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

[Sweeper2000]

weird. all nhs hospitals and i think all hospitals in general are required to have a backup generator in the case the mains go off. unrelated i know but factual. must have been a problem with the backup, poor person.

 

[Jules2021]

@Charlot123 ok you're probably someone I've been arguing with on another platform lol. You don't think it's a bit strange that the one person suspected of harming and killing babies also happens to have some sort of fascination with death and hordes hundreds of handover sheets? It's a bit of a coincidence. I believe the burden of proof has been met and then some!

She didn't get found guilty based on Dr J's testimony-there was far more than that. With the difference of opinion over the "sometimes we wait for babies to self-correct" it's not that damning anyway. But one has to wonder why she was there yet again when a baby was collapsing, whether she called for help or not. Infections don't follow one nurse around.

IMHO, LL's case is like this. With COCH in a bad shape, they didn't need to have a SK to explain the spike in deaths.

Exactly? So why would they make a nurse a scapegoat if they could easily explain what happened in some other way? Serial killer nurse has got to be the least believable scenario. Can you imagine someone just thinking that up. And not only that but picking probably the least likely butter wouldn't melt girl next door nurse possible to pin it on? Why would they do all that if it sadly wasn't the truth?

 

[Sweeper2000]

lets not underestimate the level of meticulousness and sheer scale that would be needed for a conspiracy like that to be successful as well. beyond the scope of those involved i think and its been checked so many times.

 

[Charlot123]

What it looks like and what its name means in English in completely irrelevant. There is NO evidence this was responsible. This isn't the first you've brought up the infection theory, and you have been repeatedly told there is no evidence to support it. It obviously doesn't explain the insulin cases.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

The insulin cases i would put on the back burner tbh unless they are reviewed by the best specialists in the world. Surely.

Here we are now: Insulin Test Used to Convict Lucy Letby in Babies’ Deaths Was Unreliable, Experts Say

"In the new report, the experts present what they describe as “convincing new evidence from multiple sources” showing serious problems with the test results used to demonstrate that Ms. Letby poisoned two of the babies with insulin.

They said the test, called “the Roche immunoassay,” was known to result in “falsely high insulin results.”"

"They said the testing “did not meet acceptable forensic standards” and that the results of the Roche test, in particular, should not have been relied on without being confirmed by more precise laboratory tests."

"The Royal Liverpool Hospital laboratory where the tests were conducted explicitly warns in its online guidance that they are “not suitable” for investigating low blood sugar created by an insulin injection".

As we know, samples were not sent anywhere else.

https://pathlabs.rlbuht.nhs.uk/insulin.pdf

Mostly, it comes to the same logical fallacy: here

- Maybe there is no proof that LL killed anyone by injecting air into bloodstream or NG tube, but surely there is proof that she tried to kill them with insulin.

- Oh, she was not even present when hypoglycemia happened? - Well, she probably poisoned the TPN bag the day before.

- How do we know that it was Lucy who poisoned the TPN bag but not another nurse, the pharmacist or the doctor since there is no evidence whatsoever that she did it?

- Well, but she tried to kill other babies by injecting air into IV or NG tube, you know, so who but her?

So these insulin cases that are really questionable yet seem to be the strongest ones for some - serve as the evidence to illogical, circular thinking, culminating in Evans' "oh she killed them for sure", or "babies simply don't drop dead" or whatever this showy, but inexperienced in neonatology professional "trial expert" offers as the proof.

So everyone who is trying to apply logical thinking protests this hastily and unprofessionally stitched together trial, that's all.

 

[Charlot123]

@Charlot123 ok you're probably someone I've been arguing with on another platform lol. You don't think it's a bit strange that the one person suspected of harming and killing babies also happens to have some sort of fascination with death and hordes hundreds of handover sheets? It's a bit of a coincidence. I believe the burden of proof has been met and then some!

She didn't get found guilty based on Dr J's testimony-there was far more than that. With the difference of opinion over the "sometimes we wait for babies to self-correct" it's not that damning anyway. But one has to wonder why she was there yet again when a baby was collapsing, whether she called for help or not. Infections don't follow one nurse around.

IMHO, LL's case is like this. With COCH in a bad shape, they didn't need to have a SK to explain the spike in deaths.

Exactly? So why would they make a nurse a scapegoat if they could easily explain what happened in some other way? Serial killer nurse has got to be the least believable scenario. Can you imagine someone just thinking that up. And not only that but picking probably the least likely butter wouldn't melt girl next door nurse possible to pin it on? Why would they do all that if it sadly wasn't the truth?

I tend to not argue, lol. Maybe, discussing? Weighing pros and cons?

As to "fascination with death." It is not the evidence of being a serial killer, otherwise anyone on this forum or other media is in hot water, lol! What about death metal afficionados or goths? I know a lot and honestly, my response is "people just like this music or dress so", but unless a person tells you what exactly they are fascinated with, probably, not. I would follow some online groups starting with the word death and even more, with "crime", but mostly, because I try to understand more about suicides, for example.

About handover sheets: unless we know
why people collect notes, and there can be dozens of reasons, it is not even a collateral evidence of a crime. How?

The truth is: the story started with what - sorry, it seems uneducated in math doctors - viewed as "statistics" and what any statistician would tear into pieces in a second. And then, this lack of formal education followed the whole case. It is horribly "haphazard". And when Dewi says something flamboyant but essentially, senseless, the complaints are that he is "torn into pieces by the media". But when people who are respected - Neena Modi, or MP Davis, or James Phillips - question the safety of the conviction - they are brushed aside.

Take James Phillips. He doesn't state whether Lucy Letby is innocent or guilty. He questions whether juries are equipped to handle complex scientific evidence. He ialso of an opinion that the presentation of data and expert evidence was flawed. He says that the conviction was unsafe because of this.

I am of the similar opinion. This case is horribly subjective. And it is a very serious accusation! People make conclusions based on Lucy's facial expression, some personal habits, in short, idiosyncrasies. When it comes to objectivity, this is when it all floats.

And, I don't know who they protect now: Dr. Evans, the "professional expert", Dr. Jayaram "the thespian" or Justice Goss? (They have surely protected Dr. Choco, and they didn't need to, sorry, he is a crying shame). But the longer they wait, the more it will cost. JMO.

 

[joltz]

you’re changing the goalposts. Hall thinks there’s been a miscarriage of justice in so far as she hasn’t been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, as far as I’m aware.

This is the view of anyone who looks at this objectively and isn’t emotionally invested, either in her guilt or in being ‘right’ themselves.

I don’t want to have be that guy, but ask one of the AI’s to go through the entirety of the available evidence and commentary and ask them what they think.

People on here keep implying that there’s some level of coherence and strength to the circumstantial evidence that those who didn’t follow the trial in real time aren’t privy too. But this is nonsense. Most of the people saying that don’t understand basic parts of the case such as the terribly misleading statistical evidence — misleading to this day. And now everything has been unearthed and pored over as infinitum and the new verdict is in, this case is a catastrophic miscarriage of justice.

AI? Just lol

Don't agree with any of that. McDonald is a charlatan, he's doing exactly the same as what he did with Ben Geen. It's textbook, but this is 10x the publicity. Then you have the PR firm Maltin, working with them. Then you have a band of pro Letby journalists like Knapton, Hitchens etc, all doing their bit. The intention has already been stated by McDonald: to try and change the narrative that Letby is a monster in the eyes of the public.

None of it changes the fact that there isn't any new evidence. The claims being made by Letbys defence don't stand up to, even mild scrutiny. They know that the insulin evidence is a real stumbling block and they are trying to cast doubt on it. The engineer Geoff Chase didn't come across well in the panorama documentary and neither did McDonald imo. If they can get Letbys case to the COA, then McDonald will be able to dine out on Letbys case for the next 5+ years. It's a win win for him. He gets more attention than he's ever had for his innocence project. But the fact is that he represents multiple killers as part of that project and they are all guilty. Ben Geen and Michael Stone are not innocent, they are not MOJ like he claims. His methods are not honest and I don't think he has any integrity.

So, really, imo, the insulin evidence is going absolutely nowhere. Look at Colin Norris' recent appeal hearing. He was emphatically rejected. The evidence against Letby is greater. The so called expert panel haven't been cross examined. They have just been allowed to say whatever they want, after specifically being chosen by Dr Lee and told to discount AE as a cause. They have also not taken into consideration the links between the cases. There was 5 cases, of throat bleeding, unusual screams, rashes, twins/siblings. This is ignored. Their conclusions are therefore hugely flawed. And you really have to question whether their method was specifically set up in order to find any causes that didn't include Letby. Because they are clearly working with an inherited bias and it's not impartial whatsoever. It's very easy to see that.

Letbys fans lap it all up because it's what they want to hear but really, it's all just bluster. Maybe she will get to the COA, who knows. Part of me would like that, because I would like to see these experts cross examined by Nick Johnson and crumble But one thing is certain: she has absolutely zero chance of ever having her convictions quashed. That not happening, ever. Despite people like yourself who keep trying to tell people otherwise.

JMO

 

[Charlot123]

AI? Just lol

Don't agree with any of that. McDonald is a charlatan,

How would you describe Dewi Evans then?

he's doing exactly the same as what he did with Ben Geen. It's textbook, but this is 10x the publicity. Then you have the PR firm Maltin, working with them. Then you have a band of pro Letby journalists like Knapton, Hitchens etc, all doing their bit. The intention has already been stated by McDonald: to try and change the narrative that Letby is a monster in the eyes of the public.

Lots of money. If the original trial were done professionally, this won’t be needed.

None of it changes the fact that there isn't any new evidence. The claims being made by Letbys defence don't stand up to, even mild scrutiny. They know that the insulin evidence is a real stumbling block and they are trying to cast doubt on it.

The truth is, the insulin and C-peptide were Roche immunoassay screening tests. No one did verification by using mass spectrometry, right.

So here is how it looks like: “on the day that Lucy Letby was not on shift, the baby developed hypoglycemia. A screening test with an imprecise Roche immunoassay was done by the lab that 8 months later had problems with certification. According to the test, there was high insulin and low C-peptide, which could indicate exogenous insulin being present in the baby’s body. However, this screening test does not measure insulin directly and hence, can provide false readings. It had to be followed by a direct measurement of insulin and C-peptide, if the doctors have any concerns. But apparently, no one did because nothing was ordered. Two years later, these results are pulled out, attached to Lucy Letby’s case although she was not on the unit that day and based on these reading, she is accused of adding insulin to the TPN bag the night before. There is zero evidence that she did it, but let us attach it to the case because it solidifies it.”

The engineer Geoff Chase didn't come across well in the panorama documentary and neither did McDonald imo. If they can get Letbys case to the COA, then McDonald will be able to dine out on Letbys case for the next 5+ years. It's a win win for him. He gets more attention than he's ever had for his innocence project. But the fact is that he represents multiple killers as part of that project and they are all guilty. Ben Geen and Michael Stone are not innocent, they are not MOJ like he claims. His methods are not honest and I don't think he has any integrity.

The panorama put together by Judith Moritz, a journalist whose main fault is that she believed Dewi Evans who said, “oh she killed them all right”. I can’t blame her - after all, if I spoke with a space engineer, I’d take his words about rockets for granted, because I have no education. So the fault stays with Dewi. But, Moritz wrote an article and a book that may be incorrect. So Dewi’s “interest in the case” is dragging her down, too.

really, imo, the insulin evidence is going absolutely nowhere. Look at Colin Norris' recent appeal hearing. He was emphatically rejected. The evidence against Letby is greater. The so called expert panel haven't been cross examined. They have just been allowed to say whatever they want, after specifically being chosen by Dr Lee and told to discount AE as a cause. They have also not taken into consideration the links between the cases. There was 5 cases, of throat bleeding, unusual screams, rashes, twins/siblings. This is ignored. Their conclusions are therefore hugely flawed. And you really have to question whether their method was specifically set up in order to find any causes that didn't include Letby. Because they are clearly working with an inherited bias and it's not impartial whatsoever. It's very easy to see that.

Letbys fans lap it all up because it's what they want to hear but really, it's all just bluster. Maybe she will get to the COA, who knows. Part of me would like that, because I would like to see these experts cross examined by Nick Johnson and crumble But one thing is certain: she has absolutely zero chance of ever having her convictions quashed. That not happening, ever. Despite people like yourself who keep trying to tell people otherwise.

JMO

Insulin is badly stuck even if it was correct, and who knows now?

But, the biggest problem was the police relying on two doctors probably because “they are doctors” and then, the judge and the jury panel believing a professional trial expert. It seems that all “second opinions” were post-trial except for Lord Justice Jackson who at least warned Justice Goss about Evans.

 

[Marantz4250b]

lets not underestimate the level of meticulousness and sheer scale that would be needed for a conspiracy like that to be successful as well. beyond the scope of those involved i think and its been checked so many times.

Indeed!

For this to have been a plan to fit her up for murder you'd need to get loads of senior hospital staff onboard, then con the police and CPS into buying your "evidence" and then get it all past a court and a randomly selected jury.

Any idea that this was in any way a setup is utterly insane, quite frankly.

 

[joltz]

AI? Just lol

Don't agree with any of that. McDonald is a charlatan, he's doing exactly the same as what he did with Ben Geen. It's textbook, but this is 10x the publicity. Then you have the PR firm Maltin, working with them. Then you have a band of pro Letby journalists like Knapton, Hitchens etc, all doing their bit. The intention has already been stated by McDonald: to try and change the narrative that Letby is a monster in the eyes of the public.

None of it changes the fact that there isn't any new evidence. The claims being made by Letbys defence don't stand up to, even mild scrutiny. They know that the insulin evidence is a real stumbling block and they are trying to cast doubt on it. The engineer Geoff Chase didn't come across well in the panorama documentary and neither did McDonald imo. If they can get Letbys case to the COA, then McDonald will be able to dine out on Letbys case for the next 5+ years. It's a win win for him. He gets more attention than he's ever had for his innocence project. But the fact is that he represents multiple killers as part of that project and they are all guilty. Ben Geen and Michael Stone are not innocent, they are not MOJ like he claims. His methods are not honest and I don't think he has any integrity.

So, really, imo, the insulin evidence is going absolutely nowhere. Look at Colin Norris' recent appeal hearing. He was emphatically rejected. The evidence against Letby is greater. The so called expert panel haven't been cross examined. They have just been allowed to say whatever they want, after specifically being chosen by Dr Lee and told to discount AE as a cause. They have also not taken into consideration the links between the cases. There was 5 cases, of throat bleeding, unusual screams, rashes, twins/siblings. This is ignored. Their conclusions are therefore hugely flawed. And you really have to question whether their method was specifically set up in order to find any causes that didn't include Letby. Because they are clearly working with an inherited bias and it's not impartial whatsoever. It's very easy to see that.

Letbys fans lap it all up because it's what they want to hear but really, it's all just bluster. Maybe she will get to the COA, who knows. Part of me would like that, because I would like to see these experts cross examined by Nick Johnson and crumble But one thing is certain: she has absolutely zero chance of ever having her convictions quashed. That not happening, ever. Despite people like yourself who keep trying to tell people otherwise.

JMO

And just going a bit further on the insulin, it's already been mentioned by multiple people but Geoff Chase really exposed himself with his interview.
His initial claim about the insulin/c peptide range was that it was "within the expected range" he then decided it was "not uncommon" when pressed further about whether it was normal or not, he claimed there "was no definition of normal for a preterm neonate"

Coffey states that everyone they have everyone they have spoken to says it's extraordinary and Chase replies by saying that they are not wrong but his position is now that, his original claim is "possible" but the results are "unusually high but it is possible"

That exchange sums up exactly what McDonald is trying to do. The claims don't hold up whatsoever. They are telling porky pies and trying to pass these claims off to the general public. All it took was a couple of questions from a journalist and Chase completely crumbled and had to admit he basically, talking rubbish.

JMO

 

[joltz]

How would you describe Dewi Evans then?




Lots of money. If the original trial were done professionally, this won’t be needed.



The truth is, the insulin and C-peptide were Roche immunoassay screening tests. No one did verification by using mass spectrometry, right.

So here is how it looks like: “on the day that Lucy Letby was not on shift, the baby developed hypoglycemia. A screening test with an imprecise Roche immunoassay was done by the lab that 8 months later had problems with certification. According to the test, there was high insulin and low C-peptide, which could indicate exogenous insulin being present in the baby’s body. However, this screening test does not measure insulin directly and hence, can provide false readings. It had to be followed by a direct measurement of insulin and C-peptide, if the doctors have any concerns. But apparently, no one did because nothing was ordered. Two years later, these results are pulled out, attached to Lucy Letby’s case although she was not on the unit that day and based on these reading, she is accused of adding insulin to the TPN bag the night before. There is zero evidence that she did it, but let us attach it to the case because it solidifies it.”



The panorama put together by Judith Moritz, a journalist whose main fault is that she believed Dewi Evans who said, “oh she killed them all right”. I can’t blame her - after all, if I spoke with a space engineer, I’d take his words about rockets for granted, because I have no education. So the fault stays with Dewi. But, Moritz wrote an article and a book that may be incorrect. So Dewi’s “interest in the case” is dragging her down, too.



Insulin is badly stuck even if it was correct, and who knows now?

But, the biggest problem was the police relying on two doctors probably because “they are doctors” and then, the judge and the jury panel believing a professional trial expert. It seems that all “second opinions” were post-trial except for Lord Justice Jackson who at least warned Justice Goss about Evans.

More word salad.

JMO

 

[joltz]

And just going a bit further on the insulin, it's already been mentioned by multiple people but Geoff Chase really exposed himself with his interview.
His initial claim about the insulin/c peptide range was that it was "within the expected range" he then decided it was "not uncommon" when pressed further about whether it was normal or not, he claimed there "was no definition of normal for a preterm neonate"

Coffey states that everyone they have everyone they have spoken to says it's extraordinary and Chase replies by saying that they are not wrong but his position is now that, his original claim is "possible" but the results are "unusually high but it is possible"

That exchange sums up exactly what McDonald is trying to do. The claims don't hold up whatsoever. They are telling porky pies and trying to pass these claims off to the general public. All it took was a couple of questions from a journalist and Chase completely crumbled and had to admit he basically, talking rubbish.

JMO

Letby - The Insulin Deep Dive

The insulin convictions are going nowhere

bencole4.substack.com

This substack goes into a fair bit of detail regarding the insulin

 

[Charlot123]

Letby - The Insulin Deep Dive

The insulin convictions are going nowhere

bencole4.substack.com

This substack goes into a fair bit of detail regarding the insulin

I have read all I could. I am hoping for a retrial.

 

[Charlot123]

More word salad.

JMO

You being rude is not going to change the fact that Dr. Jayaram committed perjury, that Dr. Evans is as minimum “worthless” per Justice Jackson, and that the case did not meet the burden of proof.

 

[MamsBestGirl]

 

[MamsBestGirl]

You being rude is not going to change the fact that Dr. Jayaram committed perjury, that Dr. Evans is as minimum “worthless” per Justice Jackson, and that the case did not meet the burden of proof.

From the Appeal Court. You may as well forget the Judge Jackson nonsense. She ain’t gonna get an appeal on the grounds of misinformation from SM armchair experts.

 

[May72031]

[word salad snipped]

So everyone who is trying to apply logical thinking protests this hastily and unprofessionally stitched together trial, that's all.

There was nothing "unprofessional" about the trial. What was completely unprofessional were the two press conference circuses convened by Davis/Shoo Lee, and the behaviour of Letby's online supporters. You and the other Letbyists never apply logical thinking, and continually make false or unsupported claims - such as the infection theory.

 

[marynnu]

I have read all I could. I am hoping for a retrial.

Good luck with that.

 

[joltz]

I have read all I could. I am hoping for a retrial.

Good luck with that one, lol

JMO

 

[JosieJo]

I know it's The Mirror so shoot me now ...but ..apparently Letby has deluded herself she's getting out and the inmates are not happy ....what a shock she feels she will be set free ! Didn't think she was that type

Killer nurse Lucy Letby 'under 24-hour guard and checked on every 15 minutes'

Child killer Lucy Letby is said to be under 24-hour surveillance in prison, with guards checking on her every 15 minutes over fears she may be attacked by fellow inmates

www.mirror.co.uk

 

[WaneLyrical]

IMHO, LL's case is like this. With COCH in a bad shape, they didn't need to have a SK to explain the spike in deaths.

Exactly? So why would they make a nurse a scapegoat if they could easily explain what happened in some other way? Serial killer nurse has got to be the least believable scenario. Can you imagine someone just thinking that up. And not only that but picking probably the least likely butter wouldn't melt girl next door nurse possible to pin it on? Why would they do all that if it sadly wasn't the truth?

RSBM

20 years ago I worked in a bank that called internal fraud in to a branch because the management suspected a cashier was dipping the tills. It was all the same reasons, it’s always when she’s on shift, happens at lunch and break times, happens to other people’s tills as well as her own, never used to have this many shortages, she’s struggling for money. Blah blah.

Long story short she wasn’t dipping the tills. After a proper back office investigation, all the “suspicious” shortages started falling away as they could be explained, for various reasons but often down to poor systems and controls in the branch, insufficient staffing, proper procedures not being followed, and a handful of human errors.

It wasn’t a “conspiracy”. They firmly believed she was behind it. But she wasn’t. In fact she went on to work there for many years and was an exemplary member of staff.

It’s not that difficult to believe that people point the finger instead of looking at their own shortcomings. I don’t know why people convinced of Letby’s guilt are adamant that it is.