Lucy Letby Case #3

?

  • Guilty

    Votes: 489 58.0%

  • Innocent

    Votes: 19 2.3%

  • Unsure

    Votes: 335 39.7%
  • Total voters
    843
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Order Thread by Most Liked Posts

Lucyxxxx

Thanks for the new thread could you please put a poll? I would if I could?
 
Reactions: 3
L

Lackofimagination

Can’t quote it now because the threads locked but @Lucyxxxx its a reply to your comment about thinking she’s the scape goat. I think the opposite! I don’t know why but I think she’s done this. It’s the digging up her garden for me why on earth would they do that
 
Reactions: 25
C

Cosytidy

For me I’m still thinking there are 2 hurdles to overcome to prove guilt.
1. That the deaths/attempt were an event of deliberate harm, not natural or accidental.
2. That only LL could have been responsible for these incidents of harm.
 
Reactions: 14

Lucyxxxx

I honestly think it was for show, not the entire search but the extraness of it. Gardens get dug for bodies, I doubt they were looking for bodies of the babies in her garden. Makes her look guilty in the public eye 'they wouldn't be searching for nothing'. Just my opinion of course and I could be wrong but I cant shake off this feeling she hasn't done this.
 
Reactions: 14
L

Lackofimagination

In my head I think she may of had a loss herself and that’s what’s potentially damaged her mentally and she may of buried her own baby in her garden. Maybe twins. And then parents of twins she didn’t see good enough she tried or did hurt the babies.. just my wild opinion
 
Reactions: 47
C

CoffeeandCookies

I agree that we haven’t seen real evidence that isn’t circumstantial yet and I’m unsure what the evidence will be. The prosecution will introduce a doctor who says that “baby x died from having air forcibly placed in their system”
But as they’ve said this is difficult to prove 100%
Defence will introduce another doctor who says “baby x could have died due to air forcibly in their system or they could have died due to…or I can’t be 100% certain”
And neither prosecution or defence doctor can be 100% sure of how said baby died.
So what does the jury do with that?
As for the scapegoat theory. Who is setting her up? One person? The entire hospital trust? They’re prepared to ruin a woman’s life and have her branded a baby murderer to hide their own failings? I’m not sure I buy this either it would take a huge conspiracy potentially or if it is one person they would have to be a psychopath themselves to do this to someone
 
Reactions: 16
C

crumpets2

It’s absolutely mental to think of the scapegoat theory.. and the lengths potentially gone through to make it happen. Whistle blowing is encouraged but renowned for causing problems in the NHS..
 
Reactions: 10
M

MrsJones83

Devil’s advocate here - could she argue that being in those groups and seeing from a more real parent’s view (how often do you hold it together in front of professionals and then let go when you’re on your own) could impact her nursing and help her to deal with the families
 
Reactions: 5

catlady29

I don't think they'd have dug the garden for show, I think they'd have to have a pretty solid reason and justification for doing such a thing, however I also don't think they have dug for bodies, perhaps looking for buried evidence, maybe a neighbour has reported unusual activities in the garden, maybe she'd Google searched something related to burying something, all v strange. Still firmly on the fence myself.
 
Reactions: 29

MrsDimSum

I thought I was going mad as I couldn’t find this anywhere else. But I am struggling to understand why the insulin has been a poisoning with synthetic insulin when it’s documented that the baby was given insulin via syringe for high blood glucose. Ok they say a tiny amount but it would always be a tiny amount for a tiny child? If the baby had already received insulin via injection why would the ‘alleged’ second dose have to be hidden in a bag and therefor diluted down?

 
Reactions: 5
C

Cosytidy

I don’t but into the scapegoat theory as it would mean 3 independent organisations (NHS, police & CPS) colluding together.
would the NHS want to scapegoat her if there had deaths that they hadn’t acted on? Maybe. But I don’t believe that would hold up under scrutiny from the police & then CPS.
Just from what we’ve heard I believe it’s sufficient evidence to bring the case to court for a jury to decide. No conspiracy or scapegoat necessary.
 
Reactions: 41

Lucyxxxx

One thing about professionals. They are birds of a feather and they flock together. They can and do single people out for terrible things, of this magnitude? Maybe not? Would I put it past them fully? No.
 
Reactions: 20
M

MrsJones83

good spot. How can they be sure that the child wasnt given an over dose during the actual treatment?
 
Reactions: 6

Its_Me

I’m the same. My gut feeling is she’s guilty, always has been since it all came about, I’ve never looked at her and thought aw she doesn’t look like she could do that. She looks like a smug bitch to me and I can definitely see being the hero nurse as a motive. But I’m prepared for my mind to change.

 
Reactions: 35

gummy-bear

One part of me hopes she is guilty because I can’t imagine how fucked up her life will be after this if she’s innocent. I also think it would add closure for those poor poor families. But really there’s no winners here, awful situation
 
Reactions: 22
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Menu
Log in
Register