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

[Charlot123]

Oh yes, there’s circumstantial evidence, as there usually is in most murder cases, and no one disputes this? And I’m sure for someone like yourself, who is convinced of Letby’s guilt, this stuff must seem very compelling. But none of this is direct evidence that Letby spiked the feed bags. Or that she ever harmed a baby. Because no such evidence exists.

Well, now we heard that the lab didn’t pass the certification several months prior, that Roche immunoassay is just a screening test and more, the third baby who had similar insulin/C-peptide readings (but was not included into the group of those “attacked by Lucy”) had congenital hyperinsulinemia of prematurity. This is a new condition to me, I need to read about it, too.

So now the strongest case becomes the weakest.

But of interest, Lucy was not even on call on that day. But yet she was accused of adding insulin into the TPN bag before. I think that when for three years people think she is a killer and how she did it, for sure they’d find some explanations. But it doesn’t help their own work, and to those who came to read about it, the whole case sounds odd, weird and scary.

Anyhow, now the Brits themselves understand that it was an unsafe conviction, it seems. There are new topics to study.

I would surmise that COCH has a huge problem hiring nurses to its NICU now. There is a huge need of nurses anywhere but I wouldn’t be surprised if they may be scared to work at that NICU.

 

[Charlot123]

And they say the nastiness only emanates from one side of this debate! (Putting JMO after everything doesn’t give you free rein to be rude! JMO!)

This site is polite. I hope the site visitors in general hold more balanced opinion about the case now; in the beginning I felt that I was the only one here questioning the conviction on a logical basis, but the opponents were full of emotions.

Anyhow, we can stand it.

When elsewhere on the Internet people laugh at Lucy Letby gaining weight in prison, though, I try to save such posts. Bullying should never be tolerated.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Exactly....when I heard Lee I felt more sure some of these skin discolouration was AE

yes. Something i dont like about what hes saying as well and i say this with every bit if awareness that im not medical is that he comes across as if hes saying that if the lee sign is absent or absent in descriprion at least then its not AE. That doesnt tally with what is known about AE and thats not much. Jmo

Has got me wondering though. That florid part im wondering what would make whats already there ie the veins stand out more prominently. Guessing but could be the blue background just making the contrast more prominent, could be the veins themselves kinda standing out or inflating and the pink itself is notable. Is a vein pink if its not full of blood? What is it about AE that makes a vein pink? Pure amateur thinking from me but im wondering how if blood flow is stopped at the heart is there a potential increase in ghe closed pressure cirvulatory system?

 

[WaneLyrical]

Indeed.

If I strangle someone to death in a dark park, chances are no one will notice. Do it in daylight, and I still might not be seen, but it’s more likely that I will be. Do it by an entrance on a main road, and I’d do well to get away with it once, never mind repeatedly. To put it bluntly, hospital units aren’t like dark parks.

It’s just not true, either, for people to say that we shouldn’t expect to see any direct evidence in at least some of these cases - the insulin ones, surely, being the most obvious. There were no eyewitnesses, and no evidence of tampering on any of the bags, by anyone, never mind Letby. There was no evidence of insulin going missing either, never mind that Letby ever took any.

Guilters might say, well, the amount needed to poison these babies was tiny and the bags were later discarded. And that’s true! That’s a good explanation as to why no evidence exists. But that’s the point - the idea that Letby tampered with the bags is just that, an idea, and one that’s entirely unsupported by evidence.

She wasn’t just alleged to have tampered with bags in the fridge either. In the original trial it was alleged she added insulin to Baby F’s TPN bag while it was hanging. Which would ring serious alarm bells were anyone to witness it. All in plain sight. In the busiest room on the unit.

 

[WaneLyrical]

See..
First the doctors, in a way, self-certified themselves as “not doing anything differently” and yet the babies dying. Meaning, they were a perfect unit but the babies still died, right?

And then Dr. Shoo Lee and the group of experts come and say, that in Canada, such a unit would be closed.

It never helps to certify oneself.

They weren’t doing anything differently. Problem with that, the analysis of the admissions showed a sustained rise in acuity and intensive care days, meaning babies were sicker in nurseries 1 and 2 and staying longer. The charts COCH produced were sobering, showing how the pressure on the unit dialled up persistently from Feb 2015 onwards.

It’s not even clear whether the consultants knew, never mind helped to take steps to mitigate the risks. They certainly weren’t doing more frequent rounds.

Within a few weeks of this pressure increasing, Letby became a QIS nurse, meaning she was now assigned almost exclusively to those two nurseries, the problem nurseries, mostly at night when senior staffing was almost non-existent, and was picking up extras whenever she could (in one of these cases she’d worked 6 12hr-shifts out of 8). As she was QIS qualified, she was now expected to act as a role model and would also have been expected to assist with any and all emergencies.

In doing her job, she’s been accused of “inserting” herself into things that weren’t her business.

 

[Tortoise]

Oh yes, there’s circumstantial evidence, as there usually is in most murder cases, and no one disputes this? And I’m sure for someone like yourself, who is convinced of Letby’s guilt, this stuff must seem very compelling. But none of this is direct evidence that Letby spiked the feed bags. Or that she ever harmed a baby. Because no such evidence exists.

Actually, blood results are direct evidence, (blood sugars, low and resolving, and blood analysis of Insulin and c-Peptides) and the expert witness testimony regarding interpretation of blood results is also direct evidence of the presence of exogenous insulin in the blood.

You might believe that the expert evidence is disputable, but that does not mean, as you described it, "no evidence" and "entirely unsupported by evidence".

It's not evidence that Letby did it, or of what her intention was, but it is direct evidence that the feed bags were spiked, by someone, whether deliberately or accidentally.

Based on ALL the evidence, direct and circumstantial, the jury was able to make that determination.

 

[rvlvr]

It's not evidence that Letby did it, or of what her intention was.

Bingo!

That’s my point and I’m glad we agree.

 

[Tortoise]

Bingo!

That’s my point and I’m glad we agree.

So you think there was sufficient evidence that the bags were spiked, but not against her?

 

[Charlot123]

They weren’t doing anything differently. Problem with that, the analysis of the admissions showed a sustained rise in acuity and intensive care days, meaning babies were sicker in nurseries 1 and 2 and staying longer. The charts COCH produced were sobering, showing how the pressure on the unit dialled up persistently from Feb 2015 onwards.

It’s not even clear whether the consultants knew, never mind helped to take steps to mitigate the risks. They certainly weren’t doing more frequent rounds.

Within a few weeks of this pressure increasing, Letby became a QIS nurse, meaning she was now assigned almost exclusively to those two nurseries, the problem nurseries, mostly at night when senior staffing was almost non-existent, and was picking up extras whenever she could (in one of these cases she’d worked 6 12hr-shifts out of 8). As she was QIS qualified, she was now expected to act as a role model and would also have been expected to assist with any and all emergencies.

In doing her job, she’s been accused of “inserting” herself into things that weren’t her business.

Poor woman. My personal guess is that she could have some condition that’s often missed (dyslexia? OCD?) and probably, working longer in general. If I were her, I’d ask parents to help me more. Overworking oneself never helps. I’d go to bars, date around, not limit my life with that unit or that weirdo Dr. Choc chasing young nurses. Essentially, she is doing time for working more than others (((. And, of course, Dr. Evans’s son appreciates his new car, and horse riding costs a lot.

(Is there any ethical committee looking at this case, btw? There are things one shouldn’t say, ever. It is horrible in response to Letby’s situation but also, to the parents of the kids who died).

 

[Charlot123]

Actually, blood results are direct evidence, (blood sugars, low and resolving, and blood analysis of Insulin and c-Peptides) and the expert witness testimony regarding interpretation of blood results is also direct evidence of the presence of exogenous insulin in the blood.

You might believe that the expert evidence is disputable, but that does not mean, as you described it, "no evidence" and "entirely unsupported by evidence".

It's not evidence that Letby did it, or of what her intention was, but it is direct evidence that the feed bags were spiked, by someone, whether deliberately or accidentally.

Based on ALL the evidence, direct and circumstantial, the jury was able to make that determination.

We are past that phase. It has been calculated that to achieve such a level of insulin in blood. Lucy had to spike a crazily huge balloon of TPN because insulin is sticky. So, hyperinsulinemia of prematurity that I hope will be studied.

 

[WaneLyrical]

We are past that phase. It has been calculated that to achieve such a level of insulin in blood. Lucy had to spike a crazily huge balloon of TPN because insulin is sticky. So, hyperinsulinemia of prematurity that I hope will be studied.

Indeed. They’ve modelled it. Which is what the prosecution should have done in the first instance for such a serious allegation. And people have now had to do it, for free, retrospectively. And they are being insulted for doing so.

It makes it all the more fantastical to think multiple bags of dextrose were poisoned days in advance, and as the clock ticked that insulin would adhere to the plastic bag and generally degrade. But still somehow the poisoner managed to ensure a consistent and steady supply of insulin to the baby.

Shoo Lee has provided explanations for why the babies were hypoglycaemic, it wasn’t unexpected, and he has explained what went wrong in the treatment to cause it to persist. Baby L’s blood test results are well within the norm for premature babies, but Baby F is certainly an outlier.

Also the number of insulin vials ordered to the unit remains mysterious, as we don’t know how many babies on the ward in 2015/16 needed insulin. The vials only last 6 weeks after opening. So ordering 6 vials in a year could genuinely be the result of 6 babies needing insulin who were spaced sufficiently apart to not use the same vial. Without the context of knowing who was prescribed insulin and when, the number of vials on the unit in 2015 vs 2016 is worthless information.

 

[Baileyboo]

yes. Something i dont like about what hes saying as well and i say this with every bit if awareness that im not medical is that he comes across as if hes saying that if the lee sign is absent or absent in descriprion at least then its not AE. That doesnt tally with what is known about AE and thats not much. Jmo

Has got me wondering though. That florid part im wondering what would make whats already there ie the veins stand out more prominently. Guessing but could be the blue background just making the contrast more prominent, could be the veins themselves kinda standing out or inflating and the pink itself is notable. Is a vein pink if its not full of blood? What is it about AE that makes a vein pink? Pure amateur thinking from me but im wondering how if blood flow is stopped at the heart is there a potential increase in ghe closed pressure cirvulatory system?

I think it's the air in the vein reacting with the red blood cells which cause the pink patches, the blue and white patches are where the blood flow is blocked.

Veins usually carry deoxygenated blood which is a bluer colour but the oxygen in the air embolism can oxygenate the blood making it pink.

 

[rvlvr]

So you think there was sufficient evidence that the bags were spiked, but not against her?

Previously it seemed to me very likely some form of interference must’ve taken place. But as the posts below yours set out very eloquently, that seems far from certain now. If the bags were spiked (and at this juncture I don’t think it’s at all obvious that they were), there’s no evidence that it was done by Letby.

 

[Baileyboo]

They weren’t doing anything differently. Problem with that, the analysis of the admissions showed a sustained rise in acuity and intensive care days, meaning babies were sicker in nurseries 1 and 2 and staying longer. The charts COCH produced were sobering, showing how the pressure on the unit dialled up persistently from Feb 2015 onwards.

It’s not even clear whether the consultants knew, never mind helped to take steps to mitigate the risks. They certainly weren’t doing more frequent rounds.

Within a few weeks of this pressure increasing, Letby became a QIS nurse, meaning she was now assigned almost exclusively to those two nurseries, the problem nurseries, mostly at night when senior staffing was almost non-existent, and was picking up extras whenever she could (in one of these cases she’d worked 6 12hr-shifts out of 8). As she was QIS qualified, she was now expected to act as a role model and would also have been expected to assist with any and all emergencies.

In doing her job, she’s been accused of “inserting” herself into things that weren’t her business.

The shift leaders assigned Letby to the low dependency nurseries to give her a break from intensive care and to try and break the association with the collapses. Letby was angry at this, with baby C she was cross that she wasn't allocated any babies in nursery 1, there were then also incidences of lower risk babies collapsing.

As a band five nurse she was one of the lesser qualified nurses. At baby K trial she said she wouldn't have expected to be given such a premature baby to look after as she wasn't as qualified as the band 6 or 7 nurses.

 

[WaneLyrical]

The shift leaders assigned Letby to the low dependency nurseries to give her a break from intensive care and to try and break the association with the collapses. Letby was angry at this, with baby C she was cross that she wasn't allocated any babies in nursery 1, there were then also incidences of lower risk babies collapsing.

As a band five nurse she was one of the lesser qualified nurses. At baby K trial she said she wouldn't have expected to be given such a premature baby to look after as she wasn't as qualified as the band 6 or 7 nurses.

I’m not sure it was ever evidenced that Letby was angry. She expressed concern that such a terribly sick baby was being looked after by a nurse who’d only recently qualified, and that she’d rather just get back into intensive care sooner rather than later after the death of Baby A.

Baby K shouldn’t have been in the unit at all.

 

[rvlvr]

The True Criminals podcast has an interview with Dr Dimitrova.

 

[Baileyboo]

I’m not sure it was ever evidenced that Letby was angry. She expressed concern that such a terribly sick baby was being looked after by a nurse who’d only recently qualified, and that she’d rather just get back into intensive care sooner rather than later after the death of Baby A.

Baby K shouldn’t have been in the unit at all.

All levels of NNU can look after very premature babies short term.

 

[JosieJo]

The True Criminals podcast has an interview with Dr Dimitrova.

Within the first few Minutes Dr D shows she hasn't read the prosecution evidence as she is totally wrong

 

[katydid23]

In those cases there’s normally strong evidence to suggest there’s been a murder in the first place. No such evidence exists in this case.

There is evidence that exists. But the Letby supporters ignore that evidence. She falsified medical records and logs, lied about important facts, like which nursery she was in preceding certain collapses by the victims, and lied about other important facts, like in the case of Baby E's massive blood loss.

On the contrary, the medical evidence supports natural causes of death, despite that the prosecution experts asserted.

NO, the medical evidence does not support natural causes of death. Baby E lost 1/4 of his total blood supply in a sudden bleed out. That was not a natural cause of death. IMO

 

[Baileyboo]

The True Criminals podcast has an interview with Dr Dimitrova.

Dr Dimitrova ignores the actual evidence

Baby F's blood sugar levels crash down to 0.8, when Letby hangs the bag. The blood sugar actually improves when the bag is removed.

The laceration to baby O's liver occured post mortem as there was no blood associated with that injury.