Lucy Letby Case #3

[cee-bee]

I asked the same question on the last thread; why wasn’t a thorough investigation started immediately when these incidents happened, all staff removed even, until they ascertained it wasn’t deliberate!!!! Babies being pumped with air to suffocate them, babies found profusely bleeding what the actual fuck! And not one person was pulled in? No one called an immediate investigation? To me, she did it, she’s guilty, but the whole disgusting hospital is to blame for letting a killer run free like this for so long!!!!

I think part of the difficulty was, it didn’t occur to most people that someone would want to kill an innocent baby on purpose. LL is describe as a bubbly, nerdy, sweet woman. I know I’d never point her out as a serial killer in a line up.

hindsight is wonderful, what is a clear pattern now probably wasn’t as clear then.

she allegedly started murdering babies in March 2015 and up until July 2016. An independent inquiry was called (not sure when exactly) and police were involved by May 2017 with LL being arrested for the first time in July 2018.

So it looks like it took them about a year to clock what was happening - and the way the babies were murdered made it difficult to detect or notice.

cold comfort I guess, but I do think the hospital and staff reacted fairly rapidly and probably have saved many more babies. The responsibility of the deaths of those babies lies with their murderer and no one else IMO.

 

[avabella]

i think prospective is gunna be a massive thing in this case, it’s easy looking back at all the signs but at the time it’s hard to call another doctor or nurse out on something you’re not 100% sure of with no proof. he wouldn’t of expected her to be a serial killer of babies

No but he's just said on the record in court that he was concerned enough to go and check on her because he had realised the pattern of babies dying in her care, to then find her standing at the cot and the baby then crashing. So what did he/the hospital do about it after that?

 

[abusyday]

Found him

Dr Ravi Jayaram - Knight Ayton - Representing Exceptional Talent

Dr Ravi Jayaram is a Consultant Paediatrician at the Countess of Chester Hospital. He co-presented the Channel 4’s series Born Naughty? and co-presented the ITV Tonight programme After Lucy Letby: Silence on the Wards? which explored the difficulties faced by doctors trying to raise patient...

knightayton.co.uk

For some reason the fact he’s in the public eye makes me look at him less favourably

But yet because he's in the public eye doesn't make his opinion any less valid

 

[Lackofimagination]

I’m trying very hard to keep a balanced head and be fair. I am a mother so I’m thinking of it from that view, I’ve worked within maternity services so I’m thinking that way but I’m also a woman who grew up in Belfast and people were put against a wall and shot for a hell of a lot less than this. 22 innocent babies and the only consistency is her.

 

[juy7nhio]

Legal aid is long overdue a review and the abuse of it needs to be talked about more in parliament.

Nah. I have worked in LA, we don't have enough of it. It's underfunded to the point of exhaustion, none of us want to work in it anymore because the system has been gradually destroyed by the Tories, and the people who really deserve it don't get it.

 

[cee-bee]

I don’t think that will have had any contribution. Sometimes there is no explanation other than someone’s brain is wired that way, no matter what their upbringing, it’s the same as pedophilia, it doesn’t mean they were abused as a child to become this way as an adult.

someone’s background always plays a big part. Babies are rarely born evil.

of known/convicted serial killers in the world - the overwhelming majority were subject to some form of trauma or abuse in childhood.

people aren’t hardwired wrong - they can have genetic factors that make them predisposed to personality disorders etc but it’s the abuse that creates personality disorders, the dysfunction is a reaction to environmental stressors formed in childhood.

 

[juy7nhio]

Or she was someone who was constantly out and did have a social life.

sorry but a few pictures of her with a drink in hand does not mean she was 'constantly out'. That's the image the tabloids have really wanted to push

 

[bringingdownthebs]

I’m glad I’m not on trial with many of you on the jury, it seems many have decided guilt before hearing both sides of the story.

The prosecution are doing what they are employed to do, make LL look guilty and saying that the poor children that lost their lives were murdered and that there were attempts to murder others. As tragic as the loss of life and permanent disability is from these events, there is the possibility that there are different reasons for the tragic events and we all should keep an open mind.

I hope the jurors keep this in mind and haven’t decided upon guilt already. Regardless of anything else LL deserves a fair trial.

So far much of what has been presented indicates an increased death rate while LL is on shift, correlation does not mean causation though where statistics occur, so do anomalies.

While many of her actions were unprofessional (texting colleagues, Facebook stalking, taking notes home, etc.) these are all things I’m aware of happening in a healthcare setting.

Lastly, if innocent, the deaths of patients (especially babies) may have deeply impacted her deeply, her looking up the family of a patient that passed as soon as she wakes could possibly just show that it was in her mind and she was sad about it.

I appreciate what you’re saying… but there’s clearly a case to answer as 1) she wouldn’t be on trial and 2) an unusual and alarming amount of neonatal deaths wouldn’t have taken place without foul play being involved

 

[MrsJones83]

What’s with all the transferring back and forth between hospitals? Seems quite a regular occurrence. If a baby has improved at the new hospital, wouldn’t it be more beneficial to just keep them there. Surely the transfer itself is a risk?

 

[wishiniwasskinny]

I’m glad I’m not on trial with many of you on the jury, it seems many have decided guilt before hearing both sides of the story.

The prosecution are doing what they are employed to do, make LL look guilty and saying that the poor children that lost their lives were murdered and that there were attempts to murder others. As tragic as the loss of life and permanent disability is from these events, there is the possibility that there are different reasons for the tragic events and we all should keep an open mind.

I hope the jurors keep this in mind and haven’t decided upon guilt already. Regardless of anything else LL deserves a fair trial.

So far much of what has been presented indicates an increased death rate while LL is on shift, correlation does not mean causation though where statistics occur, so do anomalies.

While many of her actions were unprofessional (texting colleagues, Facebook stalking, taking notes home, etc.) these are all things I’m aware of happening in a healthcare setting.

Lastly, if innocent, the deaths of patients (especially babies) may have deeply impacted her deeply, her looking up the family of a patient that passed as soon as she wakes could possibly just show that it was in her mind and she was sad about it.

I do find it strange when people make comments like this. IF I was the jury I wouldn’t be asked for mh verdict after the opening statements. I would hear the remainder of the evidence. As someone else pointed out up thread, we’ll probably change our minds/opinions many times. And that’s ok. Yes, saying you’re perfectly unbiased until you’ve heard everything sounds like the ideal juror but I imagine most are sitting there now with a view or leaning, because they’ve only heard this side and the prosecution are doing what they’re supposed to do. It’s not that you have to be impartial all the way through, but you can’t voice your opinion or make a final decision until all the evidence has been heard..
i do think having a poll at the start of each thread would be a good indicator of how peoples views change throughout the trial.

 

[candyland_]

From reading todays live reporting it’s blazingly obvious that she wanted chaotic shifts and felt bored and unfulfilled by the ‘slow days’. It seems to me that she wanted action packed work days and to be the one swooping in and saving the day. She was a busy body that was constantly involved in the care of babies that didn’t concern her.

 

[CoffeeandCookies]

I know I'm just someone on tattle and its opening arguements so it doesn't matter what I think but the prosecution just ain't selling this to me. I may be being unconsciously bias as my initial hunch has always been scapegoat but I'm just not at all convinced.

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

 

[Tangerine Cat]

I think the defence will really shock us when they uncover other stats from the hospital with such high levels of negligence and failings. I’m expecting so many more cases that Lucy was nothing to do with, I think we’re gonna be really shocked..

And if that’s the case it’s going to cast serious doubts over LL's guilt for me.

Take the incident of that little baby bleeding out a 1/3 of its blood. A PM should have been carried out to determine exactly what happened. If he was murdered it could have been determined then.

TBH today so far it’s looking to me more like the hospital had massive failings

 

[MrsJones83]

Glad to see you here! . This thread is interesting as it’s showing the ability of some to start to question the NHS and the staff. All is not as it seems, as we know. Encouraging though, it’s planting seeds

i find that a bit patronising tbh

 

[Its_Me]

They'd find that through medical records surely? Wild theories aren't going to do anyone any good I don't think.

IF she had a loss and buried them in her garden it wouldn’t be on her medical records.

eta I don’t think this happened though. I think maybe they were looking for things that might have been taken from the hospital or from babies/families themselves.

 

[amb1505]

I think my head just exploded. My birthday is 4th August. WTF does that mean

4th august 4+8=12. Harry was 12 when his mum died. Omg it’s your fault he left the royal family!

 

[e.l.lofthouse]

I get it Lucy, one of my most hated phrases on daughter's reports is 'mum has been reassured'. Mum hasn't, and is now dealing with a hysterical child who doesn't want to ask for help anymore because they think she is mad. It never even occurred to me that we could be sniggered at and judged by 'nosey' staff even after our appointments. I hate the thought of my daughter growing up surrounded by people who treat her like a novelty or a freak show. Being autistic myself, I wish I had never had children.

This makes me so sad. I've never experienced this from a mum POV but as a sister of a brother with aspergers... I've seen the cruelty people throw at children/adults/anyone with ASD. He's 17 now and has just been diagnosed with severe depression. He was badly bullied at school, my mum successfully sued that school as they literally just locked him in a classroom when he had what they called an 'episode' and nobody ever treated him or my mum with dignity, respect or care. Now, he's violent to anyone who goes near him and won't speak any word other than 'no'. All because of judgemental scum.

“The court hears Dr Jayaram did not make a contemporaneous note of his suspicions or the alarm failing to activate”

why not

Exactly. Can't blame THAT on being short staffed.

I get some of it is damning but this... nope. That doctor failed.

Oh yeah I suspect someone's harming little tiny babies - meh not one for the notes.

It's actually proof they failed massively. Even if she's guilty, they still failed.

 

[MrsDimSum]

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

exactly this. It’s these little bits and the fact they are SO SURE.

like with child G and the machine. The Dr couldn’t say 100% if the machine was on or not when he attended but somehow the are 100% sure that Lucy switched it off?

 

[MmmB777]

For me, I am not taking the Facebook searches, card or any other snippet we have so far to lean towards guilt in isolation. I’ve seen people comparing it to nice nurses they have kept in contact with and what’s the difference- well I’d assume none of those people also had enough evidence to get through CPS for killing and attempting to kill lots of babies. I think that’s the key difference ‍
The fb and other creepy shite would all be ok in isolation wouldn’t it but along with everything else I’ve heard it paints a bleak picture. In isolation her being at every one of these unexplained crashes and deaths is not guilt. In isolation the fascination with these children is not guilt. In isolation her appearing to centre herself to these specific children where common symptoms are shown, common patterns, common themes, common that she’s not supposed to be as involved and controlling their care when not really necessary. In isolation the combination of her saying she cannot remember or has no reason to be looking up these specific children and yet does so and has their paperwork in her house doesn’t suggest guilt. In isolation the fact that colleagues were not just suspicious of the sudden decline of otherwise ‘as well as they could have been and progressively getting better’ babies but also at times specifically of Lucy Letby. In isolation the fact they made rapid recoveries once away from her care is not suggestive of guilt. In isolation the patterns of her being around and these very similar unexpected emergency events correlating do not suggest guilt. In isolation expert witness and PMs showing that the most likely cause of death of lots of these babies without consideration of all the above factors involved show that they most likely were caused by air/milk/insulin poisoning do more than likely suggest foul play but not specifically LL. All together I personally feel that is a very strong picture. Of course they could soon be all explained away super easily and she’s the unluckiest nurse ever (not intended to be as sarcastic as it sounds ).

 

[Dexy]

This has made me feel sick

View attachment 1644810

This is the most disturbing thing I’ve read.