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 #38

[marynnu]

Why am I getting notifications of posts being removed for "claiming a reporter is lying" when it is a matter of public record that the writer for the Guardian has published materially false claims disproven by court transcripts on the exact topic?

Do I need to sit down, provide links to the relevant transcripts and articles to establish that this journalist spreads misinformation? And why are moderators overstepping in their moderation to tip the scales when it is a matter of fact and public record that can easily be verified if one looks for themselves?

I think to claim they were lying is the problem, unless you can prove it was deliberate. Better to say inaccurate or mistaken if you can't.

 

[WaneLyrical]

The article says a source close to the case, so it’s not even trying to suggest it was hashed out in court. Accusing a journalist of outright fabricating it is ludicrous.

Anyway, as the resident conspiracy theorist, I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. It’s pretty clear Letby is someone who writes when processing information, considering “hundreds” of handwritten notes were recovered. I do it too, have always done it, and her notes look a lot like my notebooks. I am lost without a pen and paper nearby.

Whether or not she was told via counselling that writing things down is a good idea, it probably wouldn’t have had any bearing on her scribbles, it looks like she does it anyway. I know that writing things down is useful from a counselling or CBT perspective, but it’s not why I do it. If someone asked me why my notebooks look like schizophrenic ramblings, I’d be like “huh, I dunno, I just do it, I just write stuff down”. There’s no deeper meaning. Incidentally, I also struggle to throw these notes away, and so they accumulate until they’re old enough that I consider them to be detached enough to discard.

I’m neurodivergent, which probably explains this quirk. But it’s also the reason why I’m entirely unconvinced by the handwritten notes or the retention of handover notes, or that the notes were some kind of counselling exercise.

 

[OhDannyBoi]

Contact the mods directly - they don't like moderation being discussed publicly.

But, yes, if you can provide links that prove a report is false then I'd do that as WS will want to prevent being sued.

How can I do that?

I think this is important enough that it needs to be discussed publicly. This is a case where journalists have been abusing their positions and publishing false claims not supported by evidence to perpetrate an innocence fraud.

1. The New Yorker article by Rachel Aviv was deconstructed by Judith Moritz and Jonathan Coffrey for their book and they uncovered misleading quote solicitation and grave factual inaccuracies.

2. Sarah Knapton of the Telegraph has been misrepresenting facts about the case in whatever way she can to the point of even overdramaticizing parental testimony from the Thirlwall Inquiry, quickly discovered by comparing her coverage to the transcripts.

3. Felicity Lawrence has misrepresented the qualifications of people she solicited quotes and has fabricated an excuse for the notes that doesn't exist in evidence because Letby herself never claimed those notes were a therapeutic exercise.

To say nothing of the ones from Unherd, Phil Hammond and Peter Hitchens.

The idea that we shouldn't discuss this when it's easy to verify is disturbing. How does one cut through the misinformation if we're not allowed to point out what's real vs what's fake?

 

[OhDannyBoi]

The article says a source close to the case, so it’s not even trying to suggest it was hashed out in court. Accusing a journalist of outright fabricating it is ludicrous.

Anyway, as the resident conspiracy theorist, I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. It’s pretty clear Letby is someone who writes when processing information, considering “hundreds” of handwritten notes were recovered. I do it too, have always done it, and her notes look a lot like my notebooks. I am lost without a pen and paper nearby.

Whether or not she was told via counselling that writing things down is a good idea, it probably wouldn’t have had any bearing on her scribbles, it looks like she does it anyway. I know that writing things down is useful from a counselling or CBT perspective, but it’s not why I do it. If someone asked me why my notebooks look like schizophrenic ramblings, I’d be like “huh, I dunno, I just do it, I just write stuff down”. There’s no deeper meaning. Incidentally, I also struggle to throw these notes away, and so they accumulate until they’re old enough that I consider them to be detached enough to discard.

I’m neurodivergent, which probably explains this quirk. But it’s also the reason why I’m entirely unconvinced by the handwritten notes or the retention of handover notes, or that the notes were some kind of counselling exercise.

Felicity Lawrence has made misleading claims before. There was an article where it was discovered the person she claimed was a foremost toxicology and insulin expert in Europe was in doubt over the test results. Someone on reddit the pulled out their publication history and discovered they'd never done any research with insulin.

Lucy Letby was directly asked about those notes at trial. It is public record and those transcripts are available publicly through Crime Scene 2 Courtroom. She did not make any claim about those notes being therapeutic exercises or written at the behest of an occupational therapist. It is a complete falsehood that the guilty party did not raise at trial.

 

[OhDannyBoi]

Yes, I agree with you. This has been discussed at length here and there is zero evidence that the notes were written on the advice of a counsellor or medical professional. Letby's side has never claimed such and it was never suggested in court that they were.

Right at the start her KC mentioned that they were ..the outpourings of an anguished and troubled woman under immense pressure... or something to that effect. That, I have no doubt is true, but it doesn't mean anything more and it certainly doesn't lean toward her innocence.

I think that the whole thing initially was taken the wrong way and it's come to settle in the minds of many that they were some sort of medical treatment exercise. They were written before her first arrest and quite possibly before she even knew that the police might even be called in. Writing about killing babies that early on gives an insight into how she feared things would play out, imo.

Yes, it's very much a retroactive excuse to try and weaken evidence against her. This is why I emphasize it is not an inaccuracy but an intentional falsehood. We have her own words on the matter as solicited by both the defence and the prosecution when she was confronted in her evidence in chief as well as cross examination.

 

[Marantz4250b]

How can I do that?

Just report any post - even one of your own - and raise the issue. They'll see it.

Edit: Saturday night so curry and Mojitos. Normal service resumes tomorrow!

 

[Dotta]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934004963623006411