See there was a baby where she wasn't even there, which makes me feel like the prosecution are just forcing things to fit (there are other things but that's one that sticks in my mind). I don't quiet know whether she's a scapegoat or police have become suspicious about her and just gone in tunnel vision? The attempted murder charges I do find a bit far fetched from what we've heard. The twins O and P I believe, I find it odd from what we've heard 2 little boys closely biologically related are the only ones we've heard about suffering from liver injuries? I do think she has questions to answer obviously but this to me what the prosecution says just doesn't quiet "fit" the way you'd expect something to if it made sense and was a true reflection of what had happened.
- 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 wonder if the parents and visitors on the ward could tell they were understaffed and struggling or weather it was like ducks on water seems fine but going crazy underneath.
I could understand that theory if the cause of death for all of the babies were something that could be explained as a natural occurrence. But so many of the babies died from external interference. Therefore if LL didn’t do it, someone else did.
The prosecution are alleging that the babies died from external interference. This hasn’t been proven as fact as yet.
Right. I also don’t think the liver injuries are being presented as she has physically directly injured their livers- I think that medical experts will be showing that they form a part of the likelihood of interference such as air embolism. The prosecution have said if I recall correctly that on some or one occasion it could be a result of cpr but there are others where that’s highly unlikely or not possible. The defence have also said it could be cpr related of course. Either way I don’t think anyone claiming she killed them by inuring their livers.
Science fact and science fiction: The case of Colin Norris – The Justice Gap
www.thejusticegap.com
This is obviously biased but explains some of the doubts about Norris’s conviction. I thought this might help illustrate where some of the “scapegoat” theories are coming from - basically Norris is saying nobody murdered four of the five. There’s also a similarity with the Letby case when you see how long it took for Norris to come to trial. I’m making no inference from that.
The police are extending the investigation which means they’ll be going back over any patients she’s looked after and anything suspicious. I can’t get over people thinking she’s innocent. Like seriously 1 bad death with a couple of incidents of malpractice or poor practice does not end up in court like this. She’s harmed and killed these poor babies. Absolutely awful and it’s only going to get worse as the evidence comes out as to what and how she actually did it and who she was.
A baby dying from insulin poisoning is external interference
@Tangerine Cat
I’ve added the post it note image to the wiki now by embedding the tweet from Judith Moritz. It’s barely taken any space up compared to attaching a proper image. Hopefully this works for people. I’ve also added a subheading so people can find it easily.
I’ve added the post it note image to the wiki now by embedding the tweet from Judith Moritz. It’s barely taken any space up compared to attaching a proper image. Hopefully this works for people. I’ve also added a subheading so people can find it easily.
Last edited:
This is what they need to prove for me. For example when they did the post-mortem on Baby A they didn’t know what the cause of death was, but there was no suggestion of any foul play. They didn’t mention an air embolism; or even that the cause of death could be due to negligence, it was just unexplained. But now they’re looking for it they decide it was because of an air embolism. Lots of deaths could be caused by many factors - it doesn’t mean it’s true. From what we’ve heard so far, there is no physical evidence that LL or anyone else caused the death in that instance.
It is; but in this case this has yet to be proven as deliberate or fact. It is again what the prosecution are alleging happened.
Judith Moritz isn’t in court today but Nick Garnett is and is tweeting.
I think people really underestimate the pressure the Police are under to get a result in high profile cases. This can and does lead to miscarriages of justiceI’m firmly in the unsure camp!
Just thinking about the Colin Norris case - he was convicted of murdering elderly patients in Leeds. His supporters have campaigned for him saying that the police made the evidence fit the hypothesis rather than draw conclusions from the evidence (I haven’t explained this very well, hopefully you know what I mean!)
Colin Norris: serial killer nurse conviction sent to court of appeal | Criminal Cases Review Commission | The Guardian
New evidence calls into doubt 2008 case of man known as ‘angel of death’ for four murders in Leedsamp.theguardian.com
I think for the prosecution to successfully prove the charges against Letby they’ll be working from the “open mind” end of things? As in, the ONLY explanation is that she did something malicious to each baby with the intent of causing death.
It’s very complex and you’d assume some of the charges have “better” evidence than others. I wonder if it’ll be a majority verdict rather than unanimous and if she’ll have a mixed bunch of verdicts. I think that will be awful for families but the jury have to make the decisions they believe are right. I don’t envy anyone involved, it’s an awful case.
What evidence do you think there needs to be to show it’s deliberate or a fact? Will you be open to accepting it was? Just genuinely wondering. Or as another poster thought recently- is it being used by several medical experts to now ‘fit’ Letby as the murderer like the discovery of evidence that most likely points to air embolism. That would be intentional in order to make her look guilty which would be a very serious crime and a heinous thing to do. X
It’s a fact that the baby died from insulin poisoning, no?
Whether it was caused by LL or someone else, it happened
Thank you for all your work on the wiki, it is amazing
I think it’s offensive that people keep referring to miscarriage or baby loss as a trigger to her starting to kill babies.
I’ve had miscarriages and I know people that have lost babies and they do not go on to become murderers.
It is highly likely that if guilty, she is a psychopath and acted in cold blood and there was no trigger.
I’ve had miscarriages and I know people that have lost babies and they do not go on to become murderers.
It is highly likely that if guilty, she is a psychopath and acted in cold blood and there was no trigger.
I think people should be able to speculate openly without fear their speculation "may offend". Try not to take anything personally.
Things like that do trigger though. Obviously noone is saying everyone who has had a miscarriage becomes a baby murderer
Im not taking it personally. If people want to pathologise, murdering a baby after having a miscarriage would demonstrate feelings of rage and anger, and loss.
If she is guilty then she is a serial killer who has gone on a killing spree, and therefore most likely a psychopath who feels nothing. Psychopaths don’t usually have a reason for their behaviour, is it is in their biological make up.
- Status