raspberryjuice
VIP Member
“He points out Child C is small and can almost fit entirely on the one x-ray image.”
How could anyone hurt something so tiny
How could anyone hurt something so tiny
- Notice
Rippedjeanmaybe
VIP Member
I do find it interesting how we all see it so differently.
some people can’t believe that someone would deliberately hurt these babies, whereas I 100% believe that people are capable of it, including LL.
Maybe it’s different life experiences, but I’ve never struggled to believe that such evil acts could be carried out.
evil comes in all different forms and acts in all different ways.
some people can’t believe that someone would deliberately hurt these babies, whereas I 100% believe that people are capable of it, including LL.
Maybe it’s different life experiences, but I’ve never struggled to believe that such evil acts could be carried out.
evil comes in all different forms and acts in all different ways.
MmmB777
VIP Member
hiya Fella, firstly this case is not built on Letby’s weird behaviour or being a bit odd. The case comes after two independent reviews concluding that the significant rise is deaths and crashes was not the result of failings. It also comes as a result of multiple consultants being concerned with the correlation of Letby being there for the unexplained events. This is typical of this crime. I imagine we are going to see a similar statistical picture as there are in many other healthcare serial killer cases - eg you become statistically a high percentage more likely to die or nearly die whenever Letby is on shift. Then you can see clearly that not only is she on shift but for multiple multiple charges, she is there at the time of the collapse or has recently administered/given “care” within the last 15 minutes or so. Again, that is a familiar picture for this type of crime. You cannot be that unlucky.I've been reading along the last few days but life has kind of taken over so I've been pretty much, exhausted
I feel the evidence today has been challenging. I am uncomfortable with the narrative that because LL wasn't present for the first collapse at 12 minutes, then it must have been because of the way Dad held the baby, rather than her health. I also feel uncomfortable with the Dr disagreeing with the mum, who felt very concerned about the appearance of her baby.
This is the prosecutions case and I absolutely understand that everything does seem to fit neatly and conveniently into their narrative. If I was accused of murder right now, I think they could probably scrape together enough weird behaviour from me that made me look incredibly guilty.
A genuine query for the 'definitely guilty' posters - I know we talk a lot about the 'overall picture' bringing you to the conclusion that she is guilty - but I wonder about the 'overall picture' of the failings of this unit, and how that presents in any other conclusions? I feel like the Dr's and witnesses constantly talk about how in context all of these concerns are minimised, but to me that feels dismissive of clinical failures.
I'm still in the unsure camp.
We are of course looking at every baby’s case in intense detail- do I think every detail of the care given has been perfect? No some has been poor. Most I feel has been more than ok. Sometimes they’re busy. Sometimes they’re not. Sometimes the babies are in worse shape. Sometimes they’re clearly doing well. Do I think this will have been the picture every year for this unit? Yes. Then why did they sometimes lose one baby a year? 2. 3. They’re losing this many a month with Letby the last to intervene every time. I’ve heard from a huge varied amount of staff that were there- do I think everyone of them are misremembering or deceiving the jury. No I don’t, I have no evidence for that or logical reason for it whatsoever. Many of them will be parents themselves and they’d be almost as evil as Letby to not give the truth and breaking serious laws. Some of the nurses and staff had worked in this unit for decades and some for much less than that. If they are all so hopeless and missed so much then why haven’t they been doing that for years on end? Why weren’t 4 babies dying every month or so with this team every year? But it’s only one person that’s there every time isn’t it! The junior doctors have become consultants, they are working for the WHO, they have nursed for 20+ years, why is it more believable that alllll these people got it wrong on these babies. Then you have the fact there are at times multiple hospitals involved who must have also been hopeless or bad at their jobs.
Why do the babies with air by their spines all have different reasons for it getting there when it is most likely air administered? The kind of air in volume and placement that they’ve never seen before from trauma? They had different conditions and different awful treatment and yet their presentation was the same in the way they collapsed and they have huge amounts of air. So this is just a coincidence and combination of varying poor care yet it produces the same conclusions for these babies . When the only person that’s stayed the same is Letby.
When we talk about Letby being weird, it’s not oh she dips her chips in chocolate or even she shops at bonmarche as a 25yr old weird that matters- not knowing what an air embolism as a level 6 nurse- more than weird. Standing in the dark watching a baby desaturate is the kind of weird I’m concerned with. Predicting babies that others thought were doing well wouldn’t leave alive weird. Searching families of multiple babies in this case before any link can be found to a supposedly innocent person weird - but they are linked. Some have air by their spines. That’s a big link. Some had insulin poisoning. That’s a big link. That’s some bad luck again for Letby that before all this comes out she’s linked them. It’s bad luck she got so anguished she wrote that she’s evil and killed on purpose despite also presumably thinking there would be nothing that could link her to these babies and nothing that could show she ever harmed them.
I do not believe these babies would have died had it not been for Letby sabotaging them and no accidental phone call, writing on a paper towel, dodgy note keeping is going to convince me otherwise. Yes in theory it makes the case look weaker to some but it doesn’t for me because therr Is far too much to say it cannot have been anything other than sabotage. There is no mistake in the insulin. There has to be another murderous nurse. Or is it more likely that she did that and she put air and milk and breathing tubes with force and venom because in her words ‘she’s evil. She did this. She killed them on purpose’.
raspberryjuice
VIP Member
Still Team Guilty. At this point unless someone else stands up in court and says “it was me”, I don’t think anything could change my mind. And if that happened I think I’d still have my doubts about LL - that’s how convinced I am of her guilt.
friedeggontoast
Chatty Member
I know it’s his job but wow, imagine being the person to question a mother on how bad their newborns screams were
Mr Myers suggests the screaming was "not as bad as that [horrendous]."
The mum says it was horrendous.
Mr Myers suggests the screaming was "not as bad as that [horrendous]."
The mum says it was horrendous.
iLoveNectarines
VIP Member
Not sure I can continue reading this thread with all the use of 'fella'
Yes it's lighthearted but it's being used too much imo
Yes it's lighthearted but it's being used too much imo
Tofino
VIP Member
He knows Lucy’s notes are incriminating against the mum’s testimony due to time discrepancies so he’s trying to insist the timing was at 10pm instead of 9pm. If the jury believe the mum then they will know Lucy must have lied and falsified her records.
But I don’t think the mum would be mistaken over what she saw when she first went down there, being sent back to ward, ringing her husband, waiting, going back down and seeing resuscitation etc. and the phone records just back up her sequence of events.
But I don’t think the mum would be mistaken over what she saw when she first went down there, being sent back to ward, ringing her husband, waiting, going back down and seeing resuscitation etc. and the phone records just back up her sequence of events.
Milktray
VIP Member
Can I just add that (to anyone who doesn't know) from today the case may become even more harrowing as the prosecution will be moving on to child E and F. Regardless of whether you believe LL is guilty or not guilty, please be wary that this may become incredibly distressing 
. xxx
. xxx
PenelopeTitsDrop
Well-known member
I got a notification that my last post was quoted, so I have read that and the posts since. Maybe I should explain what I mean a bit more about the one-sidedness just so it's clear.
Comments wanting a person who is currently believing NG to provide evidence as to their thoughts are unfair (at this point in time). The prosecution are presenting their case. How can those who may still think NG present evidence of it when the defence haven't started to provide their evidence yet? It's ok for people to feel unconvinced by the prosecution without being able to give a detailed explanation why. Even gut instinct should be enough at this point - unless posters are wanting threads to have higher standards than courts. Cases are for the prosecution to prove, after all, not for the defence to prove. There should, after all be a starting point of a presumption of innocence.
It's interesting that those with a medical or legal background are more likely to be the ones on the fence or erring towards not guilty. A comment towards one ex nurse that "hopefully" their opinion towards guilty would be crystallised when they heard further evidence, was obvious in its desire to ensure that person kept believing LL is guilty. That ISN'T respectful of that person's opinion, despite the ex nurse MORE than being able to justify their point, using facts.
People are also disputing WHAT the defence should have done in a certain situation, despite clarification by lawyers. There are lots of "well I think" comments when that happens, despite zero evidence to back those comments up, and facts presented by lawyers are overlooked because they don't fit the person's narrative. So it's hypocritical to want facts based conversation one way, to then ignore that when it suits.
So, while I think LL is absolutely guilty as hell, given I am not in charge of this or any thread, I would be wrong to try to tell people who think otherwise, what they are allowed to post, and that their posts must always stand up to factual scrutiny, when there have been piles of medical, nursing procedure and legal comments made by people who believe LL is guilty, that in no way amount to anything more than "I think" or are actually totally wrong. It's hypocrisy to accept this from one side yet condemn the other for doing it.
I hope that clears it up. It's not intended to have a go at any one person. It's simply that if I can see this as a person who thinks LL is guilty, how must those who aren't yet convinced feel? Or does noone care that lots of those on the fence or currently not guilty, seem to have stopped posting?
Comments wanting a person who is currently believing NG to provide evidence as to their thoughts are unfair (at this point in time). The prosecution are presenting their case. How can those who may still think NG present evidence of it when the defence haven't started to provide their evidence yet? It's ok for people to feel unconvinced by the prosecution without being able to give a detailed explanation why. Even gut instinct should be enough at this point - unless posters are wanting threads to have higher standards than courts. Cases are for the prosecution to prove, after all, not for the defence to prove. There should, after all be a starting point of a presumption of innocence.
It's interesting that those with a medical or legal background are more likely to be the ones on the fence or erring towards not guilty. A comment towards one ex nurse that "hopefully" their opinion towards guilty would be crystallised when they heard further evidence, was obvious in its desire to ensure that person kept believing LL is guilty. That ISN'T respectful of that person's opinion, despite the ex nurse MORE than being able to justify their point, using facts.
People are also disputing WHAT the defence should have done in a certain situation, despite clarification by lawyers. There are lots of "well I think" comments when that happens, despite zero evidence to back those comments up, and facts presented by lawyers are overlooked because they don't fit the person's narrative. So it's hypocritical to want facts based conversation one way, to then ignore that when it suits.
So, while I think LL is absolutely guilty as hell, given I am not in charge of this or any thread, I would be wrong to try to tell people who think otherwise, what they are allowed to post, and that their posts must always stand up to factual scrutiny, when there have been piles of medical, nursing procedure and legal comments made by people who believe LL is guilty, that in no way amount to anything more than "I think" or are actually totally wrong. It's hypocrisy to accept this from one side yet condemn the other for doing it.
I hope that clears it up. It's not intended to have a go at any one person. It's simply that if I can see this as a person who thinks LL is guilty, how must those who aren't yet convinced feel? Or does noone care that lots of those on the fence or currently not guilty, seem to have stopped posting?
Last edited:
PenelopeTitsDrop
Well-known member
I think I feel the same as @Hinchawakening regarding this thread. And I actually am in the G camp! But it feels that some are browbeating others with their opinions, so I think I will be stepping away for a while.
There is no rule which says people have to keep up with the Wiki. People have different amounts of time/investment/memory and noone should experience exasperation from others because they haven't approached the information in the same way.
Equally, if people are "tired of explaining" then... don't! There is no obligation that everyone on the thread has to thoroughly understand each others opinion. It's fine to think "I don't agree" and move on.
So I shall love you and leave you. Have a good one fellas!
There is no rule which says people have to keep up with the Wiki. People have different amounts of time/investment/memory and noone should experience exasperation from others because they haven't approached the information in the same way.
Equally, if people are "tired of explaining" then... don't! There is no obligation that everyone on the thread has to thoroughly understand each others opinion. It's fine to think "I don't agree" and move on.
So I shall love you and leave you. Have a good one fellas!
Last edited:
MmmB777
VIP Member
I do believe he has to do his job. It’s fucking hard telling myself that but I do. Hopefully when she’s convicted she never has a chance for appeal. He can question the time all he likes but the baby was scheduled that bloody milk at 9pm so that’s when that mother who has just described how crucial it was to her to feed her own baby her own milk fucking went. Not a fucking hour late.
Milktray
VIP Member
Following on from
Link for session Friday 11th Nov
www.chesterstandard.co.uk
Please read the Wiki for further info on the case, along with helplines and further support on any of the issues raised.
Due to the heavy nature of this thread, we refer to each other etc as 'fella' to lighten the mood when there's a difference of opinion etc. We use it affectionately.
Lucy Letby Case #14
It comes up on mine ok but it disappears when a new thread is made. Oh really it just disappears for me sometimes. Not following that many threads either. Strange that I figured it might be cause of the nature of the thread?
tattle.life
Link for session Friday 11th Nov
Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, November 11
The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more,…
Please read the Wiki for further info on the case, along with helplines and further support on any of the issues raised.
Due to the heavy nature of this thread, we refer to each other etc as 'fella' to lighten the mood when there's a difference of opinion etc. We use it affectionately.
Last edited:
friedeggontoast
Chatty Member
She says she was keen to get home and was keen to transport both babies to a hospital closer to home, and was waiting for two ambulances to be provided.
She said she and her partner were under the impression both babies were well enough to travel.
By that stage, she had had skin-to-ckin contact with both twins, and both were managing "fine".
By August 2, the couple were still waiting for transport.
She said on that day, the twins were both out of their incubators by this stage.
Child E was breathing "easily" and Child F was "great".
_____________________________________________
They were so close to getting out of COCH
She said she and her partner were under the impression both babies were well enough to travel.
By that stage, she had had skin-to-ckin contact with both twins, and both were managing "fine".
By August 2, the couple were still waiting for transport.
She said on that day, the twins were both out of their incubators by this stage.
Child E was breathing "easily" and Child F was "great".
_____________________________________________
They were so close to getting out of COCH
Motherofpugs
Chatty Member
I’ve voted guilty on every poll so far. Firstly based on gut feeling but that feeling has only been strengthened as the trial has progressed. The evidence is starting to build a pretty damning picture for me now. If I was on the jury I don’t think I would be at the beyond reasonable doubt stage yet but I feel pretty confident that I would be by the end of the trial the way things are going.
avabella
VIP Member
I've been reading along the last few days but life has kind of taken over so I've been pretty much, exhausted 
I feel the evidence today has been challenging. I am uncomfortable with the narrative that because LL wasn't present for the first collapse at 12 minutes, then it must have been because of the way Dad held the baby, rather than her health. I also feel uncomfortable with the Dr disagreeing with the mum, who felt very concerned about the appearance of her baby.
This is the prosecutions case and I absolutely understand that everything does seem to fit neatly and conveniently into their narrative. If I was accused of murder right now, I think they could probably scrape together enough weird behaviour from me that made me look incredibly guilty.
A genuine query for the 'definitely guilty' posters - I know we talk a lot about the 'overall picture' bringing you to the conclusion that she is guilty - but I wonder about the 'overall picture' of the failings of this unit, and how that presents in any other conclusions? I feel like the Dr's and witnesses constantly talk about how in context all of these concerns are minimised, but to me that feels dismissive of clinical failures.
I'm still in the unsure camp.
Edit: I'm off to delete all my texts about how much my husband annoys me just incase
I feel the evidence today has been challenging. I am uncomfortable with the narrative that because LL wasn't present for the first collapse at 12 minutes, then it must have been because of the way Dad held the baby, rather than her health. I also feel uncomfortable with the Dr disagreeing with the mum, who felt very concerned about the appearance of her baby.
This is the prosecutions case and I absolutely understand that everything does seem to fit neatly and conveniently into their narrative. If I was accused of murder right now, I think they could probably scrape together enough weird behaviour from me that made me look incredibly guilty.
A genuine query for the 'definitely guilty' posters - I know we talk a lot about the 'overall picture' bringing you to the conclusion that she is guilty - but I wonder about the 'overall picture' of the failings of this unit, and how that presents in any other conclusions? I feel like the Dr's and witnesses constantly talk about how in context all of these concerns are minimised, but to me that feels dismissive of clinical failures.
I'm still in the unsure camp.
Edit: I'm off to delete all my texts about how much my husband annoys me just incase
Last edited:
Haveyouanywool
VIP Member
@MmmB777
I’ve just read the wiki for Baby I as you suggested. The baby was being bottle fed and looked after by a Nursery Nurse. Doesn’t shout critical to me! The poor wee mite seemed well on the road to recovery.
The brain scans showing previous damage from repeated resus attempts. How fucking cruel.
I’ve just read the wiki for Baby I as you suggested. The baby was being bottle fed and looked after by a Nursery Nurse. Doesn’t shout critical to me! The poor wee mite seemed well on the road to recovery.
The brain scans showing previous damage from repeated resus attempts. How fucking cruel.