My mum died after being a patient at the cancer unit for several years. The nurses watched her funeral via link (during covid) and sent us a card so I to can see how its not weird in that way. The picture taking is weird.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I don’t know how many years Letby has been on remand now, buts it’s a while. If I was her and innocent there is no way I wouldn’t be shooting my shot to put my version of events forward.
O
---
---
---
OFC She denied saying this, and ofc this is one of the examples earlier I wanted an explanation for, so ofc dan didn’t mention it today in his tweets at all
Only bit that I found of interest was her NOT denying there was excess air, but giving an explanation for why it may be there, gulping air alrighty thenNothing much new here as far as I can see.
Lucy Letby trial: Accused nurse wanted to attend baby's funeral
Lucy Letby was asked by police about a condolence card she sent to the baby's family, a court hears.www.bbc.co.uk
---
Yes we later realised a few posts later that LL was band 5
---
I think these are crocodile tears, she’s been caught with O&P and she knows it. Found this part extremely interesting though (at least we know there’s far more in these interviews than we are hearing now too):
---
OFC She denied saying this, and ofc this is one of the examples earlier I wanted an explanation for, so ofc dan didn’t mention it today in his tweets at all
Last edited:
I aren’t going to comment on the stuff of today, I’ve just been following everyone else’s thoughts etc.
The thing I keep coming back to more recently is WHY if she thought there was something wrong on the unit, didn’t she raise concerns herself?
she’s meant to be this really capable nurse but despite acknowledging the deaths are unusual and unexplained, she never raises it.
I can’t think of an explanation for this other than she didn’t want to draw attention to her (alleged) crimes…
The thing I keep coming back to more recently is WHY if she thought there was something wrong on the unit, didn’t she raise concerns herself?
she’s meant to be this really capable nurse but despite acknowledging the deaths are unusual and unexplained, she never raises it.
I can’t think of an explanation for this other than she didn’t want to draw attention to her (alleged) crimes…
Good lord what is that diary?! 
. Thank god tigger and smudge are her cats, was starting to think they were her and NN pet names! Wonder what her prescriptions for 
. Really want to hear the defence now!
. Thank god tigger and smudge are her cats, was starting to think they were her and NN pet names! Wonder what her prescriptions for . Really want to hear the defence now!Attachments
It’s so so inappropriate for a newborn death. They didn’t get a chance to make many smiley memories. She took that from them.
I think she may take the stand. I think the defence may play on the fact the evidence is very much that an expert witness suggests things could have happened and that Lucy was there at the time, but the jury have to be convinced that the two are linked. Other than the doctor coming and seeing Lucy meddling, I'm not sure how the jury can say convincingly it was her... (I mean it definitely was her obviously - I'm camp guilty here). I think she'll stand and just do the same, it wasn't me. I'm nice and kind, cry a lot and demonstrate medical knowledge around certain things. Perhaps there's more happening than we know, but by the time the police were in there's no DNA to prove no-one else touched the fluid bags, or a breathing tube etc it was years later right?
Genuinely worried that she'll get a NG verdict because of the defence being able to get in a scrap of doubt in there, with other experts disagreeing, or BM's random attempts at medical knowledge swaying the jury. I think it's why I'm so engrossed in this trial. Maybe I've watched a few too many court room dramas with dodgy jurors. It actually makes me feel really uncomfortable, this whole case in general. Either she's let off, but guilty without enough evidence or a crappy jury, or she is found guilty and then I think I'll cry at how sad and crappy the whole situation is and that this ever happened at all.
Does anyone else feel that they are watching a film (a really really slow one). I don't mean it disrespectfully, but it still all seems so bloody unreal, I cannot get my head around it!
Sorry for the ramblings....
Peace out
Genuinely worried that she'll get a NG verdict because of the defence being able to get in a scrap of doubt in there, with other experts disagreeing, or BM's random attempts at medical knowledge swaying the jury. I think it's why I'm so engrossed in this trial. Maybe I've watched a few too many court room dramas with dodgy jurors. It actually makes me feel really uncomfortable, this whole case in general. Either she's let off, but guilty without enough evidence or a crappy jury, or she is found guilty and then I think I'll cry at how sad and crappy the whole situation is and that this ever happened at all.
Does anyone else feel that they are watching a film (a really really slow one). I don't mean it disrespectfully, but it still all seems so bloody unreal, I cannot get my head around it!
Sorry for the ramblings....
Peace out
If found NG would she be able to work as a nurse again? Cos that’s a bleepin scary thought
Re: the sympathy card. I have nursed long-term patients who had repeated long admissions over the years who sadly died waiting for transplant. It would be very unusual for an individual staff to send a condolence card to the family, if we ever did it was a large one from the entire ward. I find it weird and creepy to individually send a card to someone you have met once or twice, and narcissistic to think your words would bring them any comfort in that specific situation.
i don't think so cause even if innocent she has broke a lot of NMC rules
100% if baby I’s mum said ‘yes Lucy was very chatty and friendly and we got to know her well’ then it would change things slightly but it was basically the exact opposite of that.
I've heard people say they're worried about the jury having to take a leap of faith because there's no evidence of a connection and that the evidence is all circumstantial. I personally don't think that's the case at all. In fact, if you look at it the other way, it would take a much, much bigger leap of faith to say it wasn't LL who killed those babies. There's evidence she was the nurse assigned/involved in the care of each and every one of those babies; she's was at the cot of many just before or at exactly the time that they deteriorated suddenly and collapsed; she was the last person to administer a feed/mediation to some of them just before they collapsed; multiple experts (not just one) have ruled out a (natural) medical explanation for why the babies would've collapsed, and many more (including some very experienced experts) have said there was evidence of air embolism, splinted diaphragm, intentional and severe liver damage; there's laboratory analysis conclusively pointing to deliberate synthetic insulin poisoning; a confession note saying "I killed them on purpose"; multiple witnesses saying she made gauche comments like "he's not leaving here alive, is he?" and other comments and inappropriate behaviour to grieving parents. One would have to in effect try to deny and/or explain all of this evidence/testimony away to show that it's just bad luck/conspiracy against Lucy/medical experts are wrong, etc. BM would have a mountain to climb, and even then, I can't see him pulling it off. The jury will have enough sense to see that if all the evidence (and there's a lot of it) points towards her, then it must be her because that's the simplest, most plausible, common-sensical and rational explanation.
I agree. I think is a very odd verse to choose for a baby whose short life has probably been any further for their family than full of smiles.
I worry about who may be on the jury. And what they understand about reasonable doubt. You don’t have to have 100% proof. You can have some doubt. But it needs to be a reasonable doubt to find her NG. And beyond reasonable to find her guilty.
I really liked what pathologist Dr Andreas Marnerides said to Ben Myers the other week. I’ll copy below. I’ve posted it before but if you consider his analogy he’s using probability and possibility (just because somethings possible doesn’t mean it’s probable). It’s a similar thing with doubt - just because it’s possible doesn’t mean it’s reasonable.
Mr Myers said: “So you don’t accept the proposition that forceful CPR could cause this injury in general terms, do you agree it cannot be categorically excluded as a possibility?”
Dr Marnerides replied: “We are not discussing possibilities here, we are discussing probabilities.
“When you refer to possibilities, I am thinking for example of somebody walking in the middle of the Sahara desert found dead with a pot and head trauma.
“It is possible the pot fell from the air from a helicopter. The question is ‘is it probable?’ and I don’t think we can say it is probable.”
I always remember the discussions during star hobsons trial. Because there were two people in the house (Frankie and Brockhill) and both denied assaulting Star, people were worried Brockhill would be found NG because there was no direct evidence of who was where in the house, just their own testimonies. In theory it’s possible Frankie could have done it. But when you weighed up all the other evidence before and after the event, it became unreasonable to think it was anyone but Brockhill.
I think they are referring to MT as band 6 in that article as well!Are they not referring to MT in that? Interesting she left for two and a half years then came back.
Lots in that article that you forget. Absolutely prolific garnering of attention. Scores of texts. Also a reminder that at baby A she’s told she’s having a bad run
Soooo what do we think will happen tomorrow? Do prosecution have any more evidence and do they do a summing up at this stage even though they do a closing statement after defence have finished?
I’m really feeling the anticipation of the ‘will she won’t she take the stand’ uncertainty at the moment!
I’m really feeling the anticipation of the ‘will she won’t she take the stand’ uncertainty at the moment!
Photo 10. Classic "crying chair"
There's no court tomorrow. Back on Thursday.
She might well take the stand for a chance at a browse on the Matalan website for witness box attire.
- Status