Nurse arrested for murdering babies

Diddums said:
The change has had no shortage of advocacy for decades now sadly, you have a higher chance of winning every lottery on the face of the earth on the same day.


Which is why I vehemently support Guy Fawkes 2.0.
Click to expand...
The interesting aspect of this is though it's blocked online people can still buy a physical copy of the magazine with the article in here.
 
It's quite long and unless you're extremely informed to the micro details of the case or willing to read through the court documents you'll just have to gut feeling an opinion on their opinion that the evidence wasn't good enough.

I can't help thinking that there was an opportunity not that long ago, for all these matters to be challenged in a courtroom and that legal representation was available to do just that. Their full time job in fact.
 
MoNkeE said:
She was found by a jury guilty of having acted with malice in the murder of numerous babies.
Click to expand...
The jury can only decide from the facts they are given, if the facts they are given are questionable though then you end up with cases like Lucia de Berk

The trial covered questions at the edge of scientific knowledge, and the material was dense and technical. For months, in discussions of the supposed air embolisms, witnesses tried to pinpoint the precise shade of skin discoloration of some of the babies. In Myers’s cross-examinations, he noted that witnesses’ memories of the rashes had changed, becoming more specific and florid in the years since the deaths. But this debate seemed to distract from a more relevant objection: the concern with skin discoloration arose from the 1989 paper. An author of the paper, Shoo Lee, one of the most prominent neonatologists in Canada, has since reviewed summaries of each pattern of skin discoloration in the Letby case and said that none of the rashes were characteristic of air embolism. He also said that air embolism should never be a diagnosis that a doctor lands on just because other causes of sudden collapse have been ruled out: “That would be very wrong—that’s a fundamental mistake of medicine.”
Click to expand...
Just a snippet from the article, if not thought provoking it's certainly an interesting read, although there may be some bias towards the "she didn't do it" angle and it could have(stupid forum editing I really did write of) course be missing parts of the trial that oppose that view
 
Last edited:
ANDREW GREEN said:
There was evidence of the babies having injections of air
Click to expand...
There are serious questions over the reliability of this evidence in the US article.

ANDREW GREEN said:
handwritten notes admitting she did it
Click to expand...
Not a confession, could easily have been in a mental health crisis and writing down how she was made to feel. There were also notes saying she didn't do it.

ANDREW GREEN said:
Let's doubt the verdict of a jury of our peers who saw all the evidence
Click to expand...
A jury that wasn't unanimous, and one juror was allegedly heard saying the jurors had "already made up their minds about her case from the start".
 
Zatoichi.uK said:
Audio version is an hour and 19 mins though so not exactly a quick read. Where's the cliff notes version?
Click to expand...

The tl;dr I would say: the NHS has lots of issues; there were obvious other problems with the babies who dies; the evidence that she was there when these babies died isn't worth much; Lucy was held in high esteem by her colleagues; there is no evidence for the "air embolism" theory and the expert who presented it is dodgy - another judge threw out his opinion about the same time; the "confessions" were really nothing of the sort; juries are garbage at assessing evidence and statistics; and the defence did a terrible job of challenging the evidence. I think that about covers it. I suspect you could write a similar article about pretty much any case, but then the evidence as we've seen it seems paper thin but then outside the courtroom we never get the full picture. I guess only one person actually knows.

I dunno, I can see the argument for protecting juries from seeing stuff outside the trial, but at this point a version of her has been paraded through the media already. Does this article make much difference?
 
booyaka said:
So to be clear, the insulin that was found in 2 of the IV bags just "magically" appeared in there? Was that the "dysfunctional system" that put it in there?
Click to expand...

That's part of what makes it seem pretty damning to me, that doesn't seem to be explained away as the baby was particularly vulnerable and she happened to be the better qualified staff member available so of course she handled it etc..

ANDREW GREEN said:
There was evidence of the babies having injections of air, doctor testimony about the cause of death, handwritten notes admitting she did it, her standing over a baby she suffocated, she was there for all 25 of the babies who suffered.
Click to expand...

I've not read all of the New Yorker article yet - saw some of it on twitter and the first few pages were just providing an alternative narrative for babies that had died - they were particularly unwell already etc..

Does it actually address any of that stuff or indeed the insulin?
 
Imagine winning the title, 'most prolific serial killer of children in modern British history.' Well done Lucy, enjoy your infamy.

She also removed over 250 confidential nursing handover sheets from her workplace which should not have left the hospital, and she falsified patient records to avert suspicion.
Click to expand...

It was also revealed during the trial that Letby had to be told more than once not to enter a room where the parents of one of the victims were grieving.
Click to expand...

Letby had also searched for the parents of several infant victims on Facebook, in one case on the anniversary of a baby's death. In total Letby had searched for 11 of the families affected.
Click to expand...

Letby herself accepted at trial that the results showed that some victims had been deliberately injected with insulin and did not contest that someone must have administered it to them.
Click to expand...

Letby was the only staff member on duty for every one of the 25 suspicious incidents.
Click to expand...

Searches of Letby's and her parents' homes, and Letby's handbag, revealed a number of post-it notes handwritten by Letby. These included fragmentary phrases such as "help", "I'm sorry that you couldn't have a chance at life", "I don't want to do this anymore", "not good enough", "why me?", "I haven't done anything wrong", "we tried our best and it wasn't enough", "I am evil, I did this", and "I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them".
Click to expand...

The police had also discovered that Letby had secretly kept medical documents at home relating to the care of the children. 257 nursing handover sheets were found at addresses linked to Letby, of which 21 related to babies she had allegedly harmed
Click to expand...

Yikes. This woman is a ruthless ghoul. I hope she dies in prison.
 
Last edited:
Sankari said:
Yikes. This woman is a ruthless ghoul. I hope she dies in prison.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that seems pretty damning.

You know some are taking things like mental health awareness too far even things like that are being dismissed. I guess in part perhaps some people are just aware she wrote something and then attribute it to stress etc.. without the context that it was rather a lot of different, disturbing things along with other disturbing behaviour.

I wonder what the "address linked to Letby" refers to? (Since they've referred to say her parents house in the article already ergo if the medical notes were found at her parent's house surely they'd just say that?)
 
Jack_green said:
Sometimes evidence takes years to be published or found. There have been many witch hunts in the past, later on facts appear to change the whole scope.

They didn't really have evidence, they were investigating based on assumptions and poor expert witness reports.
Also evidence can be misunderstood, the way evidence has been collected ( bias), forensic altered, misleading Records etc..
Click to expand...

you really are continuing to drive forward with your completely baseless agenda of some massive conspiracy / cover up etc..... without actually providing a shred of evidence or facts to back it up.....
 
Jack_green said:
Sometimes evidence takes years to be published or found. There have been many witch hunts in the past, later on facts appear to change the whole scope.

They didn't really have evidence, they were investigating based on assumptions and poor expert witness reports.
Also evidence can be misunderstood, the way evidence has been collected ( bias), forensic altered, misleading Records etc..
Click to expand...

This is my expertise, gathering evidence for NHS incidents which go to trial.
I know how all health records and other forms fit together and my department have had more evidence of this case than the normal public have and she is 100% guilty, anybody who thinks differently has got a screw loose.
This trial went on for a long time with experts bought in at every stage so the Jury could understand, no stone was unturned.
That's besides the medical records planted at her house, plus her confessions on notes and dozens of other staff who would have been in on it.
 
Zatoichi.uK said:
I seem to remember someone working out the statistical chances of it not being her based on her attendance. Cba to find it though.
Click to expand...

www.linkedin.com

Do Statistics Prove Accused Nurse Lucy Letby Innocent?

If you enjoy reading this blog, please leave a star rating on WealthTender. Thank you! Statistical analyses, damning reports in 2016 by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) and in 2019 by the Care Quality Commission, and various other factual inconsistencies in publicly availabl
www.linkedin.com www.linkedin.com

If we assume that 'non-malicious' deaths are distributed according to the Poisson distribution (deaths are independent of each other and occur at a rate of 2.7 per year, the average of 2013, 2014 and 2017), then the odds of there being 11 deaths (the ones Letby has not been accused of) over a two year period purely by chance is 1 in 83. In other words, the prosecution is asking the jury to believe that there is both a serial killer at work as well as some other factor (e.g. faulty equipment, understaffed unit, incompetence among medical staff) causing the deaths. And that these two factors both started and stopped at exactly the same time. Quite a coincidence!
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom