(All superstitions stem from cognitive biases. In XXI century, however, we should accept them for what they are, “irrational, albeit comforting, beliefs”.)
Lucy Letby’s case raises a bigger question. How come so many professionals, be it doctors, policemen, journalists, or the court system seemed to show the same pattern of cognition?
Were these different specialists privy to all the facts and aware of their significance before the trial started?
Before we blame the police for not relying on statistics, there is a serious question to ask the doctors involved:
- was the fact of Pseudomonas infestation of COCH NICU in 2015-16 ever disclosed to the police before Operation Hummingbird?
- Was the gravity of this fact explained to the policemen?
If not, the police’s fault might be less, but that of the doctors, surely, more.
I found about the infection after Lucy Letby’s trial. What about the public? Were the expectant mothers planning to give birth in COCH in 2015 aware of it? Didn’t they have the right to know? Was the trial jury aware of what Pseudomonas was?
Dr. Evans was abreast of this, and probably, other things, during his investigation. In his long list of specialists involved, mentioned in the article, sanitary control is glaringly lacking. Drs. Breary, Jayaram, Gibbs, all knew of it. The CEO of the hospital knew.
My question is, was this fact (P. Aeruginosa) shared with Professor Jane Hutton, the statistician initially employed by the police, the one who was let go?
You see, she planned to investigate other factors contributing into NICU mortality and then suddenly the police let her go. Was the decision made solely by the police? Or was the hospital involved, too?
