Caporegime
She'd have had to have the world's dumbest lawyer to allow that to happen.
Bawa-Garba was systemic failure, this number of deaths is really not in keeping with that theory.
Last edited:
Nurse arrested for murdering babies
- Thread starter neocon
- Start date
Bawa-Garba was systemic failure, this number of deaths is really not in keeping with that theory.
Soldato
You are confusing me somewhat, maybe you can clarify, but my understanding (and I've been under this apprehension for many years now) is that there are 3 levels of Neonatal care, but only level 3 is an NICU..
Level 1 is SCBU - Warm, feed, open cot short term care (24 hours)
Level 2 is LNU - Drip feeding, Respiratory assistance etc, around 48 hours of care.
Level 3 is NICU - The only actual 'Intensive Care Unit'
I presume that there is some overlap, i.e. a Level 3 NICU could have course provide L1/L2 care.
Not true, as above, the confusion seems to be lumping Level 1 and 2 "units" with the actual intensive care units (Level 3).. My stats for NICU (1.2% to as high as 8%) mortality rates are not indicative of thinking every baby in an NICU is on deaths door, but more as by my point that the admittance to an actual 'ICU' just means the risk has increased to a point that calling them 'healthy' is a bit of a stretch.
Anyway, I can see some of my ignorance in I haven't followed the case that closely to realise Letsby was not working in an actual level 3 NICU so my point was rather moot anyway..
Caporegime
Your definitions are broadly correct but there's wiggle room as always.
Level 1 SCBU - feeders and growers
Level 2 LNU but usually termed NICUs - provides intensive care, usually single system support (ventilation or cardiac) and will discuss at 48hrs with a tertiary centre but many will continue well beyond that, variable gestation limits, we do 27 weeks and up and go well beyond 48hrs intensive care/provide palliative care etc
Level 3 NICU - can be surgical or non-surgical, provides intensive care to all gestations/complex congenital abnormalities and cooling.
There's talk about level 2 being split into level 2 and level 2+ as there's a lot of variability as to what those units will manage.
Ontop of all that every level unit has to provide short term intensive care to a high level as babies are inconsiderate and pop out wherever they fancy.
Last edited:
This is the same defence team that apparently called absolutely no expert witnesses in her defence. Not entirely implausible to think down those lines.
Caporegime
I can't imagine, given what she was accused of, that loads were jumping to defend her! From what I've read about the case they don't sound the best though. The questions being asked are coming from people who have had a chance to go through the evidence, transcripts and summary and are seeing flaws and counter arguments that weren't highlighted during the trial.
Soldato
Quick to blame it seems, they may have the right person though.
Man of Honour
Agree but at this point she deserves all the evidence to be disclosed and expert witnesses who are now willing to speak for her.
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 1,474
I watched it and I'm 100% sure she's guilty. You and every person talking in these documentaries haven't listened to the 9 months of evidence, but there is far more than her schedule and relying on a particular method of murder. For instance 2 twins that she attacked had bruises and damage to the liver which looked like damage from a car accident. Doctors confirmed this liver damage means the death can not have been of natural causes. Doctors testified that the cause of death of several babies were not from natural causes. This proves there is a murderer. The air embolism murders started the week after Letby did a training course on air embolism. Many doctors and nurses say they have never seen babies die in the way they died as they cared for the dying babies. The idea in the documentary that the babies died because they were unhealthy anyway is also refuted throughout the case, with evidence of how well many of them were doing. Each babies health history is well documented. Letby was caught lying and distorting the truth in her testimony. Letby falsified nursing notes of a baby she injured who was bleeding heavily if we are to believe the testimony of the babies mother. Letby's notes had no record of the baby bleeding. Letby lied that she wasn't able to see some of her friends and that's why she wrote the confession note because she felt isolated. But it was proven at trial she was in fact still seeing these friends. She stole the baby hospital case notes for the babies she killed and injured. This can be seen as a trophy, she took them from each property she lived in. She lied about intending to take the documents. She also used the case notes to look up the parents of the victims on facebook. There's tons more I've forgot.
The judge said the jury didn't need to solve how the murder's happened, just the fact they believed they were Murders and that Letby was responsible for them would suffice. Also bare in mind the defence team had access to an expert witness that they chose not to use, as they likely thought it would not help their case.
I suggest listening to this, which is essentially court transcripts and it's pretty damning:
Strongest Evidence
X-Ray evidence
Was Letby caught red handed?
Doctors testify that there was no natural cause of death in 5 of these babies. So someone murdered them
Letby broke hospital rules to steal dead baby handover sheets. (Note she had 250 stolen handover sheets, most weren't dead babies). She lies that she took these sheets home for drug prescriptions for the child that she wrote on the sheet. The only drug on the sheet is caffeine, which is not a medication. She takes the handover sheets to various properties where she lived and back and forth to work every day. She claims the handover sheets had no importance to her. It seems like she is lying about the time sheets. She lied about why she didn't dispose of the time sheets to the police, by saying she did not have a shredder when she did have one, it was next to some of the time sheets. Outside of her home she had another shredder with other baby time sheets above it that was labelled as 'Keep'. But apparently these time sheets 'meant nothing to her, they were insignificant paper' according to her. She wrote a condolence card at home and then took a video of the cards inscription at the place the child died during her shift.
Freudian Slip - 39:25 - Letby slips in testimony about babies terminal condition, saying 'she had more experience knowing what she was looking for' and then corrected to say 'what she was looking at'. It implies she knew what she said was wrong. She shouldn't have known what she was looking for. I've heard there was a far worse Freudian slip, but I can't find evidence of it.
There's 100s more video's on his channel of the Letby trial if you want to learn more.
I'd like you to say if you still think a re-trial is necessary after listening to these few videos. And then realise that is a small fraction of the whole evidence against her. A youtuber doing a far more thorough analysis than all of the newspapers and TV Channels, who are being extremely irresponsible in their reporting. Imagine how the grieving parents feel after sitting through this 10 month trial, when the media irresponsibly misrepresent the evidence.
Last edited:
Soldato
If she is guilty 100% she's the perfect candidate for the death penalty.
Associate
- Joined
- 17 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 1,474
Just watching the channel 5 documentary, I’ll report back with an opinion shortly
Watch the videos I posted above beforehand to be better informed because that documentary is a hatchet job and a half
No need, it’s not changed my mind, I’m still in the she’s guilty camp. I can see the documentary for what it is.
Greatest respect for sexygreyfox, I’ve been reading his posts for many years so thought I’d give it a try.
I watched the documentary,
I was looking forward to a hearing a reasonable explanation as to why Letby falsified patient records for the babies that died, then took some of the records home and hid them in her house.
Also didn’t hear much about the catastrophic liver injury, or the baby that was force fed so much milk it ended up with brain damage.
I was looking forward to a hearing a reasonable explanation as to why Letby falsified patient records for the babies that died, then took some of the records home and hid them in her house.
Also didn’t hear much about the catastrophic liver injury, or the baby that was force fed so much milk it ended up with brain damage.
Not that it's whatsoever likely but with the stress the job entails I can see people going a bit insane and then turbo insane if there's unexplained deaths going on. As we scrap the barrel in terms of employment this stuff is I think going to happen more often unfortunately as well as managers doing their utmost to avoid being blamed for it by letting it go on for ages.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
and that has been my answer to everybody thinking she was innocent HOWEVER I now think she still deserves a retrial because of the evidence that wasn't bought forward in her favour and omitted.
She may still be guilty as hell but she still deserves that retrial so we are 100% sure.
Last edited:
As far as I can tell, the only real thing that was omitted from the defence, was the expert witness (neonatologist) who was hired by the defence, but not called to give evidence (Dr Hall)
The problem is that none of this amounts to fresh evidence, more like a fresh expert with another opinion, and you’ll always be able to drag out experts who disagree on the fine details, which will likely just confuse a jury.
From a court of appeal point of view, I think it would need to be satisfied that fresh evidence, or exculpatory evidence that wasn’t heard or known at the trial, would need to be brought - not opinions from more experts.
(Especially when in this case, the expert complaining was hired at the original trial but not called)
Last edited:
I’m about 1/4 of the way through reading the 58 page court of appeal document, (because I’m sad), but it’s making me even more confident that she’s guilty AF.
(It’s a must-read, if you want the facts)
The part I found most interesting so far, is in regard to the insulin poisoning, the evidence shows that the babies were poisoned, and Letby agreed with the prosecution that the babies were poisoned, just not by her…..
(It’s a must-read, if you want the facts)
The part I found most interesting so far, is in regard to the insulin poisoning, the evidence shows that the babies were poisoned, and Letby agreed with the prosecution that the babies were poisoned, just not by her…..
Last edited:
A tl;dr version, got to love ChatGPT
The document contains several interesting points beyond the core evidence against Lucy Letby and her admissions. These points highlight various aspects of the trial, the legal arguments, and the broader implications of the case. Here are some notable aspects:
The document provides a detailed account of the evidence presented against Lucy Letby, which the prosecution argued proved her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Here’s a summary of the key evidence and the reasons why the court found her guilty:
The document contains several interesting points beyond the core evidence against Lucy Letby and her admissions. These points highlight various aspects of the trial, the legal arguments, and the broader implications of the case. Here are some notable aspects:
1. Role of Expert Testimony:
- The trial relied heavily on expert medical testimony to establish the cause of the babies' collapses and deaths. The prosecution's case was built around the testimonies of Dr. Dewi Evans and Dr. Sandie Bohin, among others. Their conclusions were critical in arguing that the deaths and collapses were not due to natural causes but were instead the result of intentional harm.
2. Challenge to Expert Credibility:
- Letby's defense team made significant efforts to undermine the credibility of the prosecution's expert witnesses, particularly Dr. Dewi Evans. They argued that Dr. Evans had overstepped his role as an independent expert and had become an advocate for the prosecution. The defense also pointed to a previous criticism of Dr. Evans in an unrelated case to suggest that his opinions in this case should be treated with skepticism.
3. Jury Irregularity:
- One of the grounds for Letby's appeal was a claim of potential jury irregularity. On 2 August 2023, a complaint was made to the court regarding the jury's conduct. The specifics of this complaint are not detailed in the document, but it was significant enough to form part of her appeal. The court ultimately found that the trial judge had handled the matter appropriately, and it did not affect the safety of the conviction.
4. Handling of Complex Evidence:
- The document highlights the challenges of managing a trial involving complex and technical medical evidence. The judge's role in explaining the legal and factual issues to the jury was crucial. The judge provided detailed instructions on how to interpret the evidence and reminded the jury that statements made by lawyers during the trial were not evidence themselves but were arguments meant to help the jury understand the case.
5. Fresh Evidence Appeal:
- Letby's defense sought to introduce fresh evidence in the form of reports by Dr. Shoo Lee, which were intended to challenge the reliability of the diagnosis of air embolism. The court rejected this fresh evidence, finding that it did not meet the necessary criteria and that it would not have likely changed the outcome of the trial. This decision underscores the strict standards courts apply when considering whether to admit new evidence after a conviction.
6. Impact on the Medical Community:
- The case raised significant concerns within the medical community about the possibility of such malicious acts occurring in a neonatal unit, which is typically considered a highly controlled and safe environment. The use of circumstantial evidence, particularly related to Letby's presence during the incidents, highlighted the challenges in detecting and proving such crimes in medical settings.
7. Sentencing:
- Letby was sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life order, meaning she will spend the rest of her life in prison without the possibility of parole. The severity of this sentence reflects the court's view of the gravity of her crimes.
8. Judicial Commentary:
- The court's judgment includes praise for the trial judge’s handling of the case, noting the complexity and length of the trial. The judgment also reflects the court's broader responsibility to ensure that even in emotionally charged cases, the legal process is fair and thorough.
The document provides a detailed account of the evidence presented against Lucy Letby, which the prosecution argued proved her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Here’s a summary of the key evidence and the reasons why the court found her guilty:
1. Circumstantial Evidence:
- Presence during incidents: Letby was the only nurse present during all the critical incidents when babies collapsed or died. The prosecution argued that her consistent presence was a strong indicator of her involvement.
- Shift patterns: Letby's work shifts coincided with the sudden and unexplained collapses of the babies, suggesting a pattern that aligned with the alleged crimes.
- Unusual behavior: Letby exhibited unusual behavior, such as retaining confidential handover sheets related to the babies who collapsed or died, and conducting online searches about the victims' families, which the prosecution argued showed a disturbing fixation on the cases.
2. Medical Evidence:
- Expert testimony: The prosecution relied heavily on expert testimonies from medical professionals, who explained that the collapses and deaths of the babies were not consistent with natural causes or medical conditions. These experts included Dr. Dewi Evans and Dr. Sandie Bohin, who testified about the various methods used to harm the babies, such as injecting air into their bloodstreams, administering insulin, and causing physical trauma.
- Diagnosis of air embolus: Multiple babies exhibited symptoms and post-mortem findings consistent with air embolus, a condition where air is introduced into the bloodstream, leading to fatal blockages. Experts testified that this condition is rare and typically associated with intentional acts, particularly in the context of these incidents.
- Insulin poisoning: Two babies (Baby F and Baby L) were found to have been poisoned with synthetic insulin, which led to severe hypoglycemia. The prosecution argued that the same person must have adulterated the infusion bags, and Letby was responsible since she was on duty and in a position to do so.
3. Physical and Behavioural Evidence:
- Confession note: A handwritten note found at Letby’s home, which contained the words "I am evil, I did this," was presented as a form of confession by the prosecution.
- Retention of documents: Letby took home a large number of handover sheets, which should have remained in the hospital. Over 200 such documents were found under her bed, which the prosecution suggested were "trophies" of her actions.
4. Failure to Respond to Resuscitation:
- Several babies under Letby’s care failed to respond to resuscitation in ways that medical staff found inexplicable based on their conditions. This further supported the prosecution's argument that Letby was intervening in ways that deliberately caused or exacerbated the babies’ deteriorations.
5. Absence of Alternative Explanations:
- The prosecution argued that there were no plausible alternative explanations for the sudden and severe collapses of these babies other than deliberate harm. The medical experts ruled out other potential causes like infections, natural deterioration, or equipment failures.
Court's Reasoning:
- The jury and the judges found this collection of evidence—her presence during all incidents, the expert testimonies, her unusual behavior, and the lack of other plausible explanations—compelling enough to conclude that Letby was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The court concluded that the consistent presence of Letby during the unexplained collapses, combined with the evidence of deliberate harm, pointed strongly to her guilt.
Key Points of Her Admission:
- Insulin Poisoning: During the trial, Letby conceded that both Baby F and Baby L had been deliberately poisoned with insulin. However, she denied being the one who administered the poison. The prosecution argued that the poisoning had to be done by someone who had access to the babies and that it was highly unlikely that two different individuals were responsible for the poisonings on the same neonatal unit.
- Denial of Malicious Acts: While she admitted that the poisoning had occurred, Letby consistently denied throughout the trial that she had intentionally harmed any of the babies. She suggested that someone else might have been responsible for the malicious acts but did not provide a clear alternative suspect.
Man of Honour
Anybody watch the documentary recently called Murder On Ward 4 featuring Beverly Allit?