Lucy Letby Case #16

[OldBlondie]

It annoys me that by not taking the stand (I'm assuming she won't) that Letby gets to avoid this kind of treatment but the parents and her colleagues who are not on trial are put up on the stand, ripped apart and to some extent, vilified.

It deffo has felt at times as if it’s the doctors and nurses that are on trial rather than LL

 

[MyWayOrTheHighway]

I haven’t followed the thread for a while, but today’s evidence was just so harrowing that I’m not on the fence anymore - I think she’s guilty.

I 100% believe the parents and even if somehow Lucy wasn’t guilty, she’s still negligent and didn’t help Baby E when he was clearly in distress and had been bleeding.

 

[raspberryjuice]

Sorry if it doesn't make sense I've spent the past year blocking it from memory

I’ve snipped your original post because of the content and your comment that you’ve spent time blocking it from memory.

I just wanted to say thank you to you, and all the other NICU parents, who are sharing their experiences and their babies stories. They are so important to help others understand the situations being discussed in court in real terms rather than the medical explanation.

So thank you, to all of you. And I hope all of your babies are doing well now

 

[od12839]

The big factor is really that Lucy and the mother's accounts are so different. If you check the wiki Lucy doesn't just dispute timings, she disputes this conversation ever happening, the blood, the time, and even that she would ever tell someone to leave. Then the SHO also disputes having a conversation with Lucy...

I think on it's own this is just messy. The 9pm feed/phonecall back up the mother's credibility, but it's hard to say for certain. But...the baby did literally die. Unexpectedly. And the baby's twin brother also almost died. Unexpectedly, due to insulin. And Lucy happened to be present at both of these.

It's very frustrating because individually I totally agree that some of these events could have been terrible coincidences. But god it's such a long list of coincidences at this point...

 

[Daisydunn15]

Morning! Thanks for your response, I will try to also explain how I feel and hope you (and everyone) will know I am just sharing my opinion and how I see things rather than saying anyone else is wrong etc. Probably going to end up a ramble, so if there are people that think my points dominate or don’t like how I post- please kindly put me on ignore now! I am also going to probably have to use examples of things I’ve heard here to make my points- not trying to sneer or imply anything by that - just trying to show what I see differently. Full fella disclaimer sorry- boring but trying to make it clear I don’t come here to upset people!

I also see your views on the Facebook thing, however I don’t have any justification for Letby’s. I do not have an innocent answer for why she’s done it. To me, following an innocent until proven guilty stance (I admire that!) doesn’t mean giving letby potential innocent explanations outside of what I know about the case. If I do that all the way along, if I create scenes of her innocence like hysterical and nervous, without knowing that to be the case- how will I factually interpret what I am currently hearing.

I also don’t view anything much in isolation, so if I only knew Wayne Cousins bought a bag of rubble (@Tofino stealing your example) but I gave him reasons for doing so outside of what I’d heard about the case -eg he’s doing up his patio or he’s helping a friend with building work when nobody not even Wayne has said this himself (yes I know he pleaded G just using the example)- I wouldn’t interpret the evidence I am hearing properly imo. Of course because his murder of Sarah is more typical murder, I would later hear about the crime scene and go ah ok yes. But this isn’t typical murder. It is however, extremely typical for this type of crime and evidence so to me the note is wholly significant as it is really the only wham bam moment you can expect in this kind of crime - an admission is one of the only things that can convict Health care serial killers. I appreciate the note now she’s retracted those words is not a confession legally speaking. It is though, a huge piece of evidence for me.

There are many high profile cases where I haven’t though innocent until proven guilty (I have not been on the jury for any of them so that is fine!) this is because I’ve heard and seen what I needed to already- I’ve brought it up before but a lady that decapitated her neighbour recently pleaded not guilty and yes I formed an opinion already because it was obvious.

However, this crime is not a typical murder. The victims are difficult as so vulnerable, the murder scene is sterile, the physical evidence is disposed, the murder is using means that are wholly untypical for murder (except the poisoning really) but look completely normal in the setting they are committed in (nobody suspects a nurse hanging a TPN bag or using a line to kill) there will be no dna, no cctv as there is in a lot of typical murders. What we are hearing is strong strong strong evidence for this kind of crime imo - it has almost every feature. That’s what is more important to me than the red flags - a)I do see quite a few of them and b) there are many on there that we wouldn’t know yet like mental health, relationship problems etc. But I do see many features of these crimes in the case here.

I also agree that the Facebook evidence is not straight up evidence of wrong doing, this case doesn’t pin on them. However, it is how the police even come to know this about Letby that is what interests me. The Facebook activity is only found out after she’s already linked to all these events not what is used to say she is linked to them, she is there.

The hospital is having a huge rise in cpr near deaths and deaths (however you think that came about), the consultants and other staff will have begun realising Letby is on shift for many of these events- they can not prove this at this time they can only see that link and pattern as it goes on (this is how many SK in hospital get found out) they can raise concerns that are not believed (it sounds like this happened early on), eventually somebody takes steps to try and see if that truly unbelievable suspicion could be true or negligence on her part etc, they take steps to change what appears to be a pattern and see if it continues, there are still too many unexplainable events and deaths of patients not expected to die (this is key understanding, yes preemie babies are vulnerable but they rarely go into sudden cardiac arrest near death situations without warning because of equipment and high level obs, even if there are rare events that could cause sudden events they are too often happening for the statistical picture as a whole but also for one person to be there for all) and doctors see more worrying behaviour (such as her standing over babies desaturating etc.) two investigations into the hospital show that the rise is not down to hospital failures, statistically Letby is factually there and giving treatment before too many of these events to not warrant suspicions. Police involvement - other evidence found.

Everything else, Facebook searches, parent accounts, witness accounts, medical expert evidence of foul play, toxicology experts evidence, the contents of her house search are all found after knowing the bits before. And yes that is why I go on about bad luck.. sorry! Because she is implicated in being there for all of this ‘awful run’ and ‘unexplained and shocking’ deaths and then to top it off, all of the rest of this picture just happens to be there- searches, parent accounts, note, contradiction in her notes to others, text evidence etc etc! And it isn’t that I wouldn’t consider the validity of the witnesses or what they say or validity of evidence but if I am to question allllll of them and suspect alllll of them and allll that big picture - I have to consider why they would lie, how they could misremember, why they would break the law and prejudice a case, why air is there indicative of trauma, why huge amounts of insulin are there - if I can see no logical reason for any of that then I have to decide whether I think that they do all give me evidence to show her guilt or not.

To me, finding innocent reasons for little individual things that haven’t been provided to me, destroy the big picture of things I know so far, if defence provide them then i’ll consider them but I wouldn’t let potential innocent explanations I could come up with myself cloud anything that could be there already. I do not see searching people conclusive of murder, I do see repeated and linking babies to search before known link and at strange times and then not giving a reason utterly suspicious. IMO there is not a possibility that she did not know why she was searching them or why she took such an interest in them - I believe that she absolutely COULD explain and she is choosing not to. I definitely see suspicious evidence in her texts and I can totally see why others do not- they’re subjective. But I see what she has to gain by giving interesting answers, conflict of what she says in texts to police interview (worst day of her life, detail about parents grief- sudden lack of memory of it all in police interview), conflict and convenience in what she remembers and doesn’t.
Now if the defence comes up with something special, I will change my mind! I just cannot see how all of it can be explained all at once - yes I know they’re separate charges but you absolutely have to take in the pattern and likelihood in these cases just as you did with BA and Charles Cullen. If the victims were not so vulnerable to this kind of crime, there would be no difficulty at all convicting Letby IMO.

10/10 paragraphs. Just sticking my nose in.

I firmly agree that, if she's guilty, things like the FB searches, sympathy card, wanting to be in the family room, messaging colleagues about the babies could all paint a fucked up picture of what kind of monster she was.

To me, who isn't convinced either way of her guilt, I think you can pretty easily explain away things like the texts, searches etc.. But I can see why people who think does guilty are using them to build a picture. For me it adds nothing yet.

 

[Wellthisisinteresting]

I’ve come to the conclusion you’re all a bunch of arseholes!

(obvs kidding, and ready to relight my fire and all sing together again)

I have my own views and thoughts but I genuinely love seeing how differently we all ingest information and our take on it.

 

[Faith61]

Yeah so this was the language I was referring to earlier. I know people are different but I could just never imagine replying that. I’ve mentioned previously that I’ve worked in a police setting (not children) but I would never have spoken about DV victims should I have had a run of particular nasty jobs (which did happen, no death though). Surely the more appropriate response would be “I know honestly have no idea what’s happening here, it was so sudden. They all have been. I might speak to X dr/senior because it just doesn’t seem right. That poor baby & their family. I think I need some time off just to process all this”
If she’d had responded in such way I wouldn’t be so firmly in the guilty camp, I reckon I’d be swinging back & forth (maybe not after today) but those people on here that have made comments about “I don’t see what’s wrong with her texts” etc this is how I’d best describe what I find wrong with them. They’re just “off” & the response I’d written myself would be one I’d be expected if that makes sense?

Exactly. ...my role now is working in hospice care ( worked in acute settings for years previously)
It's like me saying or thinking to a person I'm caring for either at end of life, or "living with" cancer.. "its fate, one in two of us will get it..you're one of the unlucky ones"
That thought process is sick!!
There's no fate involved in these baby's deaths ...just none...she's twisted in the head...whatever mental illness she has.....still sick

 

[MmmB777]

Also there are many further cases where her notes are shown to be falsified, and doctors are claiming that there are incidents of which they have absolutely no knowledge of, only LL does, so maybe if benefit of doubt is given this time it will be far harder to give the next time

We have already seen her falsifying notes today with the memory box thing with parents and the consent bit, never mind the rest

I personally just can’t believe all these doctors/nurses/consultants/parents are all lying, and yet LL is the only one telling the truth to me that makes zero sense and not something I’ll ever be able to get behind tbh

Yes there is another thing the mum has had to get very wrong. Her shock at being presented the memory box and photos is total contrast to Letby detailing that she asked consent. Is it not wholly inappropriate to assume those things at the very least.

It just seems like it has to be another layer of Letby’s bad luck - bad luck parents misremember things in a way that makes her look suspicious, bad luck that babies die rapidly on her shift, bad luck that it’s often directly after her cares, bad luck that the babies suffer from rare occurrences or present in very non typical declines for sepsis/pneumonia, bad luck that they get better but rapidly worse when around her, bad luck her notes don’t correlate with witness accountsher texts show how shocked people are at her bad run, she wrote a note before arrest saying she’d evil and killed on purpose, she repeatedly searched parents of people she’d later be accused of murdering.

You're completely entitled to believe what you want, but I'd want to see more evidence that she was attacking them, and I was expecting much more based on their opening statement than her being in the room, not near the cot while he cried. I think a lot of people were thinking the attack would be a bigger thing for the prosecution.

Would you only think Letby was guilty if she had been physically seen doing something like this?

 

[raspberryjuice]

Will the Mum of Baby E have to get up and testify again for Baby F? She must have found yesterday so painful to relive and then the awful questioning by BM on top. I don’t know if I could face going back up if I was her. Those moments she was talking about must have been replayed in her mind over and over again, and also in her nightmares. To be questioned about whether they’re genuine memories or not is just horrific. I get why BM had to do it, it’s just really distressing to think of a grieving mother being questioned so harshly. I hope it came across more gentle in court than the reporting makes it out.

I wish I could go back and change my name to smokeahontus.

I definitely wouldn’t be raspberry juice. I don’t even like raspberries…or juice.

 

[Faith61]

“Letby: "It's the luck of the draw...unfortunately."

Anyone thinking this is feeling very similar to her “element of fate comment”

Me!!!!! Was just thinking same...how the hell does a nurse "caring " for these tiny babies even contemplate these incidents/deaths are either..fate or luck of the draw....dear god

 

[Daisydunn15]

I have half this thread on ignore lol.

It's a shame though because although I've disagreed with people there have been some good discussions at times and that's what's kept me in the threads. I could just go off and read the updates myself and reach my own conclusions but I like to see where other people are at, it's just a shame it gets heated.

 

[PeninsulaAndOriental]

NEWS FLASH

It gets even better over at Facebook. Myers got the S/N giving evidence today to confirm the pipes were old and dirty.

The Facebook experts think this is him building a case to say the pipes caused infection.

So folks, there we have it: it’s now the PIPES that killed the babies.

It’s on the group managed by Pam with 2.7k members

 

[Deeznutslol]

Yes!! I don't see that here at all! BUT on Facebook.... well Facebook is scary

Tbh it surprises me that there are even discussion groups for LL on there, like who even uses facebook anymore? Maybe I’m from a different generation but to me it seems like it’s just full of boomers posting mental shit and indoctrinating each other with weird fake news. I literally only use it to troll my local community groups when I’m bored these days lmao

 

[PumpkinxQueen]

I’m open to peoples opinions. But I’d also like people to explain why they have a NG verdict atm. I don’t think that’s unreasonable or rude or arrogant??

If 7 cats died in the same street, within a specific time and shared the same symptoms, and the same neighbor was always around - It’s fair to assume someone might be responsible for the cats deaths, no?

Therefore my Q to the NG train (not the ‘On the fence’ train) is - If LL is NG, is someone else responsible or are these deaths and subsequent other events all a coincidence?

I haven’t tried to bait anyone or dismiss their opinion. But you can’t preach wanting a discussion and then refuse to explain your NG decision… I want to hear why, not to try disprove or argue, because I’m genuinely curious.

 

[PenelopeTitsDrop]

I am sorry to conclude that I think she will be found not guilty.

DO I think she killed children. Yes I do. But proving she did is another matter.

I agree except for the insulin deaths.

For those asking what will it take for people to decide...probably another five months and hearing the rest of the prosecution and all the defence evidence?

If this was anyone here's kid on the stand, who had pleaded not guilty, you would understandably be thinking it's not looking good at the moment. But would you really want the jury to call guilty beyond reasonable doubt at the moment, or would you want the defence to be heard?

If people are completely happy to call it now, what's the actual point of someone having a defence? I don't get it.

Edit: and whoever it was who thought it was ok to use the article snippet, about a poor dead baby being bathed, to have a laugh about "very bad luck" - just fucking ouch

 

[friedeggontoast]

To go back to the 'luck of the draw' then, wouldn't it be incredibly lucky for LL to have a Consultant write a death off as something other than suspicious? She must have been wringing her hands at her good luck with that one.

I don’t know what answer you were expecting from me but yes, if she’s guilty she was incredibly lucky to be working on a low standard ward.

It aided her killings to go on as long as they did.

 

[raspberryjuice]

“Child E was breathing by himself, requiring a little supplementary oxygen, and therefore 'could have as many cuddles as they [the mum and Child E] wanted'.”

Baby E was doing so well

 

[SamPam]

I have to agree with the memory box, my sister had a stillbirth and couldn't bear to see the baby once born. She was told that photographs had been taken with footprints, and they would remain in her file if she ever wanted to see them.
Obviously makes it worse though if LL is guilty and she was the one putting together the memory box.
I couldn't even begin to imagine the hurt of them knowing she'd also bathed the baby.

 

[Weeder]

I think there's a lot of interpretation of tone going on here.
From a presumption of innocence saying something along the lines of 'there wasn't much I can do' is acceptable and I expect quite a few medical staff have said it.
Going back a bit.. The Q word is used constantly, I wouldn't be reading in to that either.
I think it's easy to make snap judgements but now things are panning out I feel like I'm likely to be fence sitting until at least after the defence case. There's too many holes and questions and medical anomalies for my satisfaction personally.

I was fairly convinced that by the coincidence argument and her presence but now I'm not even convinced about the cause of deaths.
What a difficult time for the jury.

I don’t think it’s to do with ‘kicking up a stink’.

There are several posters who are completely *dominating* this whole thread and tone of conversation. Any deviation from the pitch fork *must be guilty* is met with sarcasm and distain, right away creating an unpleasant atmosphere.

It’s useless to say ‘it’s totally fine to think how you think’ and then proceed to type a huge explanation of all the reasons you’re *definitely* wrong.

Could not agree more.
I'm ingnoring tbh. I like airing each prosecution argument and picking holes. That is literally all I am doing and I'll do the same with the defense. I'm finding that any conversation of the finer points is shut down by the guilty voters and some of their rhetoric is very vehement. They misunderstand my motives and others.

It's a shame we're finding it difficult to chit chat. I think they're ignoring me because everything I raise causes a row, even though it's just musings.. Like the stuff around baby's mouth. Could be anything.. I've heard nothing about amount, persistance, age of blood , consistency etc and I would not ever say 'bleeding from the mouth' because that implies active bleeding.

The attack rhetoric by the prosecution as well..
Absolutely unfair I feel.

 

[IGiveUp22]

I actually admire those that are unsure/waiting for all the evidence because I’ve not been able to do that but at least I’m aware of that so I’m consciously trying to question things myself.
I do think we’re not getting the full picture so maybe a lot of these questions some of us have they’ve actually been answered.
Also, the whole memory box thing - I think the parents obviously trusted the hospital & LL (why wouldn’t you…they’re the experts) so believed they did all they could to save their baby. Likewise, if they’re told a PM wouldn’t give them anything (I think is wrong IMO) & would delay they taking the baby home, something they were so close to doing, I can understand why they didn’t insist. I think when these parents were told by police it was believed the babies death was intentional that’s when they’ve thought back to things & thought “hold on, I never even gave her permission to do that memory box” I don’t doubt they’re grateful for it as they have that of their baby but once you know what she’s accused of, it definitely gives it a more sinister spin.
I’ll be interested to hear the defence regarding this baby definitely. I’m wanting to know more about this bleeding & what could cause it etc & if there would be signs of this.