GUILTY 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

[CS2C]

Parents coming forward in support of Letby means absolutely nothing. She was not accused of harming every baby she came into contact with. Your comment does not detract from the accusations of multiple other parents whatsoever. These are parents who didn't know anything about Letby at the time and felt she had harmed their babies. That's alarming

I'm sure plenty of people came forward and said what a lovely Doctor Mr Shipman was...

 

[Sweeper2000]

Lovely enough for many to leave in their will. A charming man no doubt. Not so much salt of the earth much more like salted earth.

Eta that jogged my memory. Been thinking about her and when she's distraught and speaking to her family. Showing "genuine empathy". Shipman Shipman hung himself the day before his entitlement to some sort of money ran out and this money then went to his wife suggesting genuine care, that's very calculating. Shipman was thought to have done what he did for numerous reasons, some was indeed getting in the will another was alleviating the system of "burdens". She got none of that, so the motivation is difficult to even guess at.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Parents coming forward in support of Letby means absolutely nothing. She was not accused of harming every baby she came into contact with. Your comment does not detract from the accusations of multiple other parents whatsoever. These are parents who didn't know anything about Letby at the time and felt she had harmed their babies. That's alarming

Well, indeed!

The whole nature of psychopaths and narcissists is that they are very good at making lots of people think they're the nicest person who ever graced the face of the earth. The are experts at deception. It's entirely expected that lots of parents would say that she was a very good nurse because she actually was, in the main.

If she were an obviously unstable, unkempt lunatic who enjoyed kicking babies around the ward, we wouldn't be on a thread which is now at hundreds of pages and thousands of posts. She would have been locked up on her first day and no one would ever have heard of her.

 

[WaneLyrical]

I'm going to have to dial back on the pjs comment. I've just looked back over the cross examination. Lucy Letby stated that she was wearing PJ's during her first arrest. She was lying and that was what the back and forth was about. She admitted she was lying because she was.
They were specifically talking about her first arrest. She then tries to illicit sympathy by tying multiple arrests together. She specifically said it was the first arrest. She never said she was mistaken, she said she didn't know why she lied.

This is now being ridiculously trotted out as another reason to claim innocence. She was still lying.

CS2C posted the relevant transcripts. In the initial questioning by Myers did they even specify which arrest? She said pyjamas and we can clearly see her being taken away in a blooming dressing gown!

And on cross, she explained upfront to NJ the 2019 arrest she was wearing a tracksuit. And then he started his usual routine of flip flopping around on different arrests to try and catch her out, threatening to play a video of her in bed in a nightdress to the court when she came ‘face to face’ with police.

She said she’s been arrested in pyjamas. The footage clearly shows her in nightwear. So what’s the lie she told on the stand that shows how calculating she is?

 

[Baileyboo]

This is the exact exchange from the transcript.


Q. Well, just remind us about what happened when you were arrested.
A. What do you mean?
Q. You really don't remember?
A. You want me to describe how I was arrested?
Q. Yes, how awful it was and why it was so awful.
A. I've already explained that once.
Q. Yes, well, it's a long time ago and I'd like you to remind us, please.
A. They knocked at my door at 6 o'clock in the morning and they arrested me.
Q. And how were you dressed when you left the house?
A. I think I had a nightie on and then a tracksuit bottom and top and trainers.
Q. Oh, but you told the jury you were taken away in your nightwear, in your pyjamas, I think was how you put it.
A. Yes.
Q. You were taken away in a blue Lee Cooper leisure suit, weren't you?
A. I don't recall exactly. I just know I had a nightie on.
Q. Do you want me to show you a video of it?
A. No.
Q. Well, I'll ask you again. You were taken away in a blue Lee Cooper leisure suit, weren't you?
A. Yes.
Q. On 10 June 2019, when you answered the door, you answered in your nightie.
A. No, I didn't answer the door on -- the 2019.
Q. Oh, you've got a very clear memory of this then, haven't you?
A. Yes, I remember this through the -- the arrests, yes.
Q. When the police came face-to-face with you, you had a nightie on, didn't you?
A. In 2019?
Q. Yes.
A. I had my pyjamas on, yes.
Q. No, you had a nightie on.
A. Okay.
Q. Do you want to see a video?
A. No.
Q. Do you remember having a nightie on?
A. I can't recall specifically which night. I was in bed.
Q. Do you remember what you left the house wearing?
A. Um... No. I know I was unable to get dressed and I think I took a dressing gown as well.
Q. You put your blue Lee Cooper leisure suit on again, didn't you?
A. Yes.
Q. Then you asked them to let you put your dressing gown on over the blue Lee Cooper leisure suit, didn't you?
A. Yes.
Q. So you weren't taken away in your pyjamas, were you?
A. No.
Q. And you remember this, don't you?
A. Yes.
Q. Why did you lie to the jury about it?
A. I don't know.
Q. You don't know? What advantage were you looking for by telling the jury that you were taken away by the police in your pyjamas? What benefit was there?
A. Because that's what happened on the first time. That was was how quickly everything happened.
Q. No, no. On the first time you were taken away in your blue Lee Cooper -- do you want to watch the video?

(pause)

You are a very calculating woman, aren't you, Lucy Letby?
A. No.

It makes more sense with the transcript. She said she hadn't had time to get dressed but on both the first and second arrest she had a tracksuit on. When questioned she back tracks saying it was the first arrest. Either lying or misremembering, it had been five years at this point.

 

[Sweeper2000]

It makes more sense with the transcript. She said she hadn't had time to get dressed but on both the first and second arrest she had a tracksuit on. When questioned she back tracks saying it was the first arrest. Either lying or misremembering, it had been five years at this point.

That's what I thought. To me it makes more sense for her to be talking about that last arrest with the dressing gown. She's not talking about that first arrest at all. She's just getting a bit mixed up which is understandable really, she's center of a lot of pressure and negative attention she will stumble under a barrage of kind of confusing questions. I don't think she was lying I also don't think it's a big deal and changes much. There are more clear examples of dishonesty from her.

 

[Skiede]

Lucy Letby’s duvet cover seems to depict an image of Eeyore from Whinnie the Pooh in the Netflix trailer. IMO - I find it strange for a grown woman to have.

 

[WaneLyrical]

Lucy Letby’s duvet cover seems to depict an image of Eeyore from Whinnie the Pooh in the Netflix trailer. IMO - I find it strange for a grown woman to have.

That’s her parents house

 

[Anxala]

They do give you time to ” get dressed “ though.
They won’t hang around whilst you do a full face of makeup up but they won’t frogmarch you out half naked.
She chose to go out in those clothes.

Good point, Parker. It takes no time to put on 'outdoor' clothes eg. a pair of jeans, a sweatshirt, whatever.

 

[Ruthbullock]

Followed, but had nothing to say- but the trailer has 3 arrests in it, no idea which was when- the dressing gown with a blue hoodie underneath and we see her handcuffed like this, a second with just a blue hoodie leaving the house (and I think in that arrest we see her open the door like that, but I could be wrong) and a third with a red hoodie in a police car within the trailer. IMO all 3 times could be classed as wearing pyjamas if that is what she often slept in. The bigger question to me is why was this a line of questioning to begin with on what was theoretically a strong case of murder- the only answer I can think of is to attempt to paint her as liar to the jury. In the cold light of day, that line of questioning should really not have been deemed relevant to the trial, and if you believe it was relevant you have to wonder why you think so - surely the facts of the crimes should have spoke for themselves and not need something so trivial to collaborate a picture of a liar.

 

[JosieJo]

Lucy Letby’s duvet cover seems to depict an image of Eeyore from Whinnie the Pooh in the Netflix trailer. IMO - I find it strange for a grown woman to have.

I agree .. there were a few things that made her appear very naive , sheltered and old fashioned I feel

 

[Jules2021]

Lovely enough for many to leave in their will. A charming man no doubt. Not so much salt of the earth much more like salted earth.

Eta that jogged my memory. Been thinking about her and when she's distraught and speaking to her family. Showing "genuine empathy". Shipman Shipman hung himself the day before his entitlement to some sort of money ran out and this money then went to his wife suggesting genuine care, that's very calculating. Shipman was thought to have done what he did for numerous reasons, some was indeed getting in the will another was alleviating the system of "burdens". She got none of that, so the motivation is difficult to even guess at.

I think Shipman was affected by his mother's death as a teen and the fact he couldn't do anything about her suffering. Perhaps in some warped way he was trying to relive it again-but this time he could "help". Problem was none of these women (or men as he did kill some men) were in particular bad health I don't think. With the will I think that only happened at the end and perhaps he wanted to get caught by then. So really he didn't actually have a strong motive-we can only guess it was due to what happened to his mother or a need for control or whatever. These are still just theories though.

I thought it was heavily implied during the trial that Lucy did it all for attention and sympathy? That's why I don't get when Mcdonald and other people say there was absolutely no motive. It's not going to be money so it can only be sympathy/attention/Manchausen's/revenge on parents etc. but people don't seem to want to accept that's why she did it.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I think Shipman was affected by his mother's death as a teen and the fact he couldn't do anything about her suffering. Perhaps in some warped way he was trying to relive it again-but this time he could "help". Problem was none of these women (or men as he did kill some men) were in particular bad health I don't think. With the will I think that only happened at the end and perhaps he wanted to get caught by then. So really he didn't actually have a strong motive-we can only guess it was due to what happened to his mother or a need for control or whatever. These are still just theories though.

I thought it was heavily implied during the trial that Lucy did it all for attention and sympathy? That's why I don't get when Mcdonald and other people say there was absolutely no motive. It's not going to be money so it can only be sympathy/attention/Manchausen's/revenge on parents etc. but people don't seem to want to accept that's why she did it.

Interesting theory about Shipman. Maybe his motivation for becoming a doc?

Yeh that was the prosecutions angle on motive I just guess for me it never really met the bar for it. I can't remember one clear as day example of her really milking it for example and some examples where she seemed to barely notice it or tried to move on quick as anything. I can't remember the exact quote but I could have sworn it was something about staying strong for the team and carrying on, something in that vein. "pull through it together" maybe

Feel free to correct as it was so long ago and so much information.

 

[Skiede]

That’s her parents house

Yes. Her parents obviously kept her bed linen from when she was a child.

 

[May72031]

The Letbyists are all animated on social media. P. Hitchens is back spewing all sorts of nonsense. Obviously, the blurry image of Lucifer Letby in bed has stirred him into action again.

 

[Marantz4250b]

I thought it was heavily implied during the trial that Lucy did it all for attention and sympathy? That's why I don't get when Mcdonald and other people say there was absolutely no motive. It's not going to be money so it can only be sympathy/attention/Manchausen's/revenge on parents etc. but people don't seem to want to accept that's why she did it.

McDonald is, at best, being extremely disingenuous and, at worst, dishonest when he brings up the subject of motive and claims there wasn't any.

He, more than anyone, knows that the law has no interest in the motivations of the accused. It cares for only two things;

i) Whether the accused did, in fact, carry out the act or acts complained of, and;
ii) Whether the accused intended to carry out the act or acts complained of.

Anything else is completely irrelevant as far as determining guilt is concerned. He knows this. Trying to colour people's opinions by suggesting that "motive" is a legally relevant question is, imo, dishonest.

On top of that, is that it is simply untrue that there was "no motive". Humans do not do anything without a reason, ever, save for a few extremely rare cases of automatism - and even that's debateable.

Lucy Letby absolutely did have a motivation for what she did. We may not know what her motivation was (and she likely doesn't fully know herself) but that's not the point. Whether it was just because she enjoyed causing pain and suffering, or enjoyed seeing the parents upset, or enjoyed the attention she got when she caused emergencies we may never know. Personally, I think it's a combination of all those and probably lots of other things as well.

IMO, MM is trying to intimate that "motive" has to be directly related to a potential personal gain, such as something financial or otherwise beneficial to the perpetrator, to the exclusion of all else. In reality, someone may do a particular act for no other reason than they enjoy it.

 

[Baileyboo]

McDonald is, at best, being extremely disingenuous and, at worst, dishonest when he brings up the subject of motive and claims there wasn't any.

He, more than anyone, knows that the law has no interest in the motivations of the accused. It cares for only two things;

i) Whether the accused did, in fact, carry out the act or acts complained of, and;
ii) Whether the accused intended to carry out the act or acts complained of.

Anything else is completely irrelevant as far as determining guilt is concerned. He knows this. Trying to colour people's opinions by suggesting that "motive" is a legally relevant question is, imo, dishonest.

On top of that, is that it is simply untrue that there was "no motive". Humans do not do anything without a reason, ever, save for a few extremely rare cases of automatism - and even that's debateable.

Lucy Letby absolutely did have a motivation for what she did. We may not know what her motivation was (and she likely doesn't fully know herself) but that's not the point. Whether it was just because she enjoyed causing pain and suffering, or enjoyed seeing the parents upset, or enjoyed the attention she got when she caused emergencies we may never know. Personally, I think it's a combination of all those and probably lots of other things as well.

IMO, MM is trying to intimate that "motive" has to be directly related to a potential personal gain, such as something financial or otherwise beneficial to the perpetrator, to the exclusion of all else. In reality, someone may do a particular act for no other reason than they enjoy it.

There are plenty of male serial killers who have multilated victims for no apparent motive.

 

[Marantz4250b]

There are plenty of male serial killers who have multilated victims for no apparent motive.

Indeed, which just shows how utterly stupid MM is being when he claims that a lack of demonstrable motive is in any way significant.

Just because reasonable people cannot fathom the rationale for why someone did something doesn't mean it was motiveless. There is no such thing as someone doing something for no reason whatsoever. None. Ever.

 

[Parker Knoll]

McDonald NEVER fails to act exactly how I would expect him to for someone who’s main objective is pushing himself and I love that for her.

 

[Marantz4250b]

The two of them, IMO, are very similar characters. I mean, leaving aside the murdery bit, both of them are rampant attention seekers.

All my own opinion, obvs.