Lucy Letby

[scolopax]

The noise that Lucy Letby is an innocent woman is now growing into a clamour. A panel of neonatal experts have held a press conference to say that in this case all a baby deaths can be explained as as a combination of natural and medical negligence deaths of already sick or premature babies.

I think there may well have been a gross miscarriage of justice

[ditchman]

ive been watching this..............IF it is proved that she was wrongly convicted ...the lawyers are going to put who is responsible for indicting her TO THE SWORD in no uncertain terms

[clangerman]

thanks to media and the gullible she was convicted long before any verdict now we will have usual lies denials and feet dragging to get the truth at yet more cost to tax payers 

[ditchman]

18 minutes ago, clangerman said:

thanks to media and the gullible she was convicted long before any verdict now we will have usual lies denials and feet dragging to get the truth at yet more cost to tax payers 

AND THAT IS THE TRUTH........period

[mel b3]

I reckon her legal team will have a real uphill battle . The NHS look partly to blame , and they'll fight tooth and nail to find a scapegoat. 

Edited 18 hours ago by mel b3

[Sempers]

Got to feel for the families, unimaginable loosing a child, more so to be followed by this.

[discobob]

I heard as well that she was a whistleblower a few years before. I do wonder if she was the donkey they pinned the tail on

[Gordon R]

The Jury, at her trial, heard the full script. She was convicted.

It is a sign of the current times that people look for conspiracy everywhere and, however ludicrous, conclude that someone is innocent. I read through the twelve points the experts came up with. Totally unconvincing. Bottom line is that either the children were actually murdered or all the deaths were natural. I know where my money is.

[zipdog]

1 minute ago, Gordon R said:

The Jury, at her trial, heard the full script. She was convicted.

It is a sign of the current times that people look for conspiracy everywhere and, however ludicrous, conclude that someone is innocent. I read through the twelve points the experts came up with. Totally unconvincing. Bottom line is that either the children were actually murdered or all the deaths were natural. I know where my money is.

 

You're completely wrong. I don’t want to comment on the specifics of this case because, at this stage, no one has enough detail to form a definitive conclusion.

However, the reality is that the Western world has become far too centralised, driven by narratives rather than fact, and increasingly authoritarianism.

The issue isn’t conspiracy theorists, as misguided as some may be. The real problem is a modern society that constantly seeks a scapegoat for every negative outcome. Whether Lucy Letby is innocent or guilty is one question, but the more important one is whether she should have been convicted.

Our legal system was founded on the principle that it is better for 100 guilty people to go free than for one innocent person to be wrongly convicted. That principle seems to have been forgotten in recent years.

[hushpower]

She was the scape goat after the mis management of the ward with inept staff on . Questions must be asked & senior management held accountable and if need be sacked and lose pensions.  Instead of saying the old drival, lessons will be learned....i hope prison sentence looms if proven guilty 

[Scully]

What an awful mess.
I found it exceedingly hard to believe someone could be as cold blooded as her, when found guilty, but now I’m finding it exceedingly hard to believe how multiple people ( if that’s the case ) could be as cold blooded to deliberately contrive to make her a scapegoat. 
If she is found not to have done these deeds, then I hope her lawyers chase the truth to the ends of the earth. 

[oldypigeonpopper]

Hello, Well i know who i believe, Those in the Hospital or the group of Experts ??

[hushpower]

Group of international exsperts i believe  not the people overseeing cost cutting hospital department...its i cover up me thinks and pressures mounting for a re trial.  Remember this letby had twice blew the whistle to management about dangerous practices in the unit

[Gordon R]

Quote

You're completely wrong. I don’t want to comment on the specifics of this case because, at this stage, no one has enough detail to form a definitive conclusion.

Forgive me for failing to understand your logic. I can say you are completely wrong - it means nothing.

I note that Letby's team are anxious to concentrate on medical issues, ignoring her behaviour - notes, Googling all the families of the dead children. She seems to have connected all the deaths concerned. 

[Vince Green]

9 hours ago, hushpower said:

She was the scape goat after the mis management of the ward with inept staff on . Questions must be asked & senior management held accountable and if need be sacked and lose pensions.  Instead of saying the old drival, lessons will be learned....i hope prison sentence looms if proven guilty 

It was always said that the two consultants who brought the original allegations against her would have been the ones facing charges of incompetence if things had gone a different way. 

The pivotal moment for me came some time ago when it turned out that the shift rota used as evidence in court to 'prove' that she was working when all of the deaths occurred had been altered. That hasn't been mentioned in this present discussion.

The case seems to revolve around the expert witnesses used by the prosecution and whether they really were experts

 

[old man]

13 hours ago, ditchman said:

ive been watching this..............IF it is proved that she was wrongly convicted ...the lawyers are going to put who is responsible for indicting her TO THE SWORD in no uncertain terms

Calm down  ditchy, it won't be anyones fault, just confusion and misunderstanding?

2 hours ago, Scully said:

What an awful mess.
I found it exceedingly hard to believe someone could be as cold blooded as her, when found guilty, but now I’m finding it exceedingly hard to believe how multiple people ( if that’s the case ) could be as cold blooded to deliberately contrive to make her a scapegoat. 
If she is found not to have done these deeds, then I hope her lawyers chase the truth to the ends of the earth. 

She possibly needs a different legal team?

[ditchman]

7 minutes ago, old man said:

Calm down  ditchy, it won't be anyones fault, just confusion and misunderstanding?

She possibly needs a different legal team?

think CLANGERMAN has hit the nail on the head

[old man]

1 minute ago, ditchman said:

think CLANGERMAN has hit the nail on the head

👍🏻

[Gordon R]

We don't have enough detail to compare what expert witnesses said at the trial, compared to what this new panel of experts is claiming. Are they saying the original experts committed perjury?

[wymberley]

5 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

We don't have enough detail to compare what expert witnesses said at the trial, compared to what this new panel of experts is claiming. Are they saying the original experts committed perjury?

When did an expert opinion translate into perjury should it be shown with further evidence that it was incorrect?

[Rewulf]

14 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

We don't have enough detail to compare what expert witnesses said at the trial, compared to what this new panel of experts is claiming. Are they saying the original experts committed perjury?

Its a big read , but theres lots of good info on the wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_Letby

As far as perjury goes, no, the original expert witnesses would need to be knowingly lying, and I dont believe that to be the case, but much of what they stated to be fact, was more of an opinion.
One example is this.

In March 2017, four consultants, including Stephen Brearey and Ravi Jayaram, asked management to involve the police after receiving advice for further investigation from the regional neonatal lead.^[20][32] They then met with Cheshire Constabulary on 27 April 2017, to raise their concerns, with Letby due to return to work on 3 May 2017.^[31] Brearey and Jayaram told the Cheshire Constabulary that infant collapses are "nearly always explainable".^[33] In May 2024, staff writer Rachel Aviv for The New Yorker reported that a study of infant deaths in southeast London, published in the Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, found that about half of unexpected infant collapses remain unexplained after an autopsy.^[3][34]

Stephen Brearey also had this to say

Initial investigations

In June 2015, four collapses^[a] occurred in the same neonatology unit of Countess of Chester Hospital, three leading to infant deaths.^[10] The unit typically saw only two or three deaths a year, and the infants involved had failed to respond normally to resuscitation attempts.^[4]: 23:40 Eirian Powell, the unit manager, and Stephen Brearey conducted an informal review, and reported the incidents to the committee of the NHS Foundation Trust responsible for addressing serious incidents. Upon review, the committee classed the deaths as medication errors. Brearey observed that Letby had been on shift for all of the incidents,^[10] but considered it an unsurprising coincidence; there was only one other qualified junior nurse in the unit, and Letby often worked extra shifts to cover for staffing shortages. He stated, "Nobody had any concerns about her practice."^[3] In 2023, reports from The Guardian and The Times stated he was suspicious of Letby beginning in 2015 and accused the hospital of negligence for ignoring his concerns.^[22][10]

^{Just 2 inconsistencies from the evidence offered, and bearing in mind, this particular hospital unit, dealing in premature and ill babies, that was understaffed and poorly managed....
There are many others, and I would urge anyone with an interest to read the wiki page on this, as there are plenty more that, IMHO make the conviction unsafe, due to the fact there is no direct evidence that she killed, or tried to kill any of them.}

[Gordon R]

There are suggestions on here that there was a cover up, not merely a difference of opinion. We will only find out after the hearing, but I still think a guilty verdict was correct, despite failings elsewhere. No-one addresses any of her behaviour.

All this is speculation and it won't get settled on here. 

We will see who is right.

[Rewulf]

13 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

There are suggestions on here that there was a cover up, not merely a difference of opinion.

Not from me, my belief is that an unusual number of babies died tragically, a young perhaps inexperienced nurse under a heavy workload may have been accidentally responsible for some of them, there were other deaths too, where she was nowhere near them ?
Medical negligence is one thing, murder is another Im sure you will agree ?

My point is there are flaws in the evidence, and her defence team simply didnt examine these, there is no motive, the psychological profile of a serial killer, or 'god complex' personality disorder are absent. To all intents and purposes, she was a good hard working nurse.
The 14 panel experts, who have literally no skin in the game, have opened this case up for a retrial, IF its allowed, as previous attempts have been denied.

[Vince Green]

7 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

We don't have enough detail to compare what expert witnesses said at the trial, compared to what this new panel of experts is claiming. Are they saying the original experts committed perjury?

I think the implication is that the original expert witness Dewy Evans was flawed.

[clangerman]

experts aside real prob in the justice system is drawing juries from the electoral roll if that’s not fatally flawed you could end up being tried for murder by the same cabbages who gave us starmer! lol