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

[May72031]

If only they’d called in retired paediatrician Dewi Evans, he can spot a crime within 10 minutes of looking at case notes.

Not sure he found evidence after 10 minutes, but he (and others) did find evidence.

 

[WaneLyrical]

Well, he was right wasnt he.

Letbys fans, meanwhile, are now reduced to sly comments in online forums, which is fantastic. It's literally all they have now...


JMO

Other experts are saying he wasn’t right though, aren’t they?

I’m not a “fan” of Letby. Nor am I attending Letby parties.

I’m more interested in getting to the bottom of whether these babies were in fact murdered, or whether they were victims of poor care like many qualified medical professionals are saying. Because otherwise Thirlwall is focusing on the wrong thing, and someone has taken the fall for another failing NHS unit.

Out of interest, if any of the jurors came forward and said that if some of the information known now was presented to them during the trial, then their opinion on guilt would have been different, how would that sit with those of you convinced that the correct verdict was reached?

 

[Ruthbullock]

Police investigating baby deaths at Countess of Chester Hospital

Cheshire Constabulary confirmed the probe will focus on the deaths of eight babies but will also review seven further deaths, as well as six non-fatal collapses.

www.dailymail.co.uk

There’s a lot of information about the RCPH report in this article <modsnip: Not known to be related to this case / trial>

 

[Sweeper2000]

Other experts are saying he wasn’t right though, aren’t they?

I’m not a “fan” of Letby. Nor am I attending Letby parties.

I’m more interested in getting to the bottom of whether these babies were in fact murdered, or whether they were victims of poor care like many qualified medical professionals are saying. Because otherwise Thirlwall is focusing on the wrong thing, and someone has taken the fall for another failing NHS unit.

Out of interest, if any of the jurors came forward and said that if some of the information known now was presented to them during the trial, then their opinion on guilt would have been different, how would that sit with those of you convinced that the correct verdict was reached?

As far as I can tell. Poor care has been cleared as contributing to the deaths of these babies by the highest levels of nursing organisations many times. They really would have known and it would have been a major feature in teh trial and focused on by the defence. It simply wasn't as it isn't there. Some sub optimal care yes but to the degree where it would have compromised the babies health resulting in death with med records showing it? No. Multiple layers of high quality med professionals have checked those records and all came back as showing the deaths were very out if place.

 

[WaneLyrical]

As far as I can tell. Poor care has been cleared as contributing to the deaths of these babies by the highest levels of nursing organisations many times. They really would have known and it would have been a major feature in teh trial and focused on by the defence. It simply wasn't as it isn't there. Some sub optimal care yes but to the degree where it would have compromised the babies health resulting in death with med records showing it? No. Multiple layers of high quality med professionals have checked those records and all came back as showing the deaths were very out if place.

And another layer of quality med professionals is saying they’ve also checked the records and the deaths were not out of place. So it doesn’t really matter what the jury heard from a closed system of people inside Manchester crown court who believe what they believe.

What I’m asking is if the jury had heard this other side, as they should have done, and said they would’ve landed on the side of reasonable doubt, would your personal opinion change, or would you always know deep down she was guilty?

 

[Parker Knoll]

If there was “ another side “ don’t you think her KC would have put this forward ???
In fact he did and ran the defence of poor care.
It was debunked.
Some of these babies were in very poor health and that had unanimously been agreed during the trial but nothing that would have killed them.
She did that.
SMH.

 

[Sweeper2000]

And another layer of quality med professionals is saying they’ve also checked the records and the deaths were not out of place. So it doesn’t really matter what the jury heard from a closed system of people inside Manchester crown court who believe what they believe.

What I’m asking is if the jury had heard this other side, as they should have done, and said they would’ve landed on the side of reasonable doubt, would your personal opinion change, or would you always know deep down she was guilty?

It wasn't just the med records that got her the G in my own. So many things seemed so out of place with it that I would genuinely look at her with allot of suspicions. I would have to have reasonable explanations for the other stuff to make me shift my opinion and I don't place much credit with any new med people saying the med records show a different side to it. That needs to be verified by the same organisations that checked those records.

 

[WaneLyrical]

If there was “ another side “ don’t you think her KC would have put this forward ???
In fact he did and ran the defence of poor care.
It was debunked.
Some of these babies were in very poor health and that had unanimously been agreed during the trial but nothing that would have killed them.
She did that.
SMH.

And it’s no longer unanimously agreed by other experts, so whatever is debunked is moot.

At this point I genuinely think Ben Myers believed there was no case to answer.

Either way, it clearly needs consensus.

 

[WaneLyrical]

It wasn't just the med records that got her the G in my own. So many things seemed so out of place with it that I would genuinely look at her with allot of suspicions. I would have to have reasonable explanations for the other stuff to make me shift my opinion and I don't place much credit with any new med people saying the med records show a different side to it. That needs to be verified by the same organisations that checked those records.

Yeah. I suppose I’m more forgiving when it comes to the other stuff. I don’t really see anything that corroborates her being a killer. I think there’s just as much chance of her “always being there” as there are of her being a serial killer. And she was just an ordinary person, the kind who has a Boofle diary with cat vaccination records in it. Surely someone who can commit such heinous crimes out of nowhere, would have, at some point, let their personality-disorder mask slip? But there’s just nothing on Letby, and it’s confusing.

Why would a serial killer basically be told that they’re caught (with everyone having been careful not to actually document the incriminating stuff), then be offered a transfer to a different unit or simply to “leave the unit”, and then decide the best course of action is to stay and fight everyone?

But anyway, I can fairly easily imagine her guilty. I can also fairly imagine her being not guilty, and I’m not dismissing this stuff that’s emerged. I’ve never known people to publicly put their necks on the line like this.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I don’t think there’s any sort of conspiracy in this case. I think this case is the legal equivalent of the white or blue dress illusion.

 

[Parker Knoll]

And it’s no longer unanimously agreed by other experts, so whatever is debunked is moot.

At this point I genuinely think Ben Myers believed there was no case to answer.

Either way, it clearly

Sigh.

 

[Charlot123]

is there any open source information about mortality on other units of COCH in 2015-2016? Also, data on pregnancy/delivery/perinatal complications/NICU deaths in West Midlands for that time?

All I found so far was maternal mortality for the area as opposed to other parts of GB. Which in itself is interesting but not what I am looking for.

 

[Ruthbullock]

is there any open source information about mortality on other units of COCH in 2015-2016? Also, data on pregnancy/delivery/perinatal complications/NICU deaths in West Midlands for that time?

All I found so far was maternal mortality for the area as opposed to other parts of GB. Which in itself is interesting but not what I am looking for.

Not sure what data is on these sites- but they do collate a lot of information

Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust - Overview - Care Quality Commission

www.cqc.org.uk

Our data - National Child Mortality Database

www.ncmd.info

Perinatal mortality surveillance reports | MBRRACE-UK | NPEU

The National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) is a multidisciplinary research unit based at the University of Oxford. Our work involves running randomised con

www.npeu.ox.ac.uk

You can also search quite well on here for FOI requests

Make and browse Freedom of Information (FOI) requests

www.whatdotheyknow.com

 

[joltz]

And it’s no longer unanimously agreed by other experts, so whatever is debunked is moot.

At this point I genuinely think Ben Myers believed there was no case to answer.

Either way, it clearly needs consensus.

Just lol

 

[May72031]

I’m more interested in getting to the bottom of whether these babies were in fact murdered, or whether they were victims of poor care like many qualified medical professionals are saying.

There is zero evidence any of the babies died from "poor care".

 

[mrC]

doctors who are hardly ever at work counts as poor care as far as i am concerned

 

[Moll]

doctors who are hardly ever at work counts as poor care as far as i am concerned

Who has ever said the doctors were hardly ever at work? Are you just trolling?

 

[mrC]

the hospital records

 

[Moll]

the hospital records

Quote them. Explain what you mean.

 

[May72031]

Who has ever said the doctors were hardly ever at work? Are you just trolling?

Some of us have had similar thoughts.

 

[JosieJo]

And another layer of quality med professionals is saying they’ve also checked the records and the deaths were not out of place. So it doesn’t really matter what the jury heard from a closed system of people inside Manchester crown court who believe what they believe.

What I’m asking is if the jury had heard this other side, as they should have done, and said they would’ve landed on the side of reasonable doubt, would your personal opinion change, or would you always know deep down she was guilty?

That's is what we are waiting to find out though isn't it ? ..if the court of Appeal find there is evidence that may have influenced a jury they things can go from there .. that's something we can only have opinions on ...even her representatives can spout whatever they like it doesn't make it relevant to the original jury at trial