Lucy Letby Case #73

[O'lee]

"Both babies made a full recovery" Baby F has learning difficulties, you lying bastards

 

[Tilly Kister]

It's really pissing me off that people keep reiterating "she was so normal" Wtf was normal about her? A single woman in her 20s whose besties were all married women in their 40s & 50s. With a bedroom full of stuffed Disney characters who holidayed with her mum & dad three times a year & had them over to her place most weekends she wasn't on rota.

As far as we can tell she's never had a boyfriend unless you count the (also middle aged) married doctor she was obsessed with and who bought a property backing onto a babies' cemetery when her career was supposedly dedicated to keeping babies out of those.

They mean she's white and middle class and not exactly a munter don't they?

 

[I'm not a robot]

With no disrespect, to just be clear she's worked in healthcare and has regularly seen severely ill and deceased children before, she's going to be desensitised to it. She would have also have had thorough training about bereavement/eolc, she is not unique. She had also been in a cell for four years before. She might be on medication to help her get through the trial.

Healthcare professionals are often desensitised about their work. If anyone's ever known someone that works in something medical or police, you'll know how one of the ways they deal with traumatic events is by pretending that they're completely normal.

I've worked as a medic for over 20 years and have of course developed coping mechanisms in order to be effective in the immediate traumatic situation. After the event is massively different, and I would be horrified to be described as desensitised. Some of my colleagues who are masters at black humour immediately after a trauma, are also the ones who have the most severe PTSD. The black humour is to get them through the rest of the shift without breaking down.
I would also like to add, that despite us all being able to find humour in some of the most horrific situations, I have never known it to occur in the instance of the death of a child/baby. That is the one situation that is completely off-limits and is something you never get used to, however often it occurs.

 

[#notanadad]

None of their arguments stand up either when you think about it logically. The babies died because the unit was understaffed - OK so was it only understaffed on the shifts LL worked? The babies died because of outbreaks of infections - OK so why did none of the babies show symptoms of infection? The babies died because they were SO premature - OK so why did the death rate not reflect AT ALL what would be expected for NICU? Not to mention the fact that some of the babies were almost ready to go home so not exactly tiny or fragile. It’s embarrassing and raking up these articles again and again must be torture for the parents.

 

[O'lee]

Far from being ghoulish, I have a serious, mature interest in the functioning of the criminal justice system and so have most of the other members of the public I've met in the public gallery. Having started off going to the first Letby trial last year, I've been to a good few more cases since. The only other murder trial I've been to was the Brianna Ghey case, the rest have involved no death at all- couple of terrorism cases*, drugs importation conspiracies etc

I think more people should go to their local Crown Court and see what happens, it's a serious eye opener

*One of said terrorism cases, the lad on trial performed as badly in the witness box as Letby did

 

[ImDavidBrent]

I’m only convinced of her guilt because I followed the trial and listened to all the facts. There was no bias
Before the first trial, I simply couldn’t believe that someone could be capable of doing such a thing especially when her photo was on the news.
And I’m interested in true crime and this is one of the most shocking and abhorrent crimes of my lifetime. I don’t think it’s odd that people are interested in it.
Most of the threads on here are filled with knowledgeable, passionate people, interested in what they’re discussing. If you’re not really interested in it that’s fine; but I think it’s unfair to come on and call people who attended court and those who have studied the evidence ghoulish and basically being too invested.

You can be undecided that’s fine. If you were invested you’d have looked into the evidence and followed the trial.

I’m going to pop onto a thread I’m not really interested in now and tell the people on it that they’re too invested, but I’m not and then leave. Odd.

 

[Ghostranch]

Find these threads quite interesting, there has always been a strong ‘guilty’ bias in the regular posters here. I’m not sure I recall anyone being convinced by the trial I feel there was a strong confirmation bias in the presented evidence and if in this happened ‘pro guilty’ forum I could see the same in a more ‘NG’ leaning environment as the evidence was all circumstantial.

Strange how the NG camp are all describe as ‘nutters’ essentially when the pro-guilty camp had its only band of very dedicated followers e.g I can’t imagine going to court of trial I’m not related to directly. There’s something slightly ghoulish about it and the level of investment (aware how hypocritical I am by posting on this thread now).

I personally have been undecided throughout of her guilt and I think I would struggle to find her ‘guilty beyond reasonable doubt’ if I was on the jury. I honestly don’t feel I have a ‘camp’ I am truly undecided it’s not that I feel she is innocent more that I am not convinced by the evidence presented of her guilt.

I was convinced by the trial. I couldn't believe someone could do something so despicable to tiny babies so thought there must have been some horrible mistake. I started to change my mind after Dr Andreas Marnerides' evidence for baby A. Then I was further convinced by the huge amount of evidence against her and her own testimony on the stand.

The NG camp are nutters because they believe she is being scapegoated, which is just ludicrous. One of them threatened to "shoot up" the court. They believe the NY Times article was suppressed by the prosecution because it has "new evidence" that could exonerate her. And they refuse to acknowledge all the evidence against her. They are batshit crazy.

 

[sebanna]

With no disrespect, to just be clear she's worked in healthcare and has regularly seen severely ill and deceased children before, she's going to be desensitised to it. She would have also have had thorough training about bereavement/eolc, she is not unique. She had also been in a cell for four years before. She might be on medication to help her get through the trial.

Healthcare professionals are often desensitised about their work. If anyone's ever known someone that works in something medical or police, you'll know how one of the ways they deal with traumatic events is by pretending that they're completely normal.

She was a nurse working in a level 2 NNU, she really shouldn't have been regularly seeing babies die. The NNU at work is a level 2 and about the same size as Chester, no baby has died there for years, deaths are really unusual. If a baby is very ill it is transferred to a level 3 unit but the vast majority survive. The level of deaths and near deaths collapses, at COCH was very abnormal.

 

[Tofino]

https://archive.is/m3jBT

It's sad if people are leaving the NHS because they are scared they could be found guilty of something they haven't done.

Lucy hasn’t been found guilty of something she hasn’t done though
---
If you don’t want to get convicted of murdering babies then, I don’t know, perhaps don’t murder babies?

 

[Tofino]

Here we go again. Fed up of hearing all these idiots going on about how she’s not guilty. They must have sat through a totally different trial to the rest of us.

They didn’t sit through the trial. That’s the main problem.

 

[kikixxxxx]

They have completely skimmed over the fact the suspicious deaths and collapses followed her from night shifts to day shifts? They have COMPLETELY failed to mention it at all and just went straight to when she was taken off the ward completely, the unit was downgraded and the deaths stopped
That’s actually disgraceful. It’s so misleading

 

[Liverbird2003]

The level of interest in the whole case to me goes beyond what I would consider healthy/normal for some. Never said anything about defending her.

I've been very interested in it, I'm a midwife and I care for women whose babies are on the neonatal unit. It feels very close to home for me. I can't understand how someone could hurt or kill their patient, especially one so vulnerable as a baby, pre term babies at that.

 

[O'lee]

A year today since the end of the first trial, a very poignant day for everyone involved in this horrific case

 

[Tofino]

Only Letby knows if she's done it. I don't know. You don't know. The jury don't know. Everyone has an opinion and people could be right, but might also be wrong.

I know she’s done it. The evidence is there. I’m sorry if you don’t understand it.
---

Gosh yes you are right. After a massive police investigation, two trials, one of which lasted for months, and piles of evidence presented by the prosecution and virtually none by the defence, who can possibly say? Maybe she did, maybe she didn't, it's a total mystery....

It’s madness isn’t it. I’d have more respect for the doubters if they could just admit they were struggling to understand the evidence that resulted in her conviction. Rather than pretend there was no evidence and the jury’s verdicts were plucked out of thin air.

 

[MmmB777]

I know she's done it. The prosecution knew she did it. The jury knew she did it. The judge knew she did it. That's why she's locked up for life. The evidence against her is all there.

I did it on purpose.
Even Lucy knows she did it

 

[LittleMy]

She’s a cold, cruel bitch who only wept on the stand for herself. She deserves everything she gets but imo it’ll never be enough.

 

[MmmB777]

I know both medics and police officers and they always talk sensitively about traumatic events and are effected, not emotionless and cold.

I’ve said before my close family member has done expert witness work and I’ve now banned them from doing any more cases where children were involved. They worked the big Pring case that was in the news last year. It absolutely takes it out of people. I agree that thankfully some people are able to do this kind of work and face tragedies and awfulness that many of us can’t.
But again, Letby’s emotionless display in court for anyone except herself is just a piece of a large puzzle. She was emotional and cared so much about all the babies “she carries with her in her head” to be searching them up in the middle of the night but with the parents sat right in front of her she was petulant and emotionless whilst discussing things like the horrific deaths of baby I and the triplets. None of it ever adds up. Because she’s not a real human. She’s a bland mirage of a human with an utterly evil core.

 

[IGiveUp22]

I was a bit different, I came to follow the trail because even before it, I believed she’d done it. My reason for this was my previous policing background.
However, what I did do, was follow the trial with an open mind. I was really really “looking forward” (couldn’t think of a better term) to the defence. I wanted to hear medical experts counter the overwhelming medical evidence presented by the prosecution. But they didn’t bring any.
Any open mindedness I had ended when letby took the stand herself. I genuinely think, although I thought the medical evidence was overwhelming, if she hadn’t taken the stand, the verdict on some counts may have well been either NG or hung. But she sealed her own fate in my opinion.
I still had the hope that afterwards, the defence would call some experts. I even said on here they’d have to be bloody brilliant to change my view at that point…but they brought a plumber. That quite frankly, added absolutely nothing evidentially. Then they rested.

As others have mentioned, a lot of people on here at the start came with the view that she was innocent. But after following so closely, by the end, most were convinced of her guilt…maybe not on every count but I’d say every one believed she didn’t the insulin poisoning so then the question begs, if you think she is guilty of that, is it such a reach that she did the others too? I would seriously recommend reading the wiki, the daily court reports, the daily mail podcast and the YouTube videos which include the transcripts from court. You also have to appreciate a lot of the evidence was only heard by those present as it was too much to report absolutely everything in the detail it was presented to the jury. Plus, id also recommend looking up other health care serial killers and the pencil theory and then re assess.
It’s fine if you’re still not convinced of her guilt, but please don’t bash the posters on here for being confident she is guilty

 

[Aberscot]

The Murder Sheet have just released a podcast, the crimes of convicted serial killer Lucy Letby, a conversation with Jessica Cash.
( sorry don’t know how to link it). I am listening to it just now ( they have done brilliant ones for the Delphi murders]
However, on there Facebook page they have mentioned @Tofino wiki as below…


Y'all, there have been so many lovely comments today about my interview about twice-convicted 7-child murderer Lucy Letby with KevinÁine Greenlee, and I appreciate them all so much. So firstly, thank you - and there's something I wanted to address about the case that hadn't come out when we recorded.

Content warning for the following: baby death, attempted murder

In simple terms, there was an error with the door swipe data regarding Baby K at the first trial - the jury at the first trial were told a nurse had left the ward at 3.47am, 3 minutes before Dr Ravi Jayaram went in and saw Letby standing over Baby K while Baby K desaturated with her breathing tube dislodged.

The jury at the first trial could not reach a verdict on the charge, and Letby was retried and convicted. At the retrial the prosecution corrected this: in actual fact, the nurse had *returned* at 3.47am.

This has been presented by Letby's defenders as a huge blow to the prosecution's case: in fact, it is not. When the nurse returned, in her absence the breathing tube had been dislodged while Letby was looking after Baby K without anyone else present, and Dr Ravi Jayaram was treating her.

All this mistake does, in practice, is to move the timeline slightly earlier - Dr Jayaram was off by a few minutes. Nothing more, nothing less.

More than happy to answer any questions - and the Tattle Wiki linked in the episode notes is *phenomenal* for information.
---


It was so good, totally dismissed the New York article, brought up so many things we have discussed on here.
Even called her beige

 

[Naffdoff]

I have followed the case from the first arrest and could not let myself believe someone could be so evil. I was convinced she was innocent and this was a case of premature babies not receiving good care. However, I then listened to all the DM podcasts, read these threads and watched the crimescene2 courtroom videos. I attended court a couple of times. I do have links to her defence team who all tow the party line of her innocence but I am 100% convinced she is guilty. I think she is a grief whore who did this for kicks. Anyone who thinks she ordinary and doesn’t fit the bill of a serial killer needs to watch the Pat Brown video on YouTube. Anyone continuing to support her needs to be ashamed of themselves and concentrate on the abhorrent acts this pos has inflicted on all of these families