Good read and pretty similar findings to the one in the New Yorker. What a mess the whole system is.
Nurse arrested for murdering babies
- Thread starter neocon
- Start date
its a tough one though as the prosecution are pretty much saying the exact same thing.
There is zero evidence that she did murder anyone from what i've read. it all seems to be circumstantial and whilst there are so many coincedences that it certainly raises a lot of red flags there is no PROOF that she killed anyone.
whatever happened to proving beyond reasonable doubt?
Caporegime
The prosecution had more than its circumstantial evidence. They had proof that babies were deliberately poisoned with insulin, and proof tha only Letby was present when the babies experienced fatal medical events. Diary entries and written notes in her home also pointed directly to her as the killer.
Caporegime
Was it an incredible coincidence? Why did the Police omit other deaths from their chart giving the false impression that Letby was present at all neonatal deaths? Was Letby's shift pattern the same as other nurses? In an organisation the size of the NHS, what number of nurses would be expected to show the same pattern of deaths?
I dunno, there is a lot of information not available to us, and I don't know why the defence apparently failed to call expert testimony available to them, but the information available in the public domain stinks.
No, they don't. The same note that is this supposed "confession" says "I've done nothing wrong" and "I don't know why they died". It seems more like the jottings of someone in extreme mental distress than anything that points to her as a killer.
Last edited:
Caporegime
The police chart showed that she was always on the neonatal ward at the time of the deaths she was accused of causing. She wasn't accused of causing the other deaths, so there was no 'false impression.' I don't recall the police claiming she was present for all neonatal deaths on the ward.
Incidentally, police believe she was guilty of even more deaths than she'd been accused of, including the deaths of babies at another hospital.
How is that relevant?
I don't know, how about you find out yourself and see if what you have found exonerates her?
We do know that the hospital was slow to suspect Letby, reluctant to point the finger at her, and ruled out multiple possibilities before eventually concluding she might be responsible. They even punished consultants who raised suspicions, requiring them to write letters of apology. But eventually, the evidence became too great to ignore. The insulin poisonings were a smoking gun. Letby could not pretend these deaths were accidental.
We also know that she falsified medical records to hide what she was doing.
LOL.
'I am evil.' 'I did this.' 'I killed them on purpose.'
Soldato
Didn't a consultant pretty much catch her holding a baby and not raising the alarm, that what I read the other week?
I mean if it proved eventually she is innocent she surely going to end up with a huge sum of cash and would be rather worrying.
I mean if it proved eventually she is innocent she surely going to end up with a huge sum of cash and would be rather worrying.
Man of Honour
I'm working on two infant deaths now because babies do die however Clinicians were able to remove the deaths that didn't belong in the other group of deaths.
I had Letby's work shift pattern in front of me when we had a couple of days discussing this case.
If there were 30 incidents Letby was at all of them.
Yes some Clinicians/Nurses lined up with her on the ward at the same time but probably the most was Nurse X who was in at the same time as Letby 10 times.
Nurses shift patterns are all over the place in some wards and the chance of another Nurse having the same work pattern as Letby is none.
None for that amount of deaths/incidents.
You could say Nurse X showed 10 deaths/incidents on her watch but when compared to Letby's 30 then it isn't comparable.
The other possibility is that several Clinicians worked together to make it look like all the incidents were on Letby's watch but that's stupid (but possible).
There were lots of other things she was witnessed doing which put the nails in.
That’s my understanding too. Without the other factors, sure, maybe it’s all a big coincidence, but not with them.
Man of Honour
People don't realise that for every baby the prosecution brought in many experts and they spent hours and hours describing every aspect of the incidents and how it could be only her.
The Jury found her guilty on all 14, the evidence left nothing to debate but people will try because they know better.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,412
People will debate based on the evidence they do have, so if it isn't the full picture then that's what leaves it open to debate.
Man of Honour
I forget now but they spent something like 3 full days on each child but the armchair experts read a sentence.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,412
Presumably much of the evidence won't be released, in sympathy for the victims' families?
Or will this be the next JFK thing?
Caporegime
Well, might not be so clear cut after all...
Lucy Letby: Questions grow in debate on killer's convictions
A number of experts are raising concerns about evidence presented in the neonatal nurse's trials.
www.bbc.co.uk
Well, might not be so clear cut after all...
Lucy Letby: Questions grow in debate on killer's convictions
A number of experts are raising concerns about evidence presented in the neonatal nurse's trials.www.bbc.co.uk
The main gist of it seems to be that a majority of the evidence was circumstantial and statistical, and a whole bunch of people are chipping in with opinions.
I guess the main problem is that there wasn't any 'direct evidence' against her, there was indirect medical evidence (babies overdosed with Insulin, force fed milk, etc) but nothing that directly captured her doing it.
I don't think it matters, all of the evidence added together makes a substantial case - regardless of how people want to view statistics.
100% agree.
At the end of the day the only person who knows exactly what happened is the accused. However, based on the evidence provided at the trial - a jury found her guilty on various charges. Unless there is firm evidence to refute those charges made, I don't see what changes based on this article.
Caporegime
This tells me you didn't read the link.
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 1,474
Exceptional anomalies where she also wrote 'I killed the babies, I did this, I am evil' and stalked the victims parents on Christmas day. Just 1 of those weird coincidences that happens every day
Last edited:
