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

[Charlot123]

They did a post mortem on 5 babies. You don't need a post mortem to pick up infection as all babies are screened regularly.
Baby E evidently did not die of NEC. Why the doctor involved suggested it is baffling.

If we rely on postmortems in these cases, then none of them stated that either baby died from air embolism, air in the stomach or insulin in TPN, for starts. There should have been no trial based on post mortems. The trial started with Dr. Breary’s post hoc fallacy.

Like S. Maltophilia, mentioned in the 14-international experts panel, ventilators need to be swabbed for P. Aeruginosa that can grow in films.

I am far from baby E. I am thinking of baby C, the one with extremely low birth weight, the one that was never seen by dr. Gibbs during the first 72 hours of his life, the one who never opened his bowels and for whom Dr. Gibbs ordered only ranitidine in the first 72 hours. This is the one they suspect NEC in. The article discusses baby C.

 

[Charlot123]

Dr ZA, took responsibility for not arranging an autopsy for baby E. At the Thirlwall inquiry she apologised to the parents and said on reflection the X Ray didn't show NEC.

The article that I linked and the baby that I mentioned is Baby C. How did we switch to Baby E, respectfully?

 

[joltz]

He criticised the CPS for not bringing prosecutions in relation to the Gosport hospital scandal, where he led one of those investigations and felt adamant there was sufficient evidence to do so. He’s probably wondering what changed for the CPS to enable this absolute farce of a trial.

So he's another one with an axe to grind. Thanks, ille add him to the lengthy list of people with pre determined bias who cannot view the evidence in an impartial manner and proceed to make fools of themselves.

JMO

 

[marynnu]

If we rely on postmortems in these cases, then none of them stated that either baby died from air embolism, air in the stomach or insulin in TPN, for starts. There should have been no trial based on post mortems. The trial started with Dr. Breary’s post hoc fallacy.

Like S. Maltophilia, mentioned in the 14-international experts panel, ventilators need to be swabbed for P. Aeruginosa that can grow in films.

I am far from baby E. I am thinking of baby C, the one with extremely low birth weight, the one that was never seen by dr. Gibbs during the first 72 hours of his life, the one who never opened his bowels and for whom Dr. Gibbs ordered only ranitidine in the first 72 hours. This is the one they suspect NEC in. The article discusses baby C.

It would have been interesting to diagnose insulin in bags (how, exactly?) as neither baby died.

 

[joltz]

Dr ZA, took responsibility for not arranging an autopsy for baby E. At the Thirlwall inquiry she apologised to the parents and said on reflection the X Ray didn't show NEC.

Yes, there is evidence to show that, just like the opinion of Dr Evans in relation to baby C. That doesn't stop the flat earthers from talking gibberish unfortunately


JMO

 

[WaneLyrical]

No it was Dr ZA alone. She was on call that night and attended the death with registrar Dr Harkness.

DR ZA at Thirlwall -

Q. And had you been more curious, what investigations were available to you at the time to take that further?

A. I spoke to the Coroner and explained that I thought the cause of death was NEC, which meant that the Coroner and I agreed that we should issue a --I should issue a medical certificate of cause of death with that as the explanation. Had I not had those thoughts when I discussed it with the Coroner, then Child E would have had a postmortem to look for the cause of death.

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Thirlwall-Inquiry-7-October-2024.pdf

Dr Gibbs at Thirlwall -

You examined Child E on 2 August. There wasa deterioration on 3 August which was unexpected and Child E died on 4 August, is that your understanding?

A. Sadly that's my understanding, yes.

Q. What you say at paragraph 142 is that it was surprising that Child E rapidly deteriorated and died?

A. Yes. That's after I had found him well the previous day. Others who were looking after him the day he died will be able to report how well he seemed before he suddenly collapsed.

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Thirlwall-Inquiry-1-October-2024.pdf

Ah right, thanks, it was Harkness who was present, I know he’s not a consultant. I don’t know why I’m picturing Gibbs there.

In any event, if it were so obvious from the xray that NEC wasn’t present, keeping in mind that the death was reviewed afterwards and the baby had been described as bleeding like nothing seen before, then a number of people have been complicit in allowing a false cause of death to just go quietly under the radar. It’s scandalous, and the words of these people have been taken as gospel during this trial.

 

[WaneLyrical]

So he's another one with an axe to grind. Thanks, ille add him to the lengthy list of people with pre determined bias who cannot view the evidence in an impartial manner and proceed to make fools of themselves.

JMO

So is anyone who doesn’t agree with your opinion dismissed as a fool with an axe to grind or a flat-earther?

 

[Baileyboo]

The article that I linked and the baby that I mentioned is Baby C. How did we switch to Baby E, respectfully?

I was replying to two separate posts. The other post queried baby E.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Direct quote from the man

"There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever,”

And that's the end of that.

JMO

Do you know what it is genuinely strange. A bit more digging and we find the credentials on him. He is genuinely accomplished and experienced and knowledgeable.

Profile
Steve Watts has over 30 years’ experience as an investigator at all levels to chief officer, including serial homicide, war crimes and counter terrorism. He was vice chair of UK policing’s National Homicide Working Group, and national lead for investigative interviewing, investigation of deaths in healthcare and the investigation of death in workplaces. More recently Steve has provided strategic and operational policing, risk and security constancy in the UK, Europe, the Middle East and Australia. He is currently senior policing advisor to NICE systems APAC.

Dr Steve Watts

Steve Watts has over 30 years’ experience as an investigator at all levels to chief officer, including serial homicide, war crimes and counter terrorism. He was vice chair of UK policing’s National…

policinginsight.com

Bio​

Generated by
Topline AI
Dr. Steve Watts is a seasoned law enforcement professional with extensive experience in criminal investigations, counterterrorism, and policing strategy. He has held various leadership positions, including Director and Chief Constable, and has worked with governments, law enforcement agencies, and private organizations. Dr. Watts has a STRONG educational background in criminal justice, psychology, and applied criminology.

Dr. Steve Watts - Topline

Dr. Steve Watts is a Advisory Board Member at Kudos Knowledge Pty Ltd. Dr. Steve Watts has 49 years of experience. Dr. Steve Watts is skilled in Police, Investigation, Criminal Investigations, Counterterrorism, Criminal Justice, Command, Crime Prevention, Evidence, Change Management, Law...

topline.com

Haven't managed to find exactly what he has a doctorate in though.

I'm not sure uts relevant though as we have to Balance his opinion against the fact that multiple people of comparable expertise in relevant fields have given the process the green light. Also true that and in my knowledge he is the first to criticise the investigation itself. I don't think Maccie d has as of yet? We would have to assume that the investigators omitted allot of stuff.

Anyone know what that could mean in terms of law? Would they have to investigate the investigation? What's the potentials if they did find that bias was a part of it? I don't think it would mean allot tbh. Considering that many people outside of policing ie doctors testified the deaths were unusual maybe that itself would mean the charges were justified.

 

[joltz]

So is anyone who doesn’t agree with your opinion dismissed as a fool with an axe to grind or a flat-earther?

No but it's a common theme amongst the people claiming MOJ.

 

[rvlvr]

So is anyone who doesn’t agree with your opinion dismissed as a fool with an axe to grind or a flat-earther?

Don’t forget, a member of the ‘metropolitan elite’, at least according to Evans anyway, who definitely isn’t cracking up.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Just gonna go through the article and pick out a few bits and try and contextualise it. All quotes from that article.

"The force has been accused of fixating on Letby and of not following alternative lines of inquiry, or challenging the narrative of doctors at the Countess of Chester Hospital or expert witnesses."

The doctors narrative has been verified by other doctors hired by Hummingbird to provide opinions and expertise. It's also true that that expertise would give good reason to focus on letby.

"Under the national core investigative doctrine recommended by the College of Policing, forces are instructed to keep an OPEN mind to avoid verification bias.

But Dr Steve Watts, Hampshire’s former assistant chief constable, who drew up the national policy for investigating deaths in healthcare settings, said he was concerned that the force had NOT sought alternative explanations."

I think this can be dismissed by the addition to the investigation of testimony by parents which further pointed at letby.

"At a very early stage, it appears that Cheshire Police decided these children had been injured deliberately, and that Lucy Letby had done it."

Again it can be dismissed as testimony from both parents and doctors also pushed the COCH docs narrative. Had there of been anything that didn't point at letby then presumably other angles would have been explored.

"There are a number of other hypotheses of how these babies died. "

This has been explored at trial and mostly rejected by experts testimony.

This also clarifies the situation imo

"As the case unfolded, multiple medical experts – specialising in areas of paediatric radiology, paediatric pathology, haematology, paediatric neurology and paediatric endocrinology, and two main medical experts [consultant paediatricians] – were enlisted to ensure that we carried out as thorough an investigation as possible.”

Letby police ‘decided she was guilty from the start’

Investigation was ‘unconsciously skewed by confirmation bias’, says former assistant chief constable

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[WaneLyrical]

Just gonna go through the article and pick out a few bits and try and contextualise it. All quotes from that article.

"The force has been accused of fixating on Letby and of not following alternative lines of inquiry, or challenging the narrative of doctors at the Countess of Chester Hospital or expert witnesses."

The doctors narrative has been verified by other doctors hired by Hummingbird to provide opinions and expertise. It's also true that that expertise would give good reason to focus on letby.

"Under the national core investigative doctrine recommended by the College of Policing, forces are instructed to keep an OPEN mind to avoid verification bias.

But Dr Steve Watts, Hampshire’s former assistant chief constable, who drew up the national policy for investigating deaths in healthcare settings, said he was concerned that the force had NOT sought alternative explanations."

I think this can be dismissed by the addition to the investigation of testimony by parents which further pointed at letby.

"At a very early stage, it appears that Cheshire Police decided these children had been injured deliberately, and that Lucy Letby had done it."

Again it can be dismissed as testimony from both parents and doctors also pushed the COCH docs narrative. Had there of been anything that didn't point at letby then presumably other angles would have been explored.

"There are a number of other hypotheses of how these babies died. "

This has been explored at trial and mostly rejected by experts testimony.

This also clarifies the situation imo

"As the case unfolded, multiple medical experts – specialising in areas of paediatric radiology, paediatric pathology, haematology, paediatric neurology and paediatric endocrinology, and two main medical experts [consultant paediatricians] – were enlisted to ensure that we carried out as thorough an investigation as possible.”

Letby police ‘decided she was guilty from the start’

Investigation was ‘unconsciously skewed by confirmation bias’, says former assistant chief constable

www.telegraph.co.uk

It was only discovered at the END of the trial that sewage was leaking into the labour ward and NNU, and even then there were very few records of it. That’s the entire reason “the plumber” was called, to much ridicule here and elsewhere online, because otherwise it would have been another lie from Letby.

So just how detailed was their investigation into the other angles, if they failed to identify something as catastrophic as these fragile infants being kept in such unsanitary conditions?

 

[Sweeper2000]

It was only discovered at the END of the trial that sewage was leaking into the labour ward and NNU, and even then there were very few records of it. That’s the entire reason “the plumber” was called, to much ridicule here and elsewhere online, because otherwise it would have been another lie from Letby.

So just how detailed was their investigation into the other angles, if they failed to identify something as catastrophic as these fragile infants being kept in such unsanitary conditions?

As I say the medical investigations themselves rule out infection as a cause of the acute declines and deaths. Could we not say if the medical files contained that info then would the result Hve been different? Answers a resolute no isn't it?
It's also true that the investigation gave no prompt towards hygiene on the unit being a possible cod so no reason to investigate it.
I also have to think that there aren't many plausible alternatives, not many.

 

[joltz]

It was only discovered at the END of the trial that sewage was leaking into the labour ward and NNU, and even then there were very few records of it. That’s the entire reason “the plumber” was called, to much ridicule here and elsewhere online, because otherwise it would have been another lie from Letby.

So just how detailed was their investigation into the other angles, if they failed to identify something as catastrophic as these fragile infants being kept in such unsanitary conditions?

There was no cause to investigate a method of collapse/death for which there was no medical evidence. If a large proportion of the 40 or so colleagues that gave testimony had concerns about it and then if medical evidence pointed to it, then yes, but otherwise no.

Also didn't the police themselves release a documentary explaining how they looked for other causes instead of simply fixating on Letby.

 

[Parker Knoll]

High enough to know that stuff though for sure.

I can only think that maybe he thinks in terms of deaths at health institute settings may need a higher bar for evidence? Maybe?

Well if he pitched up offering to represent me I would consider myself doomed.

 

[WaneLyrical]

There was no cause to investigate a method of collapse/death for which there was no medical evidence. If a large proportion of the 40 or so colleagues that gave testimony had concerns about it and then if medical evidence pointed to it, then yes, but otherwise no.

Also didn't the police themselves release a documentary explaining how they looked for other causes instead of simply fixating on Letby.

There was evidence they should investigate that though, there was pseudomonas in the taps and didn’t one of the babies test positive for E Coli? This is faecal bacteria, in a unit with faeces in the ceiling. And we’re to believe it’s all just a big coincidence, that babies were destabilising and dying during the exact same period the estates team was being repeatedly called out to deal with sewage issues. Not to mention the babies dying on the unit next door.

Just because a baby didn’t have a full blown infection when they died (many of them did though, didn’t they,“he died with pneumonia, not of pneumonia”), how are we to know that constant exposure to this filthy environment was not a factor in causing the destabilisation of these infants? Where are the studies that show the effects of those pathogens and compounds in the air, and in ventilated babies? Cheshire Police don’t have the knowledge to answer it, and I’m not aware of them calling in any experts to look at things from that angle. However many millions they spent on this, and their little hummingbird charms, and they couldn’t even smell the filth coming out the ceiling.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Do you know what it is genuinely strange. A bit more digging and we find the credentials on him. He is genuinely accomplished and experienced and knowledgeable.

Profile
Steve Watts has over 30 years’ experience as an investigator at all levels to chief officer, including serial homicide, war crimes and counter terrorism. He was vice chair of UK policing’s National Homicide Working Group, and national lead for investigative interviewing, investigation of deaths in healthcare and the investigation of death in workplaces. More recently Steve has provided strategic and operational policing, risk and security constancy in the UK, Europe, the Middle East and Australia. He is currently senior policing advisor to NICE systems APAC.

Dr Steve Watts

Steve Watts has over 30 years’ experience as an investigator at all levels to chief officer, including serial homicide, war crimes and counter terrorism. He was vice chair of UK policing’s National…

policinginsight.com

Bio​

Generated by
Topline AI
Dr. Steve Watts is a seasoned law enforcement professional with extensive experience in criminal investigations, counterterrorism, and policing strategy. He has held various leadership positions, including Director and Chief Constable, and has worked with governments, law enforcement agencies, and private organizations. Dr. Watts has a STRONG educational background in criminal justice, psychology, and applied criminology.

Dr. Steve Watts - Topline

Dr. Steve Watts is a Advisory Board Member at Kudos Knowledge Pty Ltd. Dr. Steve Watts has 49 years of experience. Dr. Steve Watts is skilled in Police, Investigation, Criminal Investigations, Counterterrorism, Criminal Justice, Command, Crime Prevention, Evidence, Change Management, Law...

topline.com

Haven't managed to find exactly what he has a doctorate in though.

I'm not sure uts relevant though as we have to Balance his opinion against the fact that multiple people of comparable expertise in relevant fields have given the process the green light. Also true that and in my knowledge he is the first to criticise the investigation itself. I don't think Maccie d has as of yet? We would have to assume that the investigators omitted allot of stuff.

Anyone know what that could mean in terms of law? Would they have to investigate the investigation? What's the potentials if they did find that bias was a part of it? I don't think it would mean allot tbh. Considering that many people outside of policing ie doctors testified the deaths were unusual maybe that itself would mean the charges were justified.

Sorry, how did this guy come up here? What's his relevance to anything? What's his relevance to anything in this country as he appears to be an Aussie?

Have I missed something here?

 

[marynnu]

Not to mention the babies dying on the unit next door.

What does this mean?
I just want to check. Do you seriously think there was sewage coming from the ceiling? I mean, come on. Infection control & the staff weren't bothered & no parent noticed. Really?

 

[WaneLyrical]

What does this mean?
I just want to check. Do you seriously think there was sewage coming from the ceiling? I mean, come on. Infection control & the staff weren't bothered & no parent noticed. Really?

The estates manager told the telegraph that there was sewage coming through the ceiling, yes.

Here’s the article, telegraph is behind a paywall: https://archive.is/4v9VO

He also described how there were regular call outs to deal with foul water from the pipes which carried macerator waste and sewage above the unit. When there were blockages the waste would seep out of the pipes and through the ceiling tiles in the unit.

The team was forced to put multiple absorbent nappy pads in the ceiling area to stop any waste from dripping down

The former worker also said the sinks were often blocked, adding that the release of the blockage “could be explosive with big splashes of foul water and the cleaners would not be on hand immediately”.

“I’d unblock a sink using a plunger with babies still in the room. All of the lads would raise issues. It was an ongoing battle of firefighting with leaks and blockages,” he said.

Revolting.