It's not Letby being talked about there. It's Kristen Gilbert.Haven't heard that one before!
Agreed.Well they don't know anything about suspects do they before they arrest and search homes? That's the point of making an arrest and getting a search warrant. They knew she was a note maker after they searched her house. They say in the Op. Hummingbird documentary that they didn't expect to find so much paper evidence at her home.
Yes, thank you, I should’ve added that on to my post for clarificationIt's not Letby being talked about there. It's Kristen Gilbert.
No is the short answer!Sorry if this has been answered before but just curious, as there was no verdict on some of the attempted murders could she apply for a retrial on these and also due to the extensive media coverage on the trial over 10 months, could this be grounds for a retrial in an attempt to get a lighter sentence? Not clued up on a lot of the law/sentencing/court stuff but did see a few lawyer tiktoks that this might be the case?
Exactly as I said before. What kind of single 25 year old women choses to buy a house that backs onto a cemetery. Immediately a red flag. Also the dig being on the first arrest imo means they can’t have simply missed the notes on the first search. I wonder if her parents have a business premise where she could store thingsFirst. Pretty sure that’s the pics of the tent they put up. Sorry but again when she’s described as so ordinary and not a creepy serial killer… living right next to the baby cemetery fits the bill for creepy serial killer pretty well imo 🫠
Police dig up back garden and search gutters at home of neonatal nurse
Police officers are digging up land around Lucy Letby's home in Chester and searching gutters after she was arrested on suspicion of the murder of 8 babies at the Countess of Chester hospital.www.dailymail.co.uk
Hard agree.The more time goes on, the more the whole notes things frustrate me, because they were literally such an inconsequential piece of information that actually had barely any baring on the case. There was no medical evidence on the post-its, no proper confession, just some random ramblings, that in the end I don't think the jury even considered because they had no reference to the babies.
The notes are a smoking gun, and I wish people would see this.
Anyone else seen this? Looks like there’s even more to Ian Harvey’s action than meets the eye, he even fobbed the parents off. Doesn’t surprise me one bit, that’s what these people always do. The inquiry NEEDS to be statutory.
View attachment 2399121
Sorry if this has been answered before but just curious, as there was no verdict on some of the attempted murders could she apply for a retrial on these and also due to the extensive media coverage on the trial over 10 months, could this be grounds for a retrial in an attempt to get a lighter sentence? Not clued up on a lot of the law/sentencing/court stuff but did see a few lawyer tiktoks that this might be the case?
thank you! Glad to hear thatNo is the short answer!
THE TYPE WHO PROBABLY DRESSES HER CATS IN KITTEN HEELSExactly as I said before. What kind of single 25 year old women choses to buy a house that backs onto a cemetery. Immediately a red flag. Also the dig being on the first arrest imo means they can’t have simply missed the notes on the first search. I wonder if her parents have a business premise where she could store things
Do you actually think anyone here thinks she’s a murderer purely because of her shit fashion sense and her cats?! It was a JOKE to poke fun at the evil demon herself and no-one else. We don’t care if YOU have bad taste in footwear because you haven’t been killing babies. Please learn to take a joke.Some people seem to think that the fact that she wore kitten heels with socks is a sure sign of a "weirdo" and can obviously lead to murder her clothes have been discussed quite a bit along with her psycho eyes etc etc and the fact that she loves her cats all irrelevant to her murderous behaviour.
True.They didn't want her to break bail to re-question her. They wanted to be very careful on the amount of times they brought her in. They also needed to keep momentum. They wanted to fill in the details that mattered, because they didn't want Lucy to stop talking.
Because if they’d have gone round there and she wasn’t there, her mum and dad could’ve easily phoned her and said the police have been again. She could’ve done anythingTrue.
Though I did find myself wondering why, when they went to arrest her the second time at her parents house, were they nervous that she wouldn't be there?
I don't think she should ever be given the opportunity for a public interview.I wonder if she will ever agree to any sort of recorded public interview, i wish now she is guilty and has no chance of ever coming out of jail she would just admit it and give a reason why, as someone with zero involvement in this it is so difficult to understand why, i cant imagine how the parents of the babies / colleagues of hers and investigators feel having absolutely no definitive reason on why she did this
Seconded. What a brilliant man.Dr Ravi for PM! He'd sort the country out
If you start from around thread 2 you'll see a correlation with weekend posts and people dissecting Lucy's crime against fashion.Some people seem to think that the fact that she wore kitten heels with socks is a sure sign of a "weirdo" and can obviously lead to murder her clothes have been discussed quite a bit along with her psycho eyes etc etc and the fact that she loves her cats all irrelevant to her murderous behaviour.
It's a weird thing for a psychopath/sadist to write, and I do believe that is what she is. All the theories about wanting to be the centre of attention, narcissism, Munchausen, Dr NoName etc may have played a secondary role... but to me the main cause is that she is the typical serial killer: a psychopathic sadist who got off on the power she felt ending a human life. The trophies, the Facebook searches, the time she was standing over a dying baby without calling for attention watching them die..., even the way she made the doctors squirm in the mediation meeting, all that is consistent with a psychopathic sadist and less so with the other theories.Who the fuck writes “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough to care for them”? Definitely not an innocent person anyway.
It’s a confession note, there’s no two ways about it. It’s the smoking gun. It was a total golden nugget for the police to find.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?