Lucy Letby Case #38

[Deeznutslol]

The defence must have full access to all the medical evidence and have shown them to a number of experts, if no one can offer a natural explanation then foul play must have occurred by someone. There are very few baby killers so unlikely to be multiple people leaving the person that was there for every occurance and had the confession post it note.

The thing is, Letby and her defence have already agreed that foul play has been committed (at least for the insulin poisonings anyway, they agree that insulin couldn’t have been added to the TPN bag by accident) so they can’t even suggest a natural explanation anyway. Someone did it deliberately, so the only thing they can do is argue it wasn’t Lucy, but if it wasn’t Lucy, then who was it?
They’ve not come up with anyone else because there isn’t anyone else it could have been.

 

[tay65]

Yeah I don’t think she did spell it correctly. Again, I just think that is a totally huge moment if you consider what she has tried to claim about those sheets and her searches. Yes good point @craftypudding about her saying she had a good memory for them!! It doesn’t mean you’d remember how to spell an unusual name would it! I wonder if it was baby M’s parents as I have a feeling mum is maybe of non English heritage (she said she was praying to ‘my god’ ). That means keeping those handovers served a purpose. It served a purpose for reliving it for her. They weren’t in her garage or attic, they were under her bed. They were marked keep. They were moved house.
First she claimed not to have any, then maybe she had a few handovers, then she had to accept she had hundreds, then she had to claim she didn’t realise and they just accumulated, then she claimed she didn’t know how to dispose of them, then she claimed not to have a shredder yet it was used and one of only a few items in her room, then she said “ideally” it would be in confidential waste (not ideal- legally has to be), then she claimed not to know the policy, then she claimed on the stand that she had a problem with throwing away paper, then after saying they weren’t significant she called them a collection, then she used language like “they came home with me” as if the paperwork chose to, then she claimed that the documents were still held confidentially in her house and her parents house, then she admitted shredding bank statements but that they’re at the forefront of her mind (careful with her own sensitive data but reckless with others), then after saying handovers aren’t special or memorable she had to admit to having her first one kept away in a special box, then she had to concede that Doctor U would have hold of the paper towel that he used at 8:30 and yet she stayed an hour late and somehow managed to acquire it and keep it under her bed for years. Then you have to believe somebody so worried about being redeployed and supposedly following the rules of the investigation and being isolated, looked around that house knowing she had hundreds of illegal patient sensitive data and STILL could not throw it away. Why? too special and too important to her. Filed. Stored. Kept close. Referred to for her pleasure.

There must have been something extra special to her about the ones marked "keep". She kept them all but clearly segregated these.

 

[BearOnChair]

The thing is, Letby and her defence have already agreed that foul play has been committed (at least for the insulin poisonings anyway, they agree that insulin couldn’t have been added to the TPN bag by accident) so they can’t even suggest a natural explanation anyway. Someone did it deliberately, so the only thing they can do is argue it wasn’t Lucy, but if it wasn’t Lucy, then who was it?

Yes if they've said it was foul play they can't now say it's not.
And the defence from that must be lucy didn't do it but there's been so much evidence to say it was her I can't see what trump card they could have.

 

[LittleMy]

I wonder if BNE not questioning her on the on purpose part of the note is because he knows maybe the outcome wouldn't be favourable. I mean we all know she's a massive liar and seems to get caught out constantly but maybe he sees a risk in asking her. She could play on the whole PTSD thing, get people on the jury feeling sorry for her maybe? Or maybe he is aware that BM could make an objection that we wouldn't foresee?
Also could it be much more damning in his closing speech to bring it up where her and her defence don't have the ability to challenge him?

This is what I’ve been thinking- he may be saving it for his closing speech. It would be more powerful then I think.

 

[Tofino]

Are we also meant to believe the defence said ‘oh we won’t bother finding any medical experts to help our defence. Because the burden of proof is on the prosecution. And the jury aren’t allowed to find this damning so we will just say it’s poor care and they will have to believe us’

it’s bull!

(obvs they might actually have someone but I’m arguing about if they don’t end up having anyone)

 

[DellaC]

A case of this magnitude, with so many aspects that they could attempt to defend, they could try to put an alternative explanation by an expert forward and by doing so they may create some reasonable doubt. I thought that was the point?

If I was up on all these charges CLAIMING MY INNOCENCE then I'd want a line of experts around the courthouse backing me up.

If I was Lucifer I would want some kind of psychologist. Someone to attempt to explain the paper hoarding, what that psychologically means other than trophy taking, the notes-how I DID THIS ON PURPOSE doesn't mean exactly what it says.

She's thrown literally 20 professionals under the bus for incompetence. She's even suggested they were culpable of some deaths/injuries. Well if that's the case why aren't they following this up?

If a case of this size doesn't warrant the very best defence response then I don't know what does. But I'm just a Mum from Rammy, what do I know? (The jury are just people too and I think they'll be expecting something, anything)

It's like watching the worst game of tennis ever Poor BNE has no bugger to bat his ball back!

 

[tay65]

I feel bad for laughing at something related to such a horrific case, but Facebook fan club thinking the defence has a load of experts ready that will explain everything and prove she’s innocent

I really hope he doesn't, nothing would change my mind but I would hate to think of the possibility of any of the jury having doubts if they presently think she is guilty.

 

[sebanna]

The thing is, Letby and her defence have already agreed that foul play has been committed (at least for the insulin poisonings anyway, they agree that insulin couldn’t have been added to the TPN bag by accident) so they can’t even suggest a natural explanation anyway. Someone did it deliberately, so the only thing they can do is argue it wasn’t Lucy, but if it wasn’t Lucy, then who was it?
They’ve not come up with anyone else because there isn’t anyone else it could have been.

If the defence admits there was foul play and someone was deliberately harming the babies, there doesn't seem to be much hope for Lucy does there.

 

[Appletiser]

I‘m wondering is she protecting Dr NN?

Wouldn’t she (knowing what she’s come across like) want to throw him under the bus too if he ‘betrayed/abandoned’ her … or does she in her own way care about him so is lying to protect him (even though you’re not meant to lie under oath).
Or is she pretending they were only friends because she felt embarrassed about him rejecting her.

 

[slingo16]

F

Oh I just remembered another part, she did a datix about a bung being missing and it possibly cause an air embolism, a few days after they had called her. Yet in police interview she said she didn’t know what an air embolism was… if you were innocent there just wouldn’t be soooo many contradictions. The truth is the truth however you say it.

Was it made clear in court if LL used the word accidental in her Datix report? the sky reporting seemed to suggest this, and I know I’m repeating myself here but if she has used the word accidental then I really do think that is rather telling.

 

[DellaC]

Thank you. I wouldn't mind hearing BNE summing up but it's difficult to know exactly when that would be so if I go I think I would have to take my chances.

Oh I hope you can make it

 

[Aberscot]

I think she will have some sort of expert speak next week, some expert will come up with another explanation for the insulin ( I can’t find it just now but BM asked her something about insulin this week and how it was they knew baby had been poisoned]
Given that the court is only sitting 2 days next week I think he will have a few more ppl speak and then finish so following week will be summing up and closing statements. Hold tight everyone we are nearly there and hopefully some sort of justice will be served for these poor babies.

 

[Stiltoncheese]

Do you think BM had planned to call his expert on the insulin initially as he said in opening statements but now LL has said in the stand that the insulin was foul play but just not by her, he will not bother calling the witness?

Almost seems silly to call someone who will say it could have got there accidentally if LL has already clearly said she believes it was a deliberate act.

 

[Aberscot]

I think the expert witness will throw shade on the results ,he will give another explanation and say they were wrongly analysed.
If she doesn’t have any would that not give leave to appeal saying she wasnt given a fair trial?

 

[tay65]

you should be absolutely fine I’m sure. I know a lot have only gone for cross exam. I can’t go next week it’s not on mon/Tue and I have one of my babies sports days on wed and the other on Thursday

I think you saw probably the most interesting parts of the trial this week, apart from hopefully the verdict so you're probably glad your sports days are this coming week and not last week. Hope the weather is good for them. My children are in their 30's now but were very much into sports and I spent half my time attending different events. Enjoy.

 

[F1Grid]

I‘m wondering is she protecting Dr NN?

Wouldn’t she (knowing what she’s come across like) want to throw him under the bus too if he ‘betrayed/abandoned’ her … or does she in her own way care about him so is lying to protect him (even though you’re not meant to lie under oath).
Or is she pretending they were only friends because she felt embarrassed about him rejecting her.

I think it's because if she admits she was attracted to him then the 'causing deteriorations so he comes to the nursery' theory is more credible.

If she's not attracted to him then it's less likely. So she's going to bang on that they're just friends.

 

[gigilouxx]

I did think that BNE would bring the I did it on purpose thing up but I think in legal world things are often missed aren’t they

There was a woman near me who’d had her ex beaten to death last year, and I don’t think he’d been very nice to her, potential abuse, which would’ve been a defence but it was never mentioned in court, they just maintained they loved eachother

 

[DellaC]

I think the expert witness will throw shade on the results ,he will give another explanation and say they were wrongly analysed.
If she doesn’t have any would that not give leave to appeal saying she wasnt given a fair trial?

Surely it can't provide opportunity for appeal else they'd all be at it.

Old Bowel must have something up his sleeve. But it was very strange how the Judge worded it wasn't it?

 

[MmmB777]

It just all goes back to the fact she does not have to prove anything. Ok so just a couple of babies where COD is agreed. Will be very interesting to see if they do call experts as indicated in opening and what those experts say.

No of course they don’t have to prove it as such but where does reasonable doubt come from if the insulin is unexplained or the deaths of two healthy triplets.
I feel pretty convinced he will have people. Somebody that says air can develop post mortem. But prosecution expert is extremely knowledgable in this field, published research on it and says the babies air was very unusual. Not just the amount but where. In the main circulatory pathway? In a block all along the spine to the rectum? Right by where a catheter was positioned, right where the exact alleged offence is supposed to have happened (just how it was found at injection site for Beverly Alliitt’s victim of air). So he can bring people but I really don’t see anything he’s mentioned in opening that could break down the case prosecution has presented.

Ultimately the babies that died all had post mortem bar one. They are all rather strange and ambiguous but you could say they offer an alternative already. An alternative alone isn’t reasonable doubt. Every medical murder victim, a victim that dies in hospital at the hands of a murderer that is using drugs/medical paraphernalia to kill, has been given a cause of death unrelated to their murder until that murderer is caught. There will have always been an explanation to begin with. Look at the Danish nurse, they told the victim’s brother he had gone to get the drugs himself and committed suicide out the blue. Insane!

It’s everything else that supports what the medical experts are finding. It’s the witness accounts, parent accounts, the nurses going on a break to find babies suddenly ill, parents having only been there ten minutes before, babies suddenly coming back to life, screaming, blood that’s not been seen before, swelling not experienced before, so, so much and then this creepy awful behaviour and a confession note! How many babies in a career of decades would you expect to die so suddenly without real explanation and how can that be coincidental to her presence every single time. How many babies even cardiac arrest without a then obvious heart condition being found? You have to offer Letby the most incredible unimaginable amount of bad luck and coincidence to be not guilty.

 

[LittleMy]

Just bleeping friends with Dr NN my a!!!
That in itself proves what a lying bleep she is. Him too.
Who signs off texts with love emojis, spends hours late at night chatting to, meeting up for elicit coffees and trips to London with a married man they're "just friends" with.
How many of us here with partners/husbands with joint kids would give their blessing to this tit?
It was secret because at the very least this was an emotional affair at the worst a collision of genitals between the two.
Not the worst crime when compared with multiple killings of neonates but is another moral flaw in the ducked up mess of a human that is Miss Letby.
I hope her prison experience proves to be much for hellish than the torturous deaths she subjected to these innocent children just starting out on what should have been a long life.

My husband would have to retrieve his own balls from his throat if I found out he was swanning about with another woman on secret trips, texting all night, spending time with her at her house and sending texts with bleeping heart emojis.