It all depends on who the journalist is. Liz Hull (who actually attended the trial every day) believes Letby is guilty. Guy whatsisface (didn’t attend the trial at all) is in with the pro-Letby crowd.
- Notice
AManWalksDownTheStreet
Active member
Ian Harvey has got to be one them.
Did she say that she wanted to visit Letby in prison, her wish might come true now.If Rees is one of them and she goes to prison. Maybe she will get put in the same nick as Letby. They can have a tea party in her cell
The majority of us on here don’t, no. We think she is guilty.
A lot of didn’t start that way but changed their minds throughout following the trail. Particularly after her own evidence.
On the flip, some people came into it thinking she was guilty, but waited for evidence to convince them otherwise. It didn’t come for most.
We get the odd person dropping in either saying she’s innocent or a scapegoat or “what about all these experts” but when you actually ask someone to really explain, using the evidence, why they think she is innocent, many don’t have an answer or if they do, they can’t explain evidence from the first trial.
I think you’d be quite hard push to find someone who followed the first trial (and the second, and the appeal and the enquiry) as closely as a lot of us guys did that would still think she was innocent
Honestly words almost fail me. A woman is possibly facing charges for attacking babies and this is the main issue for her? Something seriously awry with the moral compass here.
Police failed to tell Letby she could be facing further charges
Barrister says he is concerned police are using journalists as ‘conduit for leaked gossip’www.telegraph.co.uk
You'd think interviewing her in December might have been a bit of a giveaway
Also the absolute irony of that byline is something else.
So over a 15 month period she has 15 babies suddenly collapse in her presence. Most of these collapses are unexpected and unexplained. Yet she ( according to the doctor's testimony) is animated at the thought of baby P dying. She refuses time off and insists on returning to Nursery 1! Any normal person would be in bits!
It's not just about statistics, it also Letby reaction to it all.
It's not just about statistics, it also Letby reaction to it all.
Last edited:
LittleMy
VIP Member
Anyone with half a brain can see the scapegoat theory is rubbish. The hospital management did everything it could to protect Letby not throw her under the bus, sadly putting more babies at risk in their determination to keep her there and sweep it all under the rug. These idiot Truthers will cling to anything they can, even if it can easily be debunked, because they’re pathetic. She’s a serial killer - the worst kind in that she preyed on innocent little babies who had no chance of fighting her off. Imagine throwing your support behind that? It absolutely wouldn’t be my hill to die on, that’s for sure. 
Don't worry about it. The people that know Letby is guilty don't need to go shouting about it. The ones who are desperate to make out she is innocent are the ones making all the fuss online. It means nothing in the real world. There's thousands of flat earthers making posts online every day asell but the earth is still round. She's guilty AF, YouTube comments section doesn't mean anything
Ben Myers KC.It's the women (I assume) as well over on mumsnet. Apparently they've debunked the hour difference with baby E and it was that the mums testimony was ALL wrong. So according to them the utter incompetents running the case didn't think to check with the phone company if they were out by an hour due to the phone records being in a different time zone?case closed! I just find it so bloody insulting to the parents. Like how fooking dare they claim the mum got the times wrong?!
Called to the bar in 1994.
Appointed a silk in 2014.
Outstanding reputation for one of the leading criminal silks in this country.
Shortlisted last year for Crime Silk of the Year in the Legal 500 awards 2024.
And he forgets to check the mobile phone time zone? Bloody idiot.
Maybe it’s why he didn’t win the award.
Only Letby and her trial lawyers know the answer to this. Letby has not waived legal professional privilege so the trial counsel aren't allowed to tell anyone why - not even her new lawyer who says he doesn't know. In her book on the case Judith Moritz said Letby's experts largely agreed with the prosecutions so would have been no help.
Her new lawyer has gathered together some new reports from different experts and given them to the CCRC but their value to her defence is unknown and has not been tested in court. They might not even be admissible as evidence.
MmmB777
VIP Member
It’s infuriating because the debate is not which hour it happened. Letby denies the whole conversation with the mother. She said she didn’t send her away or tell her the blood around baby E’s mouth was irritation from a breathing tube. It has to be that E&F’s mother invented this whole interaction. It’s not similar to what comes later so can’t be a mistake on the mother’s part.
It’s very obvious who is telling the truth and the phone records only back it up, with the father acknowledging the mother’s recollection too.
It’s pure desperation to put it down to phone records.
klarakluckbag
VIP Member
That report from the other hospital about the amount of times that babies' breathing tubes were dislodged, being 40 times higher than usual during Letby's shifts, is interesting to say the least. And the police are sending a file to the CPS for consideration? There's never any evidence of her causing harm, but it's amazing how many "incidents" happen when she's around.
I'm honestly open to having my mind changed about her, but I've yet to hear anything to convince me that she's not dangerous. I wonder if all those Mumsnetters who are convinced that she's innocent would let her care for their newborns?
I'm honestly open to having my mind changed about her, but I've yet to hear anything to convince me that she's not dangerous. I wonder if all those Mumsnetters who are convinced that she's innocent would let her care for their newborns?
Takemetoyourbuffet
Chatty Member
Police failed to tell Letby she could be facing further charges
Barrister says he is concerned police are using journalists as ‘conduit for leaked gossip’
You'd think interviewing her in December might have been a bit of a giveaway
Also the absolute irony of that byline is something else.
MavisBeacon
VIP Member
She selected victims for particular reasons - eg multiples, very premature (Baby K) - I suspect other reasons too. I wonder if there was something about the parents that tweaked her, as well, as she seemed to feed off their grief and distress. And, of course, the unit was caring for loads of babies - it would have been immediately suspicious if the death rate had shot through the roof, and as per Thirlwall, it should have been a heck of lot more suspicious when they started seeing it spike as it did.
The CCRC has responded to protests
inews.co.uk
The 'Free Lucy Letby' protesters frustrated by progress of bid to overturn convictions
Supporters fear the Criminal Cases Review Commission is taking a wait-and-see approach to Letby’s case
inews.co.uk
Good to hear them say they are not going to be bullied and also mentioning the poor families who have to endure this nonsense.
I still find it baffling that people think circumstantial evidence isn’t evidence. Especially in the amounts we have in this case and some of it id argue isn’t even circumstantial, some of it is quite common for a healthcare murderer.
I also do not think half of these people would be speaking out about it being a “miscarriage of justice” and those notes being not being a confession if she was male or non-white or non-conventional looking.
I also do not think half of these people would be speaking out about it being a “miscarriage of justice” and those notes being not being a confession if she was male or non-white or non-conventional looking.
Doesn’t everyone think that the CCRC should look at any application they receive carefully anyway? That’s literally their job, no matter which way it goes. Somebody saying so doesn’t mean they think Letby is innocent.
Of course you will get those who are guilty doing it time and time again anyway, and wasting time, but for the sake of true MoJs like Andrew Malkinson, I expect CCRC to look at all of them carefully!