UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #16

[Sweeper2000]

There is nothing to assume haha

I say that but again I’m sure the situation would have been different if they had known about the insulin.

 

[Sweeper2000]

im Wondering what people have made of the med notes specifically, the ones found at her house. I’m taking a guess but I don’t think the large amount of them found were actually organised in any way. We know some were found in a bag under the bed but no other documents have been found in the same place. I’m confident this would have been mentioned in court. I’m curious about the large amount of them found. is this something of significance? I’m kind of against that idea as she had more than enough time to dispose of any incriminating evidence Had she known about it.The prosecution have attached significance to something that doesn’t quite work that well and just looking at her own seeming unawareness after baby q it seems to run with it. She doesn’t perceive herself as someone with something to hide and so presumably if she even knows about those med records wouldn’t hide them. It seems to me that it’s more likely that she is indeed someone who holds onto bits of paper. I’m confident this works theoretically, the prosecution say they are of mental significance to ll yet if they were they wouldn’t have been found. If all the notes found at her home are all over the place and it would seem more likely for that to be true, then there is nothing that indicates significance to ll.

some points about the notes

1. not organised suggesting they were indeed shoved into a draw
2. many found so it’s kind of normal albeit against the rules for ll to keep notes
3. could have been easily disposed of yet were not suggesting they were not considered significant to her
4. ll had herself gone on an info finding mission about the previous years events yet still apparently did not recall keeping them, otherwise they would have been disposed of.
5. the only med notes found were of babies who lived.

this post is related purely to this aspect of the evidence presented.

im curious to know exactly how it was that the prosecution knew that the blood gas record found actually belonged to one of the babies in the charges? Same with the paper towel. Neither of which in my mind necessarily have names or details of the patient on them?

 

[magikarpmagikarp]

im curious to know exactly how it was that the prosecution knew that the blood gas record found actually belonged to one of the babies in the charges? Same with the paper towel. Neither of which in my mind necessarily have names or details of the patient on them?

I would imagine there was identifying information on both, or else the information on each could be exactly correlated to information documented in the chart (as if that information had been entered into the medical record).

 

[notsure]

They will of been sat there for over 8 months by the end of it.
Please credit them with something !
Jurors come from a cross section of the general public and I would bet they will be far FAR more versed on medical issues of this case by the end of this …. They cannot not be.
They asked very early in the trial for paper notepads and they also have iPads with the relevant information on them to run along side this trial.
They will have listened to both the prosecution / defence / medical experts and consultants. The trial judge will also direct them at the end of the trial before they retire. Will be privy so an enormous amount of information that will will not of been nor ever will be.
<modsnip>

<modsnip> I'm interested in discussing possibly controversial ideas. You say people come from a cross section of the general public. That's useful information. Do you know how they achieve this cross section? I would be genuinely interested to know that.

<modsnip>

 

[notsure]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>
Even a beginner's course in forensic psychology reveals how faulty human memory of events can be. The longer the time elapsed since the event, the less reliable the memory evidence is.

 

[Dotta]

Even a beginner's course in forensic psychology reveals how faulty human memory of events can be. The longer the time elapsed since the event, the less reliable the memory evidence is.

Oh, it might explain how some older folks' extraordinary stories of their youth's acts sound
You know - "Those were the days my friend".

JMO

 

[notsure]

Oh, it might explain how some older folks' extraordinary stories of their youth's acts sound
You know - "Those were the days my friend".

JMO

Yes, we all do it! I just started a free, open-to-everyone online Open University beginners' course in forensic psychology, which is quite an eye-opener into how our minds/memories work. That's why I've been posting more recently on some of the issues.

 

[Dotta]

Yes, we all do it! I just started a free, open-to-everyone online Open University beginners' course in forensic psychology, which is quite an eye-opener into how our minds/memories work. That's why I've been posting more recently on some of the issues.

How interesting!
Wish I had more time to join

 

[notsure]

How interesting!
Wish I had more time to join

You should! Just ten minutes a day, or whatever you can spare.

 

[Dotta]

You should! Just ten minutes a day, or whatever you can spare.

You can always share a link here.
Im sure Wsleuths would be delighted

 

[notsure]

You can always share a link here.
Im sure Wsleuths would be delighted

You think? Well, here goes:

Forensic psychology

In this free course, Forensic psychology, you will discover how psychology can help obtain evidence from eyewitnesses in police investigations and prevent miscarriages of justice.

www.open.edu

 

[notsure]

If I get banned, it was nice knowing y'all.

 

[Sillybilly]

If I get banned, it was nice knowing y'all.

Not yet, notsure JK. The link is fine and will be of interest to many.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

I see a Mod removed some posts earlier for general discussion and bickering about juries.

That is because general discussion about juries in general is off topic unless such discussion relates directly to this case.

This thread is dedicated to discussion of the trial of LL. Please stay on topic.

 

[Legal]

You think? Well, here goes:

Forensic psychology

In this free course, Forensic psychology, you will discover how psychology can help obtain evidence from eyewitnesses in police investigations and prevent miscarriages of justice.

www.open.edu

Thanks for posting! I'm definitely going to take a look

 

[Anxala]

<modsnip> I'm interested in discussing possibly controversial ideas. You say people come from a cross section of the general public. That's useful information. Do you know how they achieve this cross section? I would be genuinely interested to know that.

<modsnip>

The vetting process is detailed here.

Jury Vetting | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

The thing is, we're all on here thinking we're able to process the info we're being given. We're full of it! And yet we're pretty much the exact same random make up as that jury - we're people from all walks of life, all ages, all with our own life experiences, all thinking we have something useful to offer here.

Why think that the jury, in possession of far more info than we are, might not be as 'clever' as we are?

 

[notsure]

The vetting process is detailed here.

Jury Vetting | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

The thing is, we're all on here thinking we're able to process the info we're being given. We're full of it. We're pretty much the same random make up as the jury. Why think that the jury, in possession of far more info than we are, might not be as 'clever' as we are?

Ah, very good point! I'm personally not assuming I'm 'clever' enough to work it out. The clue is in my username.

 

[Anxala]

Ah, very good point! I'm personally not assuming I'm 'clever' enough to work it out. The clue is in my username.

I hope you know the above wasn't directed at you and was just an objective take on us all, myself very much included.

 

[esther43]

It must be very hard to be on the jury. Not being able to discuss the case. I'm so glad they gave them note books! I wonder if all the previous testimonies are transferred to their electronic bundle.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Really tricky situation on giving evidence. I have seen defendants crucified in the witness box and have been absolutely terrible who have been found NG - you just never know how it’s going to go. BM cannot control the narrative, advise or speak to her if she does decide to take the stand and that’s a problem. However she did not go “no comment” in the police interviews as far as we have been informed - she could of done that or given a prepared statement which again she didn’t do. She may want to speak up.
Who knows but we will know shortly.

The fact that she was talkative in police interviews plays a lot in her favour, I think. She obviously didn't completely fall apart because I think if she had then it wouldn't have been necessary to arrest her three times. So, who knows, maybe she will give evidence?