed. It's the junior council who has and the new KC in their place. Myers is still overseeing everything as lead council.

 

[ColourPurple]

The latest Times article includes a statement from Baby E and Fs parents

“Our family is deeply shocked by the ongoing speculation surrounding what is being referred to as a miscarriage of justice,” the parents of babies E and F said. “Certain pieces of evidence being discussed in the media are grossly out of context and misrepresented. Misinformation is being circulated about what transpired in court. Having attended the trial ourselves, we are fully aware of what was said.”

The support for Letby from people who did not sit through the trial — and in their view do not understand the full evidence — has left them appalled.

“This whole traumatic experience made us question humanity,” they told The Sunday Times. “Why are people going out of their way to support a serial killer of babies?”

They said that the prosecution case put together “individual bricks” of evidence, adding: “Once they were all put together the wall of evidence was overwhelming. To take each brick out separately is simply taking evidence out of context.

“The spread of lies and misinformation is deeply distressing and makes us sick to our cores. We just want some peace to grieve, knowing the person who caused so much agony is where she belongs”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1832484026201854103

Calls to free Lucy Letby fuelled by ‘lies and misinformation’, say parents — The Times and The Sunday Times

‘We would like to say, shame on you all.” That is the message to those calling for the release of Lucy Letby from the parents of twin boys, one murdered, the other attacked by the nurse. A campaign to free Letby, who is serving 15 whole-life sentences, has been building and took a fresh twist...

apple.news

 

[ColourPurple]

From the same article !

A Letby fan has allegedly assaulted one of the medical witnesses from the trial!

The campaign to free Letby has also turned hostile. One medical witness who gave evidence for the prosecution said they had been physically assaulted last week by a member of the public with “pro-Letby beliefs” and had reported the attack to the police. Cheshire police confirmed they were investigating. A second medical witness said they were considering referring a number of messages via social media to the police.

Calls to free Lucy Letby fuelled by ‘lies and misinformation’, say parents

Victims’ families tell The Sunday Times that the campaign to free killer nurse has made them question humanity … as she appoints top human rights barrister Mark McDonald to argue her case

www.thetimes.com

Calls to free Lucy Letby fuelled by ‘lies and misinformation’, say parents — The Times and The Sunday Times

‘We would like to say, shame on you all.” That is the message to those calling for the release of Lucy Letby from the parents of twin boys, one murdered, the other attacked by the nurse. A campaign to free Letby, who is serving 15 whole-life sentences, has been building and took a fresh twist...

apple.news

 

[Parker Knoll]

“ I thought she was very attractive “
Deep sigh.

 

[SolVic]

I can guarantee that if Lucy Letby was a man, nobody would be saying he was innocent. Especially if he was ugly.

These people would probably think Annie Wilkes was innocent.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

What annoys me the most is that LL must feel so smug knowing these fanatics love her and are causing all the attention and drama, for her. Yuck.

 

[Sweeper2000]

The latest Times article includes a statement from Baby E and Fs parents

“Our family is deeply shocked by the ongoing speculation surrounding what is being referred to as a miscarriage of justice,” the parents of babies E and F said. “Certain pieces of evidence being discussed in the media are grossly out of context and misrepresented. Misinformation is being circulated about what transpired in court. Having attended the trial ourselves, we are fully aware of what was said.”

The support for Letby from people who did not sit through the trial — and in their view do not understand the full evidence — has left them appalled.

“This whole traumatic experience made us question humanity,” they told The Sunday Times. “Why are people going out of their way to support a serial killer of babies?”

They said that the prosecution case put together “individual bricks” of evidence, adding: “Once they were all put together the wall of evidence was overwhelming. To take each brick out separately is simply taking evidence out of context.

“The spread of lies and misinformation is deeply distressing and makes us sick to our cores. We just want some peace to grieve, knowing the person who caused so much agony is where she belongs”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1832484026201854103

Calls to free Lucy Letby fuelled by ‘lies and misinformation’, say parents — The Times and The Sunday Times

‘We would like to say, shame on you all.” That is the message to those calling for the release of Lucy Letby from the parents of twin boys, one murdered, the other attacked by the nurse. A campaign to free Letby, who is serving 15 whole-life sentences, has been building and took a fresh twist...

apple.news

That's so sad, I bet the LL fans are fanaticals as well. I was hoping the families wouldn't hear of it. I'm almost certain so much of the "shaky convictions" lot are just doing it out of confirmation bias, they see the papers publish things like the counselling notes or staff rota and then assume this means the trial was unfair or unjust when that is 100% not the case. They see what they want to. They might even be thinking that if something the prosecution said turns out incorrect that means the trial was wrong, doesn't just means a part of the narrative wasn't right not that she didn't do it. So much conjecture I would genuinely love to see them debate any real savvy person on the trial.

 

[katydid23]

I don't see what it's got to do with anything anyway. These were still her thoughts, they were not dictated to her, whether it was suggested to her to do some writing or not.

Right....if my therapist told me to write out notes about my feelings while I was being charged with murdering babies, I'd probably write that 'people think I'm evil and that I did this.'

That's very different than writing in all caps" I AM EVIL I DID THIS"

 

[Marantz4250b]

Having been subjected to these absolute morons for weeks now, there is one general feeling I get from them, that being one of a sort of collective arrogance from these people.

It's hugely arrogant to show up after the event (the event being a ten month trial, a retrial and two appeals, preceded by years of investigation work) having taken absolutely no interest in anything up to this point and start telling anyone who'll listen that everyone was wrong, that it's a huge miscarriage and you know how to put it right. These people are basically saying that no one's opinion counts apart from theirs when their opinion is based on zero knowledge.

What I also find ridiculous is that these people aren't actually bringing new evidence to the fore; like typical conspiraloons they've essentially convinced themselves that she's innocent and are looking for "evidence" to confirm that bias. That's not the way you go about these things.

If they were coming forward and providing some actual new evidence, something that wasn't known to the investigators, prosecution or defence then I'd have a bit of respect for them but they aren't. All they're doing, it seems, is rehashing the same rubbish about "statistics" when statistical evidence was virtually irrelevant to the prosecution. That chart of her shifts was shown I believe twice during the trial and wasn't even real statistical evidence in any event. It only showed that she was present for all of them. It showed that she had opportunity, not that her presence gave a probability that she did it! It showed that she could have done these things, not that she did. It was all the other evidence that got her convicted, not some chart that they knocked up in 5 minutes.

The media really needs to stop giving publicity to these fools. It's gone too far now and is obviously adversely affecting the families of her victims, as if they haven't suffered enough! Unless they come forward with actual new evidence then enough is enough, quite frankly.

 

[Kemug]

I can guarantee that if Lucy Letby was a man, nobody would be saying he was innocent. Especially if he was ugly.

Or if she was an overweight brown or mouse-haired woman with a moustache, a big nose and unfortunate skin.

 

[Officer Dibble]

That's so sad, I bet the LL fans are fanaticals as well. I was hoping the families wouldn't hear of it. I'm almost certain so much of the "shaky convictions" lot are just doing it out of confirmation bias, they see the papers publish things like the counselling notes or staff rota and then assume this means the trial was unfair or unjust when that is 100% not the case. They see what they want to. They might even be thinking that if something the prosecution said turns out incorrect that means the trial was wrong, doesn't just means a part of the narrative wasn't right not that she didn't do it. So much conjecture I would genuinely love to see them debate any real savvy person on the trial.

The photo in here of the fanaticals is worth a look. Lucy Letby supporter attacks medical witness who helped convict killer

 

[Sweeper2000]

Lots if stuff coming out.

What do peeps think of this?

"Dr Jane Hawdon, a consultant neonatologist at the Royal Free hospital in London, was asked by the CoC to review 17 cases in which babies had collapsed or died in more detail and individually. The conclusions of her report, seen by the Guardian, were that the deaths or collapses of 13 babies could be explained, and “may have been prevented with different care”. Four cases she was unsure about were reviewed in forensic detail by a further neonatologist who is understood not to have found foul play."

A superbug, doctor shortages and a neonatal unit ‘out of its depth’: failures at Lucy Letby hospital revealed

As the Thirwall hearings approach, the Guardian has discovered concerns were repeatedly raised about alarming shortcomings at Countess of Chester

www.theguardian.com

It's a long article, covers many things.

 

[Dotta]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1832937285655937383

"Letby's parents' calls
for the convictions to be revisited
have outraged the parents of two babies targeted by the serial killer,
who worked at the Countess of Chester Hospital in Cheshire."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1832928216706650128

 

[Tortoise]

Lots if stuff coming out.

What do peeps think of this?

"Dr Jane Hawdon, a consultant neonatologist at the Royal Free hospital in London, was asked by the CoC to review 17 cases in which babies had collapsed or died in more detail and individually. The conclusions of her report, seen by the Guardian, were that the deaths or collapses of 13 babies could be explained, and “may have been prevented with different care”. Four cases she was unsure about were reviewed in forensic detail by a further neonatologist who is understood not to have found foul play."

A superbug, doctor shortages and a neonatal unit ‘out of its depth’: failures at Lucy Letby hospital revealed

As the Thirwall hearings approach, the Guardian has discovered concerns were repeatedly raised about alarming shortcomings at Countess of Chester

www.theguardian.com

It's a long article, covers many things.

What do I think of it?

Letby was murdering babies and trying to murder others, the very same unexpected deaths and collapses that had perplexed the consultants enough to ask for external review, putting many additional pressures on them - not only having to attend to all the emergencies Letby was creating many times during a shift, but having to convene meetings and investigate what was going on, and in effect having to become first stage detectives also while trying to cope with the normal high-pressured demands of a NNU.

Frankly, I think the Guardian is stirring the pot. We've had trials lasting together almost a year, rigorously examining the medical situations of 17 babies, with opportunities for both sides to call their experts and thrash out all of these arguments in the appropriate setting, the court, when it mattered, before the juries took to their deliberations. The defence did not call Dr Jane Hawdon, to air or defend her conclusions. Clearly, to me, her forensic examinations were not up to scratch.

All of these problems were aired by Myers in cross-examination of the witnesses. It was Letby's defence, and it fell flat on its face.

IMO

 

[Sweeper2000]

What do I think of it?

Letby was murdering babies and trying to murder others, the very same unexpected deaths and collapses that had perplexed the consultants enough to ask for external review, putting many additional pressures on them - not only having to attend to all the emergencies Letby was creating many times during a shift, but having to convene meetings and investigate what was going on, and in effect having to become first stage detectives also while trying to cope with the normal high-pressured demands of a NNU.

Frankly, I think the Guardian is stirring the pot. We've had trials lasting together almost a year, rigorously examining the medical situations of 17 babies, with opportunities for both sides to call their experts and thrash out all of these arguments in the appropriate setting, the court, when it mattered, before the juries took to their deliberations. The defence did not call Dr Jane Hawdon, to air or defend her conclusions. Clearly, to me, her forensic examinations were not up to scratch.

All of these problems were aired by Myers in cross-examination of the witnesses. It was Letby's defence, and it fell flat on its face.

IMO

I concur, the defence never was able to provide evidence as to how being understaffed affected any babies In care. I don't believe that would be missed either. We I think were given one instance of a doc not being available when needed, which I would guess is about normal.I also don't believe the sewage had any affect either. They can say its an old building all day long but that means nothing when there is no indication of infection. We did have baby H but she got NG on that I guess due to problems being indistinguishable from issues related to her care but again not issues due to "shortstaffing" was it?

Have we got anything new from what's in the media recently? No not really. I think lady Edgeworth noted those notes seemed like therapy driven notes.

I am interested to see what the new thinking on the medical notes is from these guys in the article, for me I found the med evidence probably the most damning aspect. I'll wait but am dubious, there has been so many top docs backing the prosecutions story who have read them in entirety. Will take allot to dent that. Jmo

 

[Tortoise]

I concur, the defence never was able to provide evidence as to how being understaffed affected any babies In care. I don't believe that would be missed either. We I think were given one instance of a doc not being available when needed, which I would guess is about normal.I also don't believe the sewage had any affect either. They can say its an old building all day long but that means nothing when there is no indication of infection. We did have baby H but she got NG on that I guess due to problems being indistinguishable from issues related to her care but again not issues due to "shortstaffing" was it?

Have we got anything new from what's in the media recently? No not really. I think lady Edgeworth noted those notes seemed like therapy driven notes.

I am interested to see what the new thinking on the medical notes is from these guys in the article, for me I found the med evidence probably the most damning aspect. I'll wait but am dubious, there has been so many top docs backing the prosecutions story who have read them in entirety. Will take allot to dent that. Jmo

If you want to find out Letby's real reasons for writing those notes take a listen to CS2C's recent video on it. He's pulled up the court transcripts regarding what she said in her police interviews when questioned precisely about that. The Guardian's unnamed source is contradicting Letby herself.

 

[Jazmania]

Lots if stuff coming out.

What do peeps think of this?

"Dr Jane Hawdon, a consultant neonatologist at the Royal Free hospital in London, was asked by the CoC to review 17 cases in which babies had collapsed or died in more detail and individually. The conclusions of her report, seen by the Guardian, were that the deaths or collapses of 13 babies could be explained, and “may have been prevented with different care”. Four cases she was unsure about were reviewed in forensic detail by a further neonatologist who is understood not to have found foul play."

A superbug, doctor shortages and a neonatal unit ‘out of its depth’: failures at Lucy Letby hospital revealed

As the Thirwall hearings approach, the Guardian has discovered concerns were repeatedly raised about alarming shortcomings at Countess of Chester

www.theguardian.com

It's a long article, covers many things.

I don't understand why the defence wouldn't bring in this report as evidence, including the neonatologist as a witness. It is baffling to me. I don't really know what to think, given there is no detail really on the findings of the report, and whether she was asked to consider deliberate sabotaging as a cause. If she identified natural ways which could have caused these babies' deaths, then why wasn't this heard in trial as well as the other neonatologist report?

I for one thought and still think the evidence proving her guilt is overwhelming. But part of that is that the case was so one sided. Almost 10 months of evidence saying she was guilty. And one plumber for the defence. Myers brought up many of these things (hospital failings) as a defence, but was unable to find any expert to back up what he was saying. If he had had experts and reports to back this up, maybe there would have been more doubt. I don't get why he wouldn't include this in the defence. He must have known about the report. It's so weird. I hope that some of these questions will be answered in this review that's about to take place.