Lucy Letby Case #15

[Tofino]

Totally awful so far today. Ben Myers starts off sympathetic to the parents, only then to suggest their accounts are inaccurate/false. As with every single witness he's done the same, it's like suggesting their facts are wrong is all he's got to go on

These poor parents are having to talk, in front of a Court and the press, about the hardest thing that's ever happened to them. Not impressed with BM at all, realise he's a defence lawyer but it's horrific. I know the parents would have been briefed on this but they did so well to give their accurate accounts and not give BM a piece of mind!

I agree. I can understand him questioning the possibility that the times were mistaken. That feels reasonable for a fair trial. But to suggest a mother’s account of what happened to her baby as not being as horrendous as she said it was just seems cruel.

 

[Tofino]

Can’t even remember child D? Sorry but this is not the slightest bit credible.

Monday morning is going to be tough. They usually start with the mothers statement. Reminder child E is the baby mum walked in on and Lucy was there and baby was bleeding. Child F is the insulin poisoning.

 

[BanditHealer]

I've been trying to keep up, but a bit behind. I just wanted to comment on the expert witness stuff as someone who has been one before. You are instructed by either the prosecution or defence, and funding comes from Legal Aid for the defence work. But your duty is to the court, so it means that it shouldn't matter who instructed you, you present your findings even if the instructing party aren't going to like them.

You include a statement of truth in your report and there are standards for expert witnesses we adhere to.

 

[BillingtonArms]

And just to add that really what I cannot get away from is that a full term baby with fully developed lungs (albeit with pneumonia) would pass in the same way as a teeny premmie who is less than 1kg and with very under developed lungs. That just doesn't make sense to me. They both have the sudden collapses and unexplained rashes and lack of response to resuscitation. How can that be?

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

I think people are just very concerned about offending or upsetting people in such an emotive topic so throwing it in to keep everything light-hearted (if you can). There were a few threads back there that were intense and maybe fighty!

 

[slingo16]

I’ve been as sceptical of her guilt as anybody on here since the beginning, and have been posting fairly regularly since the trial started, and I have to say, often I post things that people disagree with I go back and forth with many people in the guilty camp and no body is disrespectful I actually find people to be fairly soft in there arguments (“fella this fella that”), I’ve also not seen anybody say anything to another poster that’s worth losing sleep over. No single person here knows all the relevant information and factors here. We’re all laymen to some degree so it’s definitely helpful to share differing opinions especially when everyone here is from different backgrounds and has knowledge in certain areas that can really help other posters understand things they otherwise wouldn’t. Regardless of whether you think she’s guilty or not you can learn something from a lot of what’s said here

 

[Weeder]

I've voted NG. Somethings really 'off' about all of this but I am finding it harder to understand some of her actions and I do see this pattern of her with the babies parents. If it wasn't for this niggling feeling I have I'd probably be in the guilty camp now.

I completely get you.
I'm in the guilty camp, it doesn't feel comfortable though.

I keep feeling like it could be one of the doctors.

I know there's nothing to suggest it. I don't even know why I think it.

 

[Nelly's mum]

I think this is somewhat likely but I can’t wrap my head around it?!?! Like why would being bored at work lead you to do something so utterly evil???? Like I can understand the psychology of her being a sadist or a psychopath but why kill babies just to get a bit of excitement. Just do a sky dive ffs, or get a job at a bigger hospital.

I see your point - but I wouldn't be surprised if LL was tampering with the babies or their equipment long before baby A. Possibly she never meant to kill them, just to create excitement, she started going to far and baby A was her first baby that died.
I've thought LL is guilty from the start of the trial, I live local to COCH and the story has been building for years. I can see it's a lot to take in that a nurse is a SK of tiny babies, many people struggle to see she could be guilty

 

[Tofino]

No, there is another legal person on here who occasionally puts their head above the parapet too.

It's not always the things that are said but the way they are said. I thought the way it was worded was pretty disrespectful too. We maybe have to agree to disagree on that. And by the way, saying "no disrespect" doesn't stop the rest of the sentence sounding off in some cases. The prosecution CAN state things as fact which can be disputed. Otherwise there would be no point in having a defence. Wait until the defence call their medical experts and I suspect you may have a vastly different view.

Being able to spot a flaw in the prosecution and taking the time to explain why is not a bad thing. Posts which insinuate "why should I believe you, these are medical experts and you don't know" are pretty rude. If you think it's rubbish, and the poster isn't who they say they are, why ask?

because I’m still interested in their opinion? I’m just being cautious about taking anything said as fact especially if I’ve seen contradictions elsewhere. That’s not being disrespectful, it’s an anonymous forum Apologies if anyone takes that personally or is offended by it but I literally don’t know who anyone is. It’s not personal at all.

ETA: I’ve also said multiple times over since the trial started that my view may change when I hear the defence and what I want to see from the defence to cast reasonable doubt. We are not on the jury though, we don’t have to sit on the fence and wait for the defence before forming an opinion.

 

[Milktray]

I tend to agree we can’t be sure of her emotions or that what emotion she shows is indicative of a great deal because either way could be seen as g/ng but nothing so far has screamed at me that she’s upset in the slightest yet Could be wrong of course. Will the police that interviewed her and investigated give evidence? (sorry if that’s a stupid question!)

A few of us on here followed little Logan's case. Angharad Williamson, his mum was convicted of murdering him, throughout the trial and arrest etc was screaming, crying and making outbursts during trial. I actually think she lost all credibility because many people didn't know if it was acting, or if she was just crying for herself' etc. I can't imagine what the jury was thinking.

 

[struggs123]

There have been a few posts along the lines of I can't believe people think x they would absolutely change their mind if they read the wiki or whatever which is annoying but it's an anon gossip forum tbh so who cares.

Fella is annoying as fuck as well but just block it out tbh.

I have to stand up for kitten heels though, for tall women (and men if they like wearing heels) it was a way to wear nice shoes (flats are better now but used to be boring) without being gigantic amongst friends. Now it's more acceptable to wear flats on a night out there's no need for them.

 

[raspberryjuice]

I agree, so so interesting to hear all views… it feels like some do want it to be an agreeing thread sometimes… agree she’s guilty! I keep thinking I’ll write some notes on my points and share but then change my mind because as I’ve said, I’m not trying to sway anyone here or invite them for marshmallows I’ve shared tiny bits of my thoughts but I think they’re hard to explain without seeing the full picture going on my mind which would take bloomin essays perhaps I’ll do a write up on one baby and my reasonings and see what happens. Thanks for your comment btw, almost didn’t post my initial one as i expected to be shot down (still might be in the morning) gonna zip the tent up now and hanker down for the night

I agree with the PP, I’m curious to read why some people are so firmly camp NG too. In the same way the NG people ask the G people why they feel the way they do and if they could be missing something, I’m really intrigued by what the NG people are seeing that we may be missing. I think the thread has calmed down a lot recently and moved more to healthy debates and discussion rather than how it was in the earlier threads with lots of swiping and bickering. If you could at some point put your thoughts in to words it would be interesting to read.

 

[goyellow667]

because of how she looks?

Absolutely nothing to do with looks. As a human being that chose to look after these tiny, vulnerable human beings as a career.

 

[candyland_]

It’s so sad because on many occasions they babies were due to be delivered at other hospitals or moving them was considered. They parents will have to live with that ‘what if they had never went to the Countess’ thought.

 

[MmmB777]

If it’s a decision of who to trust over the first time mum who was clearly besotted with her twin babies vs. the nurse who falsified medical notes and lied then it’s a no brainer.

What does the mum stand to gain from lying?

How could she be in cahoots with the SHO who will also say no meeting took place between them and Letby, no order to omit the 9pm feed was given. The mum would invent blood and her being told it was from the feeding tube? And the father would stick to that story too? Nope nope nope. I cannot be expected to believe all of that all at once.

 

[Daisydunn15]

Hi fella or not Fella however we’re doing this shit now I’ve missed your posts! I take your points about the experts, I just disagree with it on the whole. I also see what you’re saying about believe parent accounts or not (I’m not going to argue the point on how I feel it’s different).. I just feel that’s the same frustration I feel when people say the Facebook searching was normal and then proceed to give an example of their own facebooking that’s totally different to LLs like unless everyone died just after you were in a room with them it’s just not the same. You might disagree with me on that, as many others do. Sometimes the frustration bubbles over slightly doesn’t it but I hope you don’t take it personally and I don’t either
@slingo16 I appreciate your post! I know I’ve definitely been abrupt/frustrated with your theories at times but I would never think or want you not to post and again it’s never personal. I’m also not going to say yes great idea if I don’t think it is as I’m sure you wouldn’t to me either!

Hey fella, I still like fella.. is it out now? Can't believe it only lasted a week.
You can say why you think they're different, I'm not easily offended I've never taken anything personally on here but then I can see why some people have at times.

I don't think the experts aren't good Dr's or knowledgeable, they're clearly well experienced and skilled professionals otherwise they wouldn't be experts, I just feel like they double down on their points sometimes when challenged which can make what they're saying less credible. For example the 'couldn't be doing better comment'.. I get that he probably meant she couldn't be better given the circumstances or given how she was earlier in the day or that he was generally happy with her...but that's not what he said. Maybe its because I've worked with a lot of stubborn and egotistical medics who would rather stick pins in their eyes than admit they were wrong, or even that there's a possibility they could be wrong.
It's also hard going off news articles and shoddy reporting, there's a whole day of evidence summarised into a few paragraphs so maybe if I were there I would perceive it differently.

 

[friedeggontoast]

If I was on the jury I’d personally find this line of questioning wouldn’t help me swing towards NG.
Whether the babies scream was bad, very bad or horrendous wouldn’t change my mind about anything. These poor babies died in pain there’s no question of that.

 

[Milktray]

Re LL not being subtle/obvious red flags - I could imagine it’s a terrifying realization that a nurse might be harming patients, and I could also imagine how terrifying it would be for a colleague to report said nurse, there’s so many variables to reporting anyone for anything, but accusing someone of such a serious crime (whether true or not) could have serious implications for another employee. I think you’d probably also question yourself like “Did I really see what I saw?” Etc. More so when someone already has an established reputation with colleagues as being a good nurse & nice person, imagine being that ONE doctor to accuse that well liked nice nurse as hurting innocent babies? Hindsight is 20/20 - I’m sure everyone who witnessed anything suspicious feels guilty about it everyday, and I really hope they all find some level of peace eventually.’ It’s also just such a vile act, it’s quite literally unbelievable what anyone would want to harm a child - let alone a child in hospital who is already very ill.

Oh I absolutely agree.
They may have thought something wasn't quite right, I'm sure they were more inclined to think, someone isn't doing their job properly...someone's making 'fatal fuck ups'.

Murder would just never cross your mind. Its like that saying 'you walk past 36 murderers in your lifetime' but you would never believe this fact because of how we perceive what a murderer would look like/behave.

I mean, could you personally imagine going into work and someone saying, 'I think Sandra from accounts is a serial killer' (sorry to any Sandras). You'd say 'Nooo, don't talk daft. Its all just a coincidence'!

Because I swear to God, if I thought at that time, LL was a serial killer, I'd be fearing for my own life.

 

[IdeletedbutI'mbackagain]

That’s just the nature of the split in opinion though. Personally I’d rather read how people reached their conclusion in detail than “I just think x” “it’s just bullshit”

Just to say in the earlier threads I was annihilated for being so sure of her guilt so early on. I didn't take it personally, I just explained why I felt that way. If people disagreed and weren't making valid points I just ignored them.

Reversely, I also had to defend myself when I said I didn't think the note was as big a deal as a lot of people who were convinced of her guilt thought. I just explained why and didn't take it personally when people seemed to be genuinely annoyed because at the end of the day its not me they were annoyed at really.

This is a discussion thread, you have to be prepared to explain of defend your view point.

If you say you think she's NG just because of a "feeling" or that the case is "just bullshit" without further articulation then people will bite back because it's just not helpful to a discussion thread. Personally I just ignore posts like that rather than bite because what's the point of them really?

These last 2 threads have been less of a debate of G vs NG and more dissecting what we have been presented with in trial and I honestly think that's just a natural progression of the thread with more and more people being in the G camp each day as each child is presented and it will probably remain that way until defence have their go.

 

[stardust1]

Emotions are a weird thing though, not the same but when I used to work taking 999 calls, generally calm callers who said x is happening where always the worst calls; as in, the situation was the worst even though the caller was calm. Not sure how to properly explain it, but it was always odd to me as they're the ones you'd expect to be hysterical or whatever but they were super calm, if you had 2 callers both saying the same thing but one was screaming and crying and one was calm you just knew which would be worse (the response was the same though so didn't assume, just always turned out to be the case). The human mind has lots of mechanisms in when dealing with trauma etc it is fascinating. I don't think showing no emotion in super stressful situations suggests much really.

I was thinking about this the other day. I get really stupid intrusive thoughts and I was thinking if I needed to ring 999 What if I was too calm but then I thought they might think I am guilty of causing harm to them so I have been practicing my 999 calls

 

[Tofino]

Sorry.. it was too quiet? They’ve just had as many deaths in a month or so as they normally do in a fucking year and work is too quiet? Shut the front fucking door. Guess suboptimal care because the unit was so busy ain’t going to cut it with this one Letterz you floppy hatted cunt.

Yeah I’d like to hear an explanation for this one. Quiet as in nothing to do? Too many staff and not enough babies? (Not believable)

Or quiet as in nothing exciting happening.(very unfortunate wording for someone supposedly ‘innocent’ but on trial for murder just hours before one of her babies dies)