Lucy Letby

[mrswah]

As I wrote on another thread I was convinced she was guilty and a few months ago waded into a discussion online about it with people who are (IMO) the equivalent of 2007/08 McCann sceptics, i.e: apparently dedicating their whole lives to a justice campaign with a ferocity and determination not to mention unlimited reserves of stamina and bitchiness that was initially quite bewildering.  These people (mostly women) had an answer for absolutely everything I threw at them but I had to admit defeat in the end as their knowledge of the minutiae of the case far exceeded mine.  In fact I actually think without an in-depth knowledge of the science involved it’s pretty difficult to draw conclusions either way and that was a strong part of their argument.  That jurors aren’t really qualified or knowledgeable enough to make a value judgement about evidence in such cases.  Of course there’s loads of circumstantial evidence, just as there is in the case of Bruckner, but most if not all can be explained away and is easily dismissed by the Lucy Letby fan club.  Then of course there’s is the independent investigations by various highly regarded publications such as Private Eye and the New Yorker, and the support of many extremely well regarded scientists and medical experts such as we saw at the press conference yesterday, all convinced that LL has been the victim of a terrible miscarriage of justice.
I really don’t want to admit it but I think they may have a point, terrible though it is for the parents of these babies to be put through his re-examination of the evidence in the mainstream media and social media, but should their feelings be considered when there is a possibility that an innocent woman will be spending the rest of her life behind bars?

My opinion is that the  case should continue to be investigated if there is doubt, and that this must come before the feelings of the families.

[Eleanor]

My opinion is that the  case should continue to be investigated if there is doubt, and that this must come before the feelings of the families.

Has there not just been a Thirwell Review? The findings have not yet been published.  Waiting for those might be a good idea. Or will those not be enough for some?  I will be paying particular attention.

[mrswah]

Has there not just been a Thirwell Review? The findings have not yet been published.  Waiting for those might be a good idea. Or will those not be enough for some?  I will be paying particular attention.

Yes.  The Thirlwall Inquiry has its own website, and there is some very interesting stuff on there, if you look under transcriptions, evidence and documents.

The Inquiry did not go into the possible innocence of LL.  It was examining  how she managed to get away with her crimes for so long.

[Vertigo Swirl]

The ITV programme on the case broadcast the other night makes a compelling argument for a re-trial at the very least.

[Joe Blogs]

The ITV programme on the case broadcast the other night makes a compelling argument for a re-trial at the very least.

It sure does, Vertigo!
After having no opinion on the case, I now have reasonable doubt at least!

[Joe Blogs]

The thing is, with the Lucy Letby case there are just too many experts coming forward in her defence! And not just any expert witnesses, but the best of the best in their field from all over the world.
Would it be fair to say that David Davis started the ball rolling?
There was some evidence of Letby 'allegedly' being caught in the act as it were, but these claims have been largely debunked too it seems, due to recently discovered E-mails and such I believe.
Anyway, its definately a case for the medical experts to fight over, and not one for the lay-person I feel?

[Wonderfulspam]

She did Facebook searches of the families of her victims = guilty. There's no legitimate & logical reason for her to have done that, other than her revelling in her work & it's such an unfortunate coincidence that she should be the nurse on duty every time there was a suspicious death on the ward. She is right where she belongs.

[Joe Blogs]

She did Facebook searches of the families of her victims = guilty. There's no legitimate & logical reason for her to have done that, other than her revelling in her work & it's such an unfortunate coincidence that she should be the nurse on duty every time there was a suspicious death on the ward. She is right where she belongs.

I didn't really know about the Facebook searches, Spam!
Not sure if they addressed that point in the prog or not.
The prog does claim however that the chart was made up to suit a guilty Letby.

[Vertigo Swirl]

She did Facebook searches of the families of her victims = guilty. There's no legitimate & logical reason for her to have done that, other than her revelling in her work & it's such an unfortunate coincidence that she should be the nurse on duty every time there was a suspicious death on the ward. She is right where she belongs.

How is that proof that she murdered those babies?  It?s strange that you should focus on that most tenuous piece of evidence.  As for thr suspicious deaths thing - they only assigned the deaths on the nights that Letby was working as supicious after they?d decided she might be involved, rather than looking at all the deaths that occurred on the neo natal ward in that period, some of which she was not present for.  I agree that on the face of it there?s a load of circumstantial evidence but none of it is irrefutable and as you?re someone who demands actual tangible forensic evidence of Bruckner?s guilt I?m surprised you aren?t in the Letby is Innocent camp. 

[Wonderfulspam]

I didn't really know about the Facebook searches, Spam!
Not sure if they addressed that point in the prog or not.
The prog does claim however that the chart was made up to suit a guilty Letby.

I followed the trial. She Facebook searched multiple of her victims families.

[Wonderfulspam]

How is that proof that she murdered those babies?  It?s strange that you should focus on that most tenuous piece of evidence.  As for thr suspicious deaths thing - they only assigned the deaths on the nights that Letby was working as supicious after they?d decided she might be involved, rather than looking at all the deaths that occurred on the neo natal ward in that period, some of which she was not present for.  I agree that on the face of it there?s a load of circumstantial evidence but none of it is irrefutable and as you?re someone who demands actual tangible forensic evidence of Bruckner?s guilt I?m surprised you aren?t in the Letby is Innocent camp.

I really can't be arsed to give this case the attention Ms Letby craves.

[Joe Blogs]

I followed the trial. She Facebook searched multiple of her victims families.

OK, Spam!
I will do some research into the case before commenting further!
Meantime, I will sit on the fence, as it were!

[Vertigo Swirl]

I really can't be arsed to give this case the attention Ms Letby craves.

b....r off then.

[Wonderfulspam]

b....r off then.

No I've changed my mind now. I won't do what you tell me. I'm going to sit here with my arms folded & a stern look on my face until justice is served. I fully trust Ms Letby now, I think she should be welcomed back into the nursing profession with no supervision whatsoever.  She can run the children's ward & Brueckner can work in the creche. Ian Huntley can manage the children's bathtime & Harold Shipman can administer vaccinations.

[Vertigo Swirl]

No I've changed my mind now. I won't do what you tell me. I'm going to sit here with my arms folded & a stern look on my face until justice is served. I fully trust Ms Letby now, I think she should be welcomed back into the nursing profession with no supervision whatsoever.  She can run the children's ward & Brueckner can work in the creche. Ian Huntley can manage the children's bathtime & Harold Shipman can administer vaccinations.

Sadly Harold Shipman is dead, so bang goes that plan.