I’m sorry but how frigging dare they! Especially during the Thirlwall enquiry.
shes guilty as sin you absolute idiotic rum who say otherwise.
I’m just so fed up of these people being given airtime/articles etc.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
shes guilty as sin you absolute idiotic rum who say otherwise.
I’m just so fed up of these people being given airtime/articles etc.
I'll wait until I've seen it and if it pushes the truther lies I'll be on to Ofcom. They won't do anything and they are not properly accountable - so then I'll go to my MP.
C5 uses the Freeview platform paid for out of public money. It should not be used to support a convicted murderer of babies. I don't care about the newspapers and blogs but I'm not having my money paying for this.
Isn't Damien Harry just some random with a grudge against Cheshire Police. They must be desperate for content if they are engaging with. Why are they going on about flies?
It says confidential in the subject line of the email that was sent to him. That he’s screenshot and posted on X.
You would think after the strong message sent out by Lady Thirwell and the families about the damage broadcasters propagating conspiracy theories was having, that they would take heed. Yet the families wishes are being ignored.
how do you begin to explain to a child what happened to their sibling. Something so high profile as this too.
From what I can gather of the crossed wires phone call, it reads like the doctor doing the resus was under the impression he was talking to a consultant- “are you coming in?”. Someone has put that call through to his phone when he’s been waiting to talk to a senior for advice. I can’t help but feel that Letby has engineered this appalling incident, for her own entertainment and perhaps as a “punishment” for the mum ringing every 2 hours. So so harrowing for the mum, and I’m willing to bet money the doctor will have had sleepless nights about it as well. She’s caused so much harm and evil chaos to everyone she has come into contact with.
I remember reading during the trial that some of the parents regarded her as a weirdo and even ghoulish so it’s no surprise it’s mentioned in the inquiry.
I also think when she said about the feeding whilst texting “you think I pushed it in” she was revelling in what she had done and probably had to hold back from saying “but you can’t prove that”. It’s probably the closest to an admission, otherwise why say something so incriminating? She could have said you think I didn’t feed him, you think I was unprofessional, you think I rushed it, you think I wasn’t paying attention…but no, she wanted to dance the dance
I remember reading during the trial that some of the parents regarded her as a weirdo and even ghoulish so it’s no surprise it’s mentioned in the inquiry.
I also think when she said about the feeding whilst texting “you think I pushed it in” she was revelling in what she had done and probably had to hold back from saying “but you can’t prove that”. It’s probably the closest to an admission, otherwise why say something so incriminating? She could have said you think I didn’t feed him, you think I was unprofessional, you think I rushed it, you think I wasn’t paying attention…but no, she wanted to dance the dance
So much to say about the things Baby I’s mum has brought up. Her care at LWH sounds very similar to COCH (ignored during labour, multiple attempts to fit in a long line on a premature baby)
This rings alarm bells… (redacted is the name of a mother not involved). I wonder if they have determined it’s completely unrelated or if there is no evidence of who it is or which baby it was fed to.
This rings alarm bells… (redacted is the name of a mother not involved). I wonder if they have determined it’s completely unrelated or if there is no evidence of who it is or which baby it was fed to.
While the parents 100% should talk about their experiences of poor care etc at the hospital, you just know the weirdos are going to be all over it to support their scapegoat nonsense. 
I also don’t think I had made the link during the trial that baby I and baby G were both being attacked around the same time.
---
---
Oh yes they will. I’m glad for the transparency though. One thing that has struck me is you really see how vastly much more info you get from a full transcript vs a couple of news articles. And we can really see how the media cherry pick click bait rather than the most relevant facts.While the parents 100% should talk about their experiences of poor care etc at the hospital, you just know the weirdos are going to be all over it to support their scapegoat nonsense.
Last edited:
Could it had been fed to baby G? The extra milk would have had to come from somewhere.
Mum also says they didn’t have much to do with her. They would see her around but apart from helping with the first bath not much else. So it just doesn’t add up at all (apart from the sinister baby killer bit). I could understand a regular, designated nurse who had built up a connection with the family.
And it’s something we seem to keep seeing with these experiences. We are meant to believe by her supporters that it’s just coincidence because she worked all these extra shifts. Yet the parents rarely came across her until she was involved in resuscitation and dealing with the ‘aftercare’ of the baby dying, inserting herself into private family moments. She’s not the only nurse at these resuscitations, often not even the designated nurse, yet she’s the one bathing them, putting memory boxes together, getting cold coats out. Ugh it’s so sinister.
Last edited:
This is a bit of a follow up from the murder sheet podcast that was a few weeks ago.
i copied it from a Facebook discussion page that Jessica Cash posted, it’s worth a read.
Quite a few people have recommended the New Yorker article on Lucy Letby as a reason to doubt Ms Letby's guilt.
Here's a screenshot from an email sent 5 days after Letby's first conviction by the author of the New Yorker article, Rachel Aziz, regarding working with Sarrita Adams, a conspiracy theorist who runs various pro-Letby sites while falsely claiming to be a Cambridge PhD (Ms Adams dropped out of Cambridge), in which Aziz makes it clear she was already pushing the "wrongful conviction"
i copied it from a Facebook discussion page that Jessica Cash posted, it’s worth a read.
Quite a few people have recommended the New Yorker article on Lucy Letby as a reason to doubt Ms Letby's guilt.
Here's a screenshot from an email sent 5 days after Letby's first conviction by the author of the New Yorker article, Rachel Aziz, regarding working with Sarrita Adams, a conspiracy theorist who runs various pro-Letby sites while falsely claiming to be a Cambridge PhD (Ms Adams dropped out of Cambridge), in which Aziz makes it clear she was already pushing the "wrongful conviction"
What is Rachel Aviv’s background? Who’s she to say there’s nothing in Letby’s personality? Is that how we are meant to convict criminals, on their personality type? duck off.
They bang on about things like confirmation bias then go on to do the very thing they criticise themselves. The lack of self awareness is astounding.
By "nothing in her personality" they mean "nothing in her looks". You can see in her behaviour that she's a bit weird. But surely a nice middle class kind-of-pretty-if- you-squint blonde girl can't be the worst serial killer!
Exactly! The police spent 72x that amount of time investigating her!
Seems to me with the amount of phones in hands on that bleeping ward and the content of texts exchanged between staff that the only people whose confidentiality was ever protected were the incompetent staff.
- Status