Nurse arrested for murdering babies

I'm not saying she isn't guilty but what were the stats of the other babies on the ward, did none of the others have any problems ? Was it just the babies she attended to ? Or are there other babies not on this list who she attended to ?

There were lots of other cases/incidents where she wasn't there that weren't added to the list.
There was also a lot of staff not added to the list.

Allegedly.
 
I'm not saying she isn't guilty but what were the stats of the other babies on the ward, did none of the others have any problems ? Was it just the babies she attended to ? Or are there other babies not on this list who she attended to ?
I believe it was a case of, they basically worked out the dates/times of when issues occurred then overlaid the shifts of staff members on top of that, and found that when she was on shift something bad usually happened. That of course didn't mean that bad things didn't happen when she wasn't on shift, just that when she was they often did. This is one of the issues that you get with circumstantial evidence cases, it's not clear cut, but when you have a LOT of circumstantial evidence it tends to add up.
 
Last edited:
I believe it was a case of, they basically worked out the dates/times of when issues occurred then overlaid the shifts of staff members on top of that, and found that when she was on shift something bad usually happened. That of course didn't mean that bad things didn't happen when she wasn't on shift, just that when she was they often did. This is one of the issues that you get with circumstantial evidence cases, it's not clear cut, but when you have a LOT of circumstantial evidence it tends to add up.

However the shift spreadsheet didn't have every staff member on it and other incidents happened when she wasn't there.
It does need investigating.
 
I believe it was a case of, they basically worked out the dates/times of when issues occurred then overlaid the shifts of staff members on top of that, and found that when she was on shift something bad usually happened. That of course didn't mean that bad things didn't happen when she wasn't on shift, just that when she was they often did. This is one of the issues that you get with circumstantial evidence cases, it's not clear cut, but when you have a LOT of circumstantial evidence it tends to add up.

There is also witness evidence, it's not all circumstantial, that's a myth

Also were the other deaths as suspicious as the ones that happened on her shift. I'm betting they weren't. Deaths happen in hospitals, but the death's on Letby's shift were insanely suspicious. IE blood coming from a babies mouth she was caring for and Letby lying about it according to the babies mother.
 
Expected thread to have been revived after expert witness change of view in news today .


It's amazing how often the experts turn out to be wrong.

I mean, I hate to say it, but if there is doubt then she shouldn't be in jail.

He didn't change his mind on everything but even so, what a plonker.

Actually, she is probably safer in there. Guilty or not, her life is ruined now and she is constantly at risk.
 
Last edited:
So according to this expert Baby O wasn't killed by Letby?

tl;dr They put the baby on a ventilator but with the pressure setting too high, the abdomen distended - a doctor tried aspirating it by placing a needle in, used the wrong side (according to expert, should have been done on the left side) and perforated the baby's liver as it was pushed right down into the pelvis by the high pressure. Baby was still being ventilated at high pressure with a needle in its liver which caused lacerations - baby went into shock.

IIRC the doctor the expert alleges is responsible for this death actually testified against Letby at trial.

 
Last edited:
Expected thread to have been revived after expert witness change of view in news today .


According to Letbys lawyers.

The Doctor in question has strongly denied the accusation.


In a statement, Dr Evans said he had neither received any formal notification of the announcement nor any correspondence from Letby's barrister Mark McDonald or his team.
Dr Evans added: "Mark McDonald's observations regarding my evidence is unsubstantiated, unfounded, inaccurate.
"His method of presenting his information reflects clear prejudice and bias.
"I find his style most unedifying, most unprofessional. It's highly disrespectful to the families of babies murdered and harmed by Lucy Letby."
 
People seem absolutely desperate to get this woman off. I wonder if any of them would be happy to let her babysit their kids.
I strongly suspect not.
Well they wouldn't now, given that she was already having mental health issues due to the stresses at work before this all kicked off... Even if she's found totally innocent not guilty in the end, how messed up do you think she'll be after all this?

I think, given the NHS history of **** ups and cover ups, mismanagement, misfunding and all similar drama, people believe it far more likely that this was a system/institutional failing than a lone nurse going on a murder rampage for so long. Nurses have been the overworked, underpaid heroes, not just of Covid but of the NHS for decades - The idea that a demon could be one of the angels rather than some overpaid external consultant manager just does not compute for many people.
 
Expected thread to have been revived after expert witness change of view in news today .

No, he did not change his view; the lawyers claim he did and he has denied doing so


BBC said:
Dr Evans added: "Mark McDonald's observations regarding my evidence is unsubstantiated, unfounded, inaccurate.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KIA
No, he did not change his view; the lawyers claim he did and he has denied doing so


Exactly - another pile of nonsense to try and stir up a 3rd effort at a review/retrial.... previous 2 have been rejected.

Nothing new to report. The "expert" witness has NOT changed anything as he clearly has stated.

It's Letby's lawyers trying something else to get a retrial......

In a statement, Dr Evans said he had neither received any formal notification of the announcement nor any correspondence from Letby's barrister Mark McDonald or his team.
Dr Evans added: "Mark McDonald's observations regarding my evidence is unsubstantiated, unfounded, inaccurate.

"His method of presenting his information reflects clear prejudice and bias.

"I find his style most unedifying, most unprofessional. It's highly disrespectful to the families of babies murdered and harmed by Lucy Letby."
 
It's amazing how often the experts turn out to be wrong.
ever seen My Cousin Vinny? The experts only offer an opinion, supposedly a well informed one based on knowledge.

It doesn't mean all experts would come to the same conclusion, or that they are infallible
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom