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 #36

[Ruthbullock]

side topic but im interested in gauging what everyone's opinion is on the medical expertise presented at Dr Lee's press conference? Its probably the strongest counter to the prosecutions narrative to date considering there really wasn't one at the trial itself.

Spose first of all im looking at it from the legal perspective is it even admissable at a court of appeal? if its found they simply looked for reasons no matter how obscure, how rare and how likely hten its not going to get far is it? is mcdonald towing the line there so to speak?

i actually would like to see how it is that they discounted what was found at the initial trial itself. if it does get somewhere i would also like to see if it got picked apart by what i would presume would be the prosecution.

I don’t think we have been privy to the full document, only the press conference and snippets of the press release document- I could be wrong, but I think there is a fuller document being submitted.

 

[Baby baby Jane]

<modsnip - leaving the below comment - this was a quote and info from an unapproved podcast, and it's WHY we don't allow just any podcast>

Anyway, just venting but defo removing these idiots from my feed. So blatantly irresponsible “journalism” they mis-inform

 

[Ruthbullock]

In all the discussion- this to me is the biggest failing. No investigation was carried out, this didn’t rely on doctors whistleblowing, surely this was a matter of law at the time.

Deaths of children and babies, except for stillbirths, must be referred to the coroner by the hospital to establish the cause of death. The coroner will then decide whether it will be necessary to have a post-mortem examination.

If the coroner decides it is necessary, you won’t be asked to give consent (permission). This is because the coroner is required by law to carry out the examination.

But you should be given an explanation about why the examination has been ordered and what the process will be.

The fact some babies parents were asked permission and only given a hospital post mortem is what has led to many unanswered questions as well as debate over the trial. Someone (and I doubt a nurse has that authority) has felt there was no need for further investigations- despite all their misgivings and suspicions.

Having a post-mortem after a neonatal death

A post-mortem is a medical examination of a body to try to find the reason why someone died. Here, we explain more about these procedures.

www.tommys.org

 

[Anxala]

On a lighthearted note, I'm laughing at how the desperation to point the finger away from LL has now been reduced to instead fingering Tigger and Smudge as the potential cause of it all.

No wonder Ben Myers KC wisely decided not to call them as witnesses and put them on the stand.

 

[mrC]

well tony chambers thought she was innocent Lucy Letby inquiry: 'Hospital boss felt nurse was innocent'

 

[joltz]

well tony chambers thought she was innocent Lucy Letby inquiry: 'Hospital boss felt nurse was innocent'

And? Tony Chambers wasn't in full possession of the facts.

Quote from the article

"I said to him 'well it's not for you to find the cause, you have unexpected and unexplained collapses and deaths of patients and even one of those is a cause of concern"

Chambers was more concerned with protecting the reputation of the hospital. Obviously he wasn't qualified to determine the cause.


And another quote from today

>“\[Stephen Brearey and I\] spent three hours going through the timeline, both clinically and non-clinically, of everything that had happened.

>“I discovered clinical histories of patients who were doing well, who were expected to go home, perhaps even on the day they were due to go home, suddenly having a cardiorespiratory collapse.

>“Even with adults, on an intensive care unit you have a watchlist of patients who are at risk of deterioration, or whose clinical condition is fragile, and if they deteriorate it’s not like flicking a switch, it’s a gradual worsening of their vital signs.

>“What Dr Brearey was describing to me was something I had never, ever, seen or heard of in my clinical practice.

>“Just one of those, for me, would have been enough as a medical director or a director of nursing, to absolutely want to get to the bottom of what is happening here


So Susan Gilby immediately knew there was something not right and she knew action needed to be taken.

<modsnip - personalizing>

 

[mrC]

ishe regulerly cried in karen rees arms apparently Former nursing boss says Lucy Letby is ‘innocent’ and regularly ‘cried in my arms’

 

[Sweeper2000]

ishe regulerly cried in karen rees arms apparently Former nursing boss says Lucy Letby is ‘innocent’ and regularly ‘cried in my arms’

Does she now?

 

[Sweeper2000]

On a lighthearted note, I'm laughing at how the desperation to point the finger away from LL has now been reduced to instead fingering Tigger and Smudge as the potential cause of it all.

No wonder Ben Myers KC wisely decided not to call them as witnesses and put them on the stand.

i think the plumber, all due respect to the great white shark and most capable man that is lorenzo mansutti is only a few steps away from it in terms of effect on evidence.

 

[Marantz4250b]

side topic but im interested in gauging what everyone's opinion is on the medical expertise presented at Dr Lee's press conference? Its probably the strongest counter to the prosecutions narrative to date considering there really wasn't one at the trial itself.

Spose first of all im looking at it from the legal perspective is it even admissable at a court of appeal? if its found they simply looked for reasons no matter how obscure, how rare and how likely hten its not going to get far is it? is mcdonald towing the line there so to speak?

i actually would like to see how it is that they discounted what was found at the initial trial itself. if it does get somewhere i would also like to see if it got picked apart by what i would presume would be the prosecution.

I don't really think it's possible to gauge the quality or relevancy of the opinions of this panel because it hasn't been tested in front of a court and it has been put together for a specific purpose by people who want a particular outcome from it.

It's all very well the people on the panel saying it's a game-changer but that's their whole reason for coming together - the existence of this panel was specifically to get her convictions quashed.

This panel hasn't even been in existence for the length of time that the original trial took, let alone the years of evidence gathering by the police and CPS. It seems unlikely that they have actually come up with a game-changing legal reality.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I don't really think it's possible to gauge the quality or relevancy of the opinions of this panel because it hasn't been tested in front of a court and it has been put together for a specific purpose by people who want a particular outcome from it.

It's all very well the people on the panel saying it's a game-changer but that's their whole reason for coming together - the existence of this panel was specifically to get her convictions quashed.

This panel hasn't even been in existence for the length of time that the original trial took, let alone the years of evidence gathering by the police and CPS. It seems unlikely that they have actually come up with a game-changing legal reality.

cheers marantz. yeh im on board with what your saying.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Does she now?

No - it's a clickbait headline!

Following Letby’s conviction in 2023, Ms Rees was advised to publicly denounce the nurse, and she said at the time: “[Letby] was very convincing. I now know that this was a calculated and successful attempt to make me believe her story, and I was deceived.”

 

[Charlot123]

Neither were the jury, clearly!

There are a plethora of "plausible" explanations either way - they were examined in a ten month trial, one of the longest in UK criminal legal history, and then a retrial on one of the counts. She was convicted and is serving multiple WLO's.

It is, imo, highly disingenuous to refer to what the panel said as being a "verdict". That is to give it way too much credence. That panel is not a court and their statements have not been examined by a court or been afforded any independent legal scrutiny. They are paid medical professionals who have been gathered to write a report on behalf of LL's defence. Nothing more. Even using the word "experts" is disingenuous as it supposes that they would be accepted as such by a court and that is in no way certain.

Are they paid, though?

This is a question. My personal feeling is that it is not a review paid for by their defense. I think that Dr. Lee, being a fact-based specialist, reviewed the facts. And he doesn't see the evidence of malice on behalf of LL.

About paid medical professionals - there is one, dr. Dewi Evans, so let us not get there. I can understand the mistakes made by the doctors working at NICU, no one is above criticism, and btw, doctors are as superstitious as anyone else. (I think that whoever, perhaps jokingly, called Lucy "Nurse Death" unwittingly started the whole process, as superstitious beliefs form easily). All their mistakes are still nothing compared to a doctor involved as a professional trial witness, who is out of practice for many years. "Inert" is what he is, at best.

ETA: the most important part about dr. Evans - he is not a neonatologist. Do you know what it means? It means that he, like most of people discussing the case (unless someone works in the ICU), has zero knowledge about intensive care. I'd rather see a specialist in adult intensive care review the case than an ex-pediatrician who never worked in the area. Of all areas of medicine, ICU is the most complex because it is so close to physiology. And it is constantly changing. COVID taught a lot about ventilation of people with this illness. A doctor working in adult ICU, with additional reading, can easily understand the principles of neonate ICU and then, a preemie. A doctor who never worked there, at best, learns by very superficial "osmosis". This is what i think has happened.

 

[mrC]

dr lee made it clear that he wasnt getting paid and none of the other experts were

 

[Furore]

There are witness statements of one baby that I have seen where a doctor has said that they were the person keeping notes during resuscitation, so it does appear that it is an allocated role during these periods. The note keeping in general seems haphazard, which is again a bigger issue that hopefully will be addressed through the inquiry, although times have moved on and you now see laptops being pushed around to keep notes in real time compared to years ago.

Yes arrest teams have scribes, but the person intubating or performing compressions would not have their own contemporaneous notes written in their own hand, so the doctors involved might have to add additional notes retrospectively on the impression that greeted them/they walked in on is my point that seems to have got a little wooly apologies!

 

[Charlot123]

On a lighthearted note, I'm laughing at how the desperation to point the finger away from LL has now been reduced to instead fingering Tigger and Smudge as the potential cause of it all.

No wonder Ben Myers KC wisely decided not to call them as witnesses and put them on the stand.

Well, why cats? I asked myself about toxoplasmosis. About 11.8% of people had it in their lives. Google to help you if you are interested!
I checked "asymptomatic carriers" and the list was huge. It is an interesting thing to consider. I am trying to look through more rational explanations before "she killed them".

 

[Sweeper2000]

No - it's a clickbait headline!

yeh i know. she might be able to reach through the bars if so inclined but she wont get far with it.

 

[mrC]

seems dr Jayaram hadn't seen this page Raising Concerns - NHS Resolution

 

[mrC]

he also doesnt seem to have seen this https://www.gmc-uk.org/professional...onals,person may be being abused or neglected.

 

[magikarpmagikarp]

From Dr ZA's testimony at Thirlwall:

"A. I very much took it to mention that if we continued to carry on raising our concerns, then my job would be at risk. I went home that night and with my husband worked out how long we could pay our mortgage and bills for if I were to lose my job, so it certainly felt real and that that was a genuine possibility."

She was at this point committed to pressing those concerns even if she would lose her job. And she was very candid in her testimony about all the things she wished she would have done differently. I think it's easy but unfair to criticize the doctors in hindsight - and the doctors were all too willing to criticize themselves - but the blame belongs elsewhere.

I will provide the link in my next post because if I switch tabs to get it my crap phone will dump this post.