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 #37

[crespo29]

This is the best summary I have found in the press.

Lucy Letby: killer or coincidence? Why some experts question the evidence

Exclusive: Doubts raised over safety of convictions of nurse found guilty of murdering babies

www.theguardian.com

 

[joltz]

How do we know he didn’t? His mom did. Hence, IVF and a difficult pregnancy and a scheduled delivery in a better hospital. The OBGYN hoped she’d carry to 32 weeks so she didn’t yet move closer to the other hospital, poor woman. Mom developed preeclampsia and ended up developing in COCH via a very difficult C-section.

This poor woman. The situation when the babies were not immediately transferred to another unit and not seen for a day by a senior consultant makes me very upset.

Because we have the expert witnesses testimony of paediatric haematologist Prof Kinsey, who says that it didn't.

 

[joltz]

This is the best summary I have found in the press.

Lucy Letby: killer or coincidence? Why some experts question the evidence

Exclusive: Doubts raised over safety of convictions of nurse found guilty of murdering babies

www.theguardian.com

Well it's certainly a summary of sorts. One that leans quite heavily to the pro-letby side. I mean it even mentions Richard Gill. I would say it's a heavily biased summary. It mentions plenty of apparent doubts, then leaves it at that, even though I would say most of these doubts have been rebuked. JMO

 

[joltz]

Does this apply to everyone currently in prison? Wayne Couzens? Rose West? I mean, some people are falsely convicted, so I guess that means they must be innocent, too?

There were also people who believed Myra Hindley was unjustly convicted, and there were also people who though the planes that crashed into the WTC towers were "holograms".

The fact is, have any of these people brought ANY evidence to the table to challenge the evidence presented at court? So far, no they haven't. I'm really not interested in how many "doubts" some people have if they can't actually point to anything to back up their doubts.

And that's just it. Our justice system is not designed to appease random members of the public who have decided they arent satisfied with the evidence. JMO

 

[joltz]

Respectfully.

You are not working with evidence. You are using it as indirect clue that she was the killer.

You say, “We can only work with the evidence we have. I find it pointless inventing scenarios which Letby herself has never offered as explanation.”

So why did the prosecution turn it into a proof of her being a killer? People hoard paper, that’s all.

But as long as you allow hoarding papers and scrolling Facebook to be used as evidence of guilt, please allow me to offer a different explanation.

Lastly, how do people arrive at a conclusion that she was lying without being there? Just because two definitely not the best doctors who physically were in the unit only twice a week, and pushed care for level 2 babies on interns (registrars) and overwhelmed nurses couldn’t understand why very sick babies were dying?

No one said that Letby was a killer because she had the handovers etc and she wasn't simply "hoarding paper"
We know this from the evidence. We know from Letbys testimony that she also had to admit, that she had taken home several handovers on purpose. She didn't want to admit this, but when pressed there was no alternative so she admitted it, grudgingly.

You seem to have a habit of making excuses for Letbys behaviour in any circumstances.

The facts of the handovers.

The handovers had the confidential information of the babies, including names
Letby could not spell a family name for whom she had a handover underneath her bed and who she was searching for on FB.
She took them with purpose.
She kept them and moved with with on at least 5 occasions.
She claimed she would have shredded them if she had a shredder.
She owned a shredder.
She kept some in a shredder box marked "keep"
She can't remember why almost every single one related to the charges ended up underneath her bed.
She says she has no awareness of the them but she launders her uniform daily and removes them from her pocket.

And it wasn't just handovers, it's was the blood/gas document, which somehow found itself in Letbys possession after being disposed of in a confidential wastebin after Letbys shift ended.

Coincidentally, Letby stayed behind on this shift, thereby making it possible for her to retrieve it.

JMO

 

[Parker Knoll]

If anyone can be bothered, have a look at the court judgements for the Ben Geen case that MM is dealing with.
I can’t link it here as the official judgement doesn’t seem to be online so it is a Wordpress document that shows it ( first thing that comes up on Google )
It’s a long document obviously but the comparisons are exactly the same in the way he runs things.
Full of holes, documents not lodged, judges highly critical of him, wild claims made without substance … I could go on and unsurprisingly appeal dismissed.
I am expecting the same here.
JMO obviously.

 

[May72031]

I hear that bunch of Letby supporters up in Liverpool sang "You'll Never Walk Alone" at one point.

Very grim. A massive insult to the parents.

 

[Sweeper2000]

yeh thats totally vile in nearly all regards. its insulting to the victims of that event as well. conspiracy nuts must be.

 

[Charlot123]

Because we have the expert witnesses testimony of paediatric haematologist Prof Kinsey, who says that it didn't.

Does pediatric hematologist comment on no senior neonatologist seeing a 29-week old newborn since he was born? What does he say about inability to establish IV access and the neonate having no fluids for a few hours? You don’t have to have APLS to form a clot at the tip of the catheter if there is no fluid going through it, btw.

 

[Charlot123]

No one said that Letby was a killer because she had the handovers etc and she wasn't simply "hoarding paper"
We know this from the evidence. We know from Letbys testimony that she also had to admit, that she had taken home several handovers on purpose. She didn't want to admit this, but when pressed there was no alternative so she admitted it, grudgingly.

You seem to have a habit of making excuses for Letbys behaviour in any circumstances.

The facts of the handovers.

The handovers had the confidential information of the babies, including names
Letby could not spell a family name for whom she had a handover underneath her bed and who she was searching for on FB.
She took them with purpose.
She kept them and moved with with on at least 5 occasions.
She claimed she would have shredded them if she had a shredder.
She owned a shredder.
She kept some in a shredder box marked "keep"
She can't remember why almost every single one related to the charges ended up underneath her bed.
She says she has no awareness of the them but she launders her uniform daily and removes them from her pocket.

And it wasn't just handovers, it's was the blood/gas document, which somehow found itself in Letbys possession after being disposed of in a confidential wastebin after Letbys shift ended.

Coincidentally, Letby stayed behind on this shift, thereby making it possible for her to retrieve it.

JMO

You are wrong to pile me into the group of Lucy’s supporters btw.
I don’t know Lucy and I poorly understand her life.
I had a baby developed when I had pre-eclampsia. The doctor cut through his cheek and I didn’t start a lawsuit because I understood, she had several C-sections that day and a klutzy inexperienced male Intern to help her.
But if my child ended up in ICU and no neonatologist saw him for a day, that would have been a very, very different situation.
If later the neonatologist tried to explain their laziness by “we have a killer on the unit”, my response would be, “who the heck runs this unit?”

 

[Marantz4250b]

You are wrong to pile me into the group of Lucy’s supporters btw.
I don’t know Lucy and I poorly understand her life.
I had a baby developed when I had pre-eclampsia. The doctor cut through his cheek and I didn’t start a lawsuit because I understood, she had several C-sections that day and a klutzy inexperienced male Intern to help her.
But if my child ended up in ICU and no neonatologist saw him for a day, that would have been a very, very different situation.
If later the neonatologist tried to explain their laziness by “we have a killer on the unit”, my response would be, “who the heck runs this unit?”

No one understands her life. I doubt anyone has ever truly understood her life but I think that those close to her know a lot more about her than they are letting on or even care to admit to themselves.

Lucy herself is the last person who understands her life, in my humble opinion.

 

[joltz]

Respectfully.

You are not working with evidence. You are using it as indirect clue that she was the killer.

You say, “We can only work with the evidence we have. I find it pointless inventing scenarios which Letby herself has never offered as explanation.”

So why did the prosecution turn it into a proof of her being a killer? People hoard paper, that’s all.

But as long as you allow hoarding papers and scrolling Facebook to be used as evidence of guilt, please allow me to offer a different explanation.

Lastly, how do people arrive at a conclusion that she was lying without being there? Just because two definitely not the best doctors who physically were in the unit only twice a week, and pushed care for level 2 babies on interns (registrars) and overwhelmed nurses couldn’t understand why very sick babies were dying?

No one said that Letby was a killer because she had the handovers etc and she wasn't simply "hoarding paper"
We know this from the evidence. We know from Letbys testimony that she also had to admit, that she had taken home several handovers on purpose. She didn't want to admit this, but when pressed there was no alternative so she admitted it, grudgingly.

You seem to have a habit of making excuses for Letbys behaviour in any circumstances.

The facts of the handovers.

The handovers had the confidential information of the babies, including names
Letby could not spell a family name for whom she had a handover underneath her bed and who she was searching for on FB.
She took them with purpose.
She kept them and moved with with on at least 5 occasions.
She claimed she would have shredded them if she had a shredder.
She owned a shredder.
She kept some in a shredder box marked "keep"
She can't remember why almost every single one related to the charges ended up underneath her bed.
She says she has no awareness of the them but she launders her uniform daily and removes them from her pocket.

And it wasn't just handovers, it's was the blood/gas document, which somehow found itself in Letbys possession after being disposed of in a confidential wastebin after Letbys shift ended.

Coincidentally, Letby stayed behind on this shift, thereby making it possible for her to retrieve it.

KMO

You are wrong to pile me into the group of Lucy’s supporters btw.
I don’t know Lucy and I poorly understand her life.
I had a baby developed when I had pre-eclampsia. The doctor cut through his cheek and I didn’t start a lawsuit because I understood, she had several C-sections that day and a klutzy inexperienced male Intern to help her.
But if my child ended up in ICU and no neonatologist saw him for a day, that would have been a very, very different situation.
If later the neonatologist tried to explain their laziness by “we have a killer on the unit”, my response would be, “who the heck runs this unit?”

Ok, you've obviously had a bad experience but I just don't understand this comparison you are making whatsoever, it makes absolutely no sense?
And what's it got to do with the actual evidence about the handovers which we were talking about?

If you already have a bad experience that you are projecting onto this case, then you have an inherited bias towards the evidence and that certainly seems to be the case. Hence why you keep pulling up apparent Dr mistakes but always have an excuse ready for Letbys actions.

JMO

 

[joltz]

Does pediatric hematologist comment on no senior neonatologist seeing a 29-week old newborn since he was born? What does he say about inability to establish IV access and the neonate having no fluids for a few hours? You don’t have to have APLS to form a clot at the tip of the catheter if there is no fluid going through it, btw.

No, a paediatric hematologist comments on issues related to their expertise?

But we had other experts to comment on these matters.

Struggles to establish IV and having no fluids for a few hours are actually not death defying issues and they don't cause air embolisms or the collapses witnessed in these babies.

 

[Anxala]

The only reason I thought about “writing a romance” is that because I used to know a person, not a nurse, and working in the field very far from the medical one, but slightly of Lucy’s type. They decided to write a book about their job. Against all common sense. It backfired, and badly.

So I think if Lucy could have had such an idea because she resembles me that person. But if she ever came to writing a true book about her unit, with 29-weeks-old neonates dying without ever having been seen by the consultants, with nurses and interns/registrars being chronically overwhelmed, with nosocomial infections on the unit and sewage occasionally spilling out, with one of the doctors being so hyped about himself that he wore a watch in NICU, and with older married doctors hitting on young nurses, her book had zero chance of being published. JMO.

Respectfully, this is beyond absurd. Even Letby herself imo would be side-eyeing this as a potential get out for her 'I collect paper' excuse.

She was given all the time in the world during her trial to explain and rationalise both her notes and her 'paper collections' and yet failed dismally to do so on both counts.

I just don't understand this need to outright ignore/deny the things she herself, in her very own words, has said about herself.

What you're saying, essentially, and hilariously ironically, is that you just don't trust her to tell the truth.

 

[Charlot123]

No, a paediatric hematologist comments on issues related to their expertise?

But we had other experts to comment on these matters.

Struggles to establish IV and having no fluids for a few hours are actually not death defying issues and they don't cause air embolisms or the collapses witnessed in these babies.

Did anyone diagnose the baby with air embolism as the reason for death after it happened?

Or did it happen post factum? With their professional “trial expert” deprived of medical license for fifteen years?

Any ICU specialist will tell you that no IV fluids for a few hours may be a death defying issue.
.

 

[joltz]

Did anyone diagnose the baby with air embolism as the reason for death after it happened?

Or did it happen post factum? With their professional “trial expert” deprived of medical license for fifteen years?

Any ICU specialist will tell you that no IV fluids for a few hours may be a death defying issue.
.

I'm sorry but you just don't seem to have any understanding whatsoever of what happened at the trial, the evidence presented, the experts testimony, the original pathology reports or basically anything to do with the case.

No one diagnosed air embolism, no. Because no one would even consider such a thing, the pathologists were not considering foul play when determining the cause of death of newborn babies, that never left the neonatal ward.

Have you got no understanding of how these things work? Let me enlighten you. Very often, especially in a medical setting, victims are not known to have been murdered, initially and their causes of death or not concluded to be suspicious. Just like Beverley Allitts victims, just like Charles Cullens victims, just like Harold Shipmans victims, just like Ben Geens victims.

So yes, often, medical experts will later determine what actually happened by looking at the forensic details. Things that would not be looked at initially, because maybe no one is expecting the nurse caring for them to be trying to murder them. So initially these newborns would not, for example have a need for a pediatric radiologist to look at the x-ray of their brains and spines to see if there are unusual air bubbles which should not be there.

And let's not keep harping on about a medical expert not having a licence for 15 years, when there are another 4 separate medical experts also in agreement about air embolism.

JMO

 

[Charlot123]

Respectfully, this is beyond absurd. Even Letby herself imo would be side-eyeing this as a potential get out for her 'I collect paper' excuse.

She was given all the time in the world during her trial to explain and rationalise both her notes and her 'paper collections' and yet failed dismally to do so on both counts.

I just don't understand this need to outright ignore/deny the things she herself, in her very own words, has said about herself.

What you're saying, essentially, and hilariously ironically, is that you just don't trust her to tell the truth.

I haven’t seen her to weigh in on her trustworthiness. What a neurodivergent person says may be misunderstood. All I know is that she said she was innocent. For now, I honestly phase out “Lucy” factor because I don’t think it adds any weight.

I am looking from a different standpoint.

Level 2 unit in UK
provides short-term intensive care for babies needing non-invasive respiratory support, often those born between 27 and 32 weeks gestation.

Meaning they can be severely premature.

Now if you tell me that consultant level neonatologists are there only twice a week, this is enough for catastrophes to happen.

Why the increase in 2015-2016? God knows. Triaging might have changed (remember the COCH was determined poor-level of care for the mother of babies A @ B and it is only by poor luck she ended there. So it was a poor hospital to start with; maybe more sick kids ended up there due to change in triage?). So, more babies of 27 weeks as opposed to 32, here is your rise in deaths.

Or, as they mention, nosocomial infections. Pseudomonas aeruginosa, anyone? Or E. Coli due to sewage overflow?

If what Dr. Lee’s committee said about Dr. Jay - essentially, that he had no clue about ventilation in neonates - is true, and if during that time, statistically, they had more preemies needing ventilation - here is your reason for increased unit mortality.

These doctors should have been there night and day for such neonates, and they pushed the job on registrars and nurses.

 

[Charlot123]

I'm sorry but you just don't seem to have any understanding whatsoever of what happened at the trial, the evidence presented, the experts testimony, the original pathology reports or basically anything to do with the case.

No one diagnosed air embolism, no. Because no one would even consider such a thing, the pathologists were not considering foul play when determining the cause of death of newborn babies, that never left the neonatal ward.

Have you got no understanding of how these things work? Let me enlighten you. Very often, especially in a medical setting, victims are not known to have been murdered, initially and their causes of death or not concluded to be suspicious. Just like Beverley Allitts victims, just like Charles Cullens victims, just like Harold Shipmans victims, just like Ben Geens victims.

So yes, often, medical experts will later determine what actually happened by looking at the forensic details. Things that would not be looked at initially, because maybe no one is expecting the nurse caring for them to be trying to murder them. So initially these newborns would not, for example have a need for a pediatric radiologist to look at the x-ray of their brains and spines to see if there are unusual air bubbles which should not be there.

And let's not keep harping on about a medical expert not having a licence for 15 years, when there are another 4 separate medical experts also in agreement about air embolism.

JMO

I know that their key trial expert, Dr. Evans, was professional expert. Paid for it. Not a doctor for fifteen years. Not seen a single patient. Sits in a court.
I know that the other trial expert, who died before the trial, put innocent person behind bars. Do you want to get into that story? His management of statistics? It is a shame.
And let us not get into the area of doctors wearing too many hats.

 

[Furore]

Respectfully.

You are not working with evidence. You are using it as indirect clue that she was the killer.

You say, “We can only work with the evidence we have. I find it pointless inventing scenarios which Letby herself has never offered as explanation.”

So why did the prosecution turn it into a proof of her being a killer? People hoard paper, that’s all.

But as long as you allow hoarding papers and scrolling Facebook to be used as evidence of guilt, please allow me to offer a different explanation.

Lastly, how do people arrive at a conclusion that she was lying without being there? Just because two definitely not the best doctors who physically were in the unit only twice a week, and pushed care for level 2 babies on interns (registrars) and overwhelmed nurses couldn’t understand why very sick babies were dying?

You’re not allowed to take confidential patient information home, and doing so is illegal as well as unethical. That she did this is actually an offence in and of itself - she’d have known this IMO and chose to break both the law and patient confidentiality - not a good look for me personally

I haven’t seen her to weigh in on her trustworthiness. What a neurodivergent person says may be misunderstood. All I know is that she said she was innocent. For now, I honestly phase out “Lucy” factor because I don’t think it adds any weight.

I am looking from a different standpoint.

Level 2 unit in UK
provides short-term intensive care for babies needing non-invasive respiratory support, often those born between 27 and 32 weeks gestation.

Meaning they can be severely premature.

Now if you tell me that consultant level neonatologists are there only twice a week, this is enough for catastrophes to happen.

Why the increase in 2015-2016? God knows. Triaging might have changed (remember the COCH was determined poor-level of care for the mother of babies A @ B and it is only by poor luck she ended there. So it was a poor hospital to start with; maybe more sick kids ended up there due to change in triage?). So, more babies of 27 weeks as opposed to 32, here is your rise in deaths.

Or, as they mention, nosocomial infections. Pseudomonas aeruginosa, anyone? Or E. Coli due to sewage overflow?

If what Dr. Lee’s committee said about Dr. Jay - essentially, that he had no clue about ventilation in neonates - is true, and if during that time, statistically, they had more preemies needing ventilation - here is your reason for increased unit mortality.

These doctors should have been there night and day for such neonates, and they pushed the job on registrars and nurses.

or potentially instead of A plus B plus C plus D to make sense of it all, there was a convicted murderer?

I think it’s evident there is a lack of understanding about consultant job plans. Given that no human beings can work 24/7, rotas are established so that a number of places can be covered - delivery suite emergencies eg resus/brain cooling, the on-call for NICU - where they must be within 15-30 mins - but often a 72 hour on call, which, without cocaine they could not be permanently resident for, outpatient and follow up clinic, as well as governance meetings such as mortality and morbidity meetings, regional network meetings, audit, bed management etc so in order to cross cover all of these areas they evidently could not provide daily consultant ward rounds, though they always had 24/7 consultant advice. That’s not about pushing responsibility it’s just about how to get a limited number of people to cover all bases whilst needing to sleep and rest.

It also shouldn’t surprise you that this is just how hospitals work. Out of hours hospitals are nearly always run by registrars and nurses, that’s what provides the expertise and training to become a consultant.

I don’t think it’s particularly feasible at least to me that you can explain the spike in deaths to 2015-2016, following Letbys holidays, night shifts or day shifts etc just because consultants decided to be particularly ineffective or lazy or whatever that year. They spent the whole time trying to work out any other reasons for the spikes.

I cannot recall any of the cases having positive microbiology results for pseudomonas or E. coli. Have you followed the trial/the actual pathology reports? Deaths with sepsis from such infections would not be sudden and they would not be “unexplained”.

I think personally some of this is just reaching for extravagant reasons why this could not be letby when reality is usually much simpler.

All JMOO

 

[katydid23]

The LL case seems to be so highly charged and people who do not know the whole story have accepted viewpoints that have solidified that it is difficult to have any type of conversation about developments. I personally think that such a high profile case has been poorly handled and reported on. It is likely that LL is guilty but there are doubts and her Defence Team did not seem to do a very good job. There have been some high profile cases of innocent people being found guilty in recent years after spending long periods in jail. Could this be another example that will be exposed in the future?

No, this is not an example of an innocent sitting in jail. Nurse Letby had a very long, detailed, comprehensive trial. There was a very complete and exhaustive investigation that took several years to complete before her trial.

Letby was on the stand for many hours and given the chance to discuss each and every incident she was charged with. During that time, she was caught telling many inconsistent versions of events and she was caught telling some flat out lies about her actions and was caught with fraudulent medical notes she had changed to try and cover her tracks.

She had called out 2 of the parents of deceased twin boys, and accused them of lying when they accused her of assaulting their baby boys. Letby set forth her version of events and her timeline by showing her medical notes from those incidents.

But during the trial, the parents of Babies E and F had cell phone logs which corroborated their timeline and conflicted with Letby's timeline. And the sworn testimony of the 2 parents, their mid wife, and the attending doctor of the hospital ALL aligned with each others in opposition to what Nurse Letby testified to.

The mother of the babies went to the nursery to feed her twin boys and found one of her babies screaming in pain and bleeding from his mouth. That was at 9 pm, and Nurse Letby told the Mom to leave the nursery and said the doctor was on his way.

Two hours later that baby collapsed and died. Nurse Ltby claimed the mom was mistaken. She said the Mom did not come to the nursery at 9 pm, and there was no bleeding at that time, and Mom must be confused. BUT MOM AND DAD PROVED OTHERWISE.

Nurse Letby is not an innocent victim. She is a cunning, cold hearted serial killer. And was convicted as such in a fair and thorough trial. IMO