Lucy Letby Case #73

[sebanna]

The jury will have looked at each charge individually, looking at who was there and was there evidence of foul play.

I have never understood the statistician wanting to change the chart by adding none suspicious deaths. If the evidence isn't there that a crime has been committed then there's no point trying it in court. They act like all the doctors, police and lawyers are deliberately only looking at cases where Lucy was present.

 

[Hazara04]

The jury will have looked at each charge individually, looking at who was there and was there evidence of foul play.

I have never understood the statistician wanting to change the chart by adding none suspicious deaths. If the evidence isn't there that a crime has been committed then there's no point trying it in court. They act like all the doctors, police and lawyers are deliberately only looking at cases where Lucy was present.

Yes It would have been misleading to include the 9 explained deaths and completely irrelevant

They also don't seem to acknowledge that each unexpected collapse was investigated separately by different teams of officers before they knew that Letby was suspected and yet all roads led to Letby.

 

[MmmB777]

The jury will have looked at each charge individually, looking at who was there and was there evidence of foul play.

I have never understood the statistician wanting to change the chart by adding none suspicious deaths. If the evidence isn't there that a crime has been committed then there's no point trying it in court. They act like all the doctors, police and lawyers are deliberately only looking at cases where Lucy was present.

If anything, hearing exactly how that picture usually unfolds would have made me even more certain of her guilt.
A poor little baby born with awful health conditions either discovered in-utero or shortly after birth, being given a prognosis, parents informed that outcomes aren’t good. A poor little baby succumbing to infection, generally a fairly gradual process with obvious soft signs when babies are in full medical care and with multiple blood works showing infection taking over.
Perhaps babies like that kept her from being “bored” with just “feeding and changing”. Maybe they were always safer from her because they gave her excitement anyway. Or maybe she gave them a helping hand towards death whenever she was around them. We won’t know unless she confesses which she never will.
Instead this case was full of shock, disbelief that babies that were getting better were suddenly dead. All the “they were fine when I went off shift” type comments. All Letby’s weird and wonderful reasons she thought the babies had died. Downs. Gulping air. Sometimes the job is just so sad. It’s the reoccuring feature of nurses momentarily leaving the room to find babies at deaths door when they returned. Parents that are keeping vigil, having just been allowed holds, confident to go and get some sleep to come back to babies dying. Bleeding. Alarms failing. Inexplicable air. Vomits from serious over feeding. Clear liquids. Not even responding to ventilation. No responses to cpr then sometimes coming back to life. Poisonings. Flashing rashes that nobody had seen before. Air in brains. Air by IV lines. Air in blocks. More air than the expert radiographer had ever seen in babies that had actually died from overwhelming infection

Any discussion of expected and natural deaths would have just made these features more obvious.

 

[#notanadad]

Interesting that two babies died of infection, I assume that’s why she tried to say the plumbing was poor and was hoping that it would be convincing enough.

 

[Tofino]

If anything, hearing exactly how that picture usually unfolds would have made me even more certain of her guilt.
A poor little baby born with awful health conditions either discovered in-utero or shortly after birth, being given a prognosis, parents informed that outcomes aren’t good. A poor little baby succumbing to infection, generally a fairly gradual process with obvious soft signs when babies are in full medical care and with multiple blood works showing infection taking over.
Perhaps babies like that kept her from being “bored” with just “feeding and changing”. Maybe they were always safer from her because they gave her excitement anyway. Or maybe she gave them a helping hand towards death whenever she was around them. We won’t know unless she confesses which she never will.
Instead this case was full of shock, disbelief that babies that were getting better were suddenly dead. All the “they were fine when I went off shift” type comments. All Letby’s weird and wonderful reasons she thought the babies had died. Downs. Gulping air. Sometimes the job is just so sad. It’s the reoccuring feature of nurses momentarily leaving the room to find babies at deaths door when they returned. Parents that are keeping vigil, having just been allowed holds, confident to go and get some sleep to come back to babies dying. Bleeding. Alarms failing. Inexplicable air. Vomits from serious over feeding. Clear liquids. Not even responding to ventilation. No responses to cpr then sometimes coming back to life. Poisonings. Flashing rashes that nobody had seen before. Air in brains. Air by IV lines. Air in blocks. More air than the expert radiographer had ever seen in babies that had actually died from overwhelming infection

Any discussion of expected and natural deaths would have just made these features more obvious.

Hmm when you put it like that, for all we know prosecution might have wanted to include those deaths as background info and it was Myers that got them dismissed as evidence as “not relevant”. He might have wanted to hide real life examples of how naturally poorly babies usually respond.

I’m purely speculating as I have no idea on the law and what Goss would rule on if either side did or didn’t want to include them, but there’s certainly an assumption it’s all down to the prosecution when it might not be.

 

[Apostate]

The removed RCPCH review reported 13 deaths on the unit in 2015-2016. BBC Panorama said 13 with Letby present at them all. Seems possible she murdered more than 7 but there was not enough evidence to go to court.

 

[sebanna]

The removed RCPCH review reported 13 deaths on the unit in 2015-2016. BBC Panorama said 13 with Letby present at them all. Seems possible she murdered more than 7 but there was not enough evidence to go to court.

They said on the podcast they discounted four deaths completely so maybe they were 17 in total. The death rate was very high even without the trial deaths. They were either very unlucky or Lucy had a hand in them but they were ill so it's impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
From the interviews that Dewi Evans gave they did originally deem more of the deaths as suspicious but further investigation showed it was obvious why they died.

 

[#notanadad]

And there’s always the fact that some babies could have died because the unit was poorly run and the other babies died because letby murdered them. I don’t understand why the conspiracy theorists insist it can only be for one reason

 

[CabalofBolorneaise]

And there’s always the fact that some babies could have died because the unit was poorly run and the other babies died because letby murdered them. I don’t understand why the conspiracy theorists insist it can only be for one reason

I think this goes on both sides though to be fair. If you criticise the running of the unit, then you get people thinking that means you’re saying she’s innocent, also insisting there can only be one reason.

She was evil and the unit was terribly run which likely directly caused some deaths and indirectly caused others (eg would she have got away with so long on a better run unit?) . Both can be true at once and saying that doesn’t mean you’re saying she’s innocent or defending her.

 

[MmmB777]

I think this goes on both sides though to be fair. If you criticise the running of the unit, the “she’s evil and guilty and none of it is the hospitals fault” bunch jump on you.

She was evil and the unit was terribly run which likely directly caused some deaths and indirectly caused others (eg would she have got away with so long on a better run unit?) . Both can be true at once and saying that doesn’t mean you’re saying she’s innocent or defending her.

What evidence is there that the hospital “caused deaths”? Which deaths did the hospital cause? That’s quite the claim isn’t it?
Are you going to move on at any point

 

[CabalofBolorneaise]

And there’s always the fact that some babies could have died because the unit was poorly run and the other babies died because letby murdered them. I don’t understand why the conspiracy theorists insist it can only be for one reason

What evidence is there that the hospital “caused deaths”? Which deaths did the hospital cause? That’s quite the claim isn’t it?
Are you going to move on at any point ✌

Why don’t you ask the others saying this? Like the poster above. Why just me? Do you sit here waiting excitedly for me to post so you can jump in

 

[MmmB777]

Why don’t you ask the others saying this? Like the poster above. Why just me?

That poster said that there could have been babies that died because of poor care in the hospital as a theory the conspiracists can’t entertain. You’ve said the hospital caused deaths. So are you suggesting the babies not brought into trial died because the hospital “caused” them to or that the babies in this case died because the hospital caused them to?

Oh you added that little bit at the end? You are full of self importance literally you cannot post without referencing me calling you out for supporting a lot of the Gill theories. Sorry it upset you so much that you have to reference it every single time you post

 

[CabalofBolorneaise]

That poster said that there could have been babies that died because of poor care in the hospital as a theory the conspiracists can’t entertain. You’ve said the hospital caused deaths. So are you suggesting the babies not brought into trial died because the hospital “caused” them to or that the babies in this case died because the hospital caused them to?

No, I’m very clearly saying that poor care may have been the reason some babies died (ie the hospital caused it - due to their poor care) and that due to their failure to act on Letby earlier the hospital indirectly caused the deaths of later babies at her hands. As if they’d acted on the many signs they had including the insulin results and the doctors raising concerns, some of the later deaths wouldn’t have happened simply because Letby wouldn’t have been there.

I don’t know why the latter in particular is such a hard concept for you to understand to be honest? You’ve challenged me on it more than once. Is it really that outrageous to say the hospital should have acted earlier to prevent deaths at Letby’s hands?

 

[MmmB777]

No, I’m very clearly saying that poor care may have been the reason some babies died (ie the hospital caused it - due to their poor care) and that due to their failure to act on Letby earlier the hospital indirectly caused the deaths of later babies at her hands. As if they’d acted on the many signs they had including the insulin results and the doctors raising concerns, some of the later deaths wouldn’t have happened simply because Letby wouldn’t have been there.

I don’t know why the latter in particular is such a hard concept for you to understand to be honest? You’ve challenged me on it more than once. Is it really that outrageous to say the hospital should have acted earlier to prevent deaths at Letby’s hands?

Would you describe Cullen and Shipman’s colleagues as “causing the deaths” of their victims?

 

[Tofino]

I think this goes on both sides though to be fair. If you criticise the running of the unit, then you get people thinking that means you’re saying she’s innocent, also insisting there can only be one reason.

She was evil and the unit was terribly run which likely directly caused some deaths and indirectly caused others (eg would she have got away with so long on a better run unit?) . Both can be true at once and saying that doesn’t mean you’re saying she’s innocent or defending her.

I don’t recall seeing anyone on here saying the other deaths couldn’t have been down to poor care. Everyone accepts the unit was badly ran (with the biggest scandal being allowing a serial killer to run on for so long) and all the sub-optimal care for each baby was discussed in trial, accepted as poor but not as a possible cause of death. This is the part the Letby supporters are refusing to accept. They think any suboptimal care means Lucy must have been made a scapegoat. Despite the fact that those specific events would not have caused the manner of death as multiple experts testified. If they had, Myers would have easily found someone to counter it.

 

[CabalofBolorneaise]

Would you describe Cullen and Shipman’s colleagues as “causing the deaths” of their victims?

I’ve never read into either of those cases so I’m not informed enough to comment.

However, in any case where there are repeated signs something is amiss and it’s allowed to continue despite warnings then those who ignored the signs do hold some responsibility as they indirectly caused the deaths by allowing it to continue. If your baby had been killed after the hospital had been warned about Letby, would you blame only her or would you be pretty annoyed at the hospital too? Personally I’d blame both.
---

I don’t recall seeing anyone on here saying the other deaths couldn’t have been down to poor care. Everyone accepts the unit was badly ran (with the biggest scandal being allowing a serial killer to run on for so long) and all the sub-optimal care for each baby was discussed in trial, accepted as poor but not as a possible cause of death. This is the part the Letby supporters are refusing to accept. They think any suboptimal care means Lucy must have been made a scapegoat. Despite the fact that those specific events would not have caused the manner of death as multiple experts testified. If they had, Myers would have easily found someone to counter it.

Yet I’m being questioned right now on this thread for saying poor care likely caused deaths including the later ones at the hands of Letby? I’m told nobody is saying it couldn’t be possible but being hauled over the metaphorical coals for saying it was possible and almost certain in the later Letby cases.

Saying the hospital indirectly caused the later deaths is NOT saying she’s a scapegoat or innocent. It’s simply saying that by allowing her to be there once there was enough evidence that doctors were repeatedly warning them about her, they played a role. She couldn’t have done it if she wasn’t there, after all.

 

[AllieBee]

I think this goes on both sides though to be fair. If you criticise the running of the unit, then you get people thinking that means you’re saying she’s innocent, also insisting there can only be one reason.

She was evil and the unit was terribly run which likely directly caused some deaths and indirectly caused others (eg would she have got away with so long on a better run unit?) . Both can be true at once and saying that doesn’t mean you’re saying she’s innocent or defending her.

Was the unit terribly run? Management were awful but the unit itself wasn't badly run. All will be identified in the enquiry. Also bad management doesn't cause deaths, murdering nurses do.
---

I’ve never read into either of those cases so I’m not informed enough to comment.

However, in any case where there are repeated signs something is amiss and it’s allowed to continue despite warnings then those who ignored the signs do hold some responsibility as they indirectly caused the deaths by allowing it to continue. If your baby had been killed after the hospital had been warned about Letby, would you blame only her or would you be pretty annoyed at the hospital too? Personally I’d blame both.
---


Yet I’m being questioned right now on this thread for saying poor care likely caused deaths including the later ones at the hands of Letby? I’m told nobody is saying it couldn’t be possible but being hauled over the metaphorical coals for saying it was possible and almost certain in the later Letby cases.

Saying the hospital indirectly caused the later deaths is NOT saying she’s a scapegoat or innocent. It’s simply saying that by allowing her to be there once there was enough evidence that doctors were repeatedly warning them about her, they played a role. She couldn’t have done it if she wasn’t there, after all.

There isn't any evidence that the care was poor.

 

[CabalofBolorneaise]

I don’t recall seeing anyone on here saying the other deaths couldn’t have been down to poor care. Everyone accepts the unit was badly ran (with the biggest scandal being allowing a serial killer to run on for so long) and all the sub-optimal care for each baby was discussed in trial, accepted as poor but not as a possible cause of death. This is the part the Letby supporters are refusing to accept. They think any suboptimal care means Lucy must have been made a scapegoat. Despite the fact that those specific events would not have caused the manner of death as multiple experts testified. If they had, Myers would have easily found someone to counter it.

Was the unit terribly run? Management were awful but the unit itself wasn't badly run. All will be identified in the enquiry. Also bad management doesn't cause deaths, murdering nurses do.
---

There isn't any evidence that the care was poor.

@Tofino here you go. People saying the unit wasn’t badly run and there’s no evidence the care was poor

 

[MmmB777]

I’ve never read into either of those cases so I’m not informed enough to comment.

However, in any case where there are repeated signs something is amiss and it’s allowed to continue despite warnings then those who ignored the signs do hold some responsibility as they indirectly caused the deaths by allowing it to continue. If your baby had been killed after the hospital had been warned about Letby, would you blame only her or would you be pretty annoyed at the hospital too? Personally I’d blame both.

You’re talking about the management. Even then causing death is an interesting turn of phrase imo.

I’d like to think that I would be able to see people like Breary, Gibbs and Jayram as victims of Letby too and see the obvious pain they have that they attempted to get this looked into properly and deeply regret not being more aggressive in their approach. I’d like to see that those same people accused by others actually desperately tried to save my babies life. On some occasions their quick thinking and skill was the only reason babies survived rather than “causing death”

What I object to is the suggestion any of the babies in the trial died because of the actions of the doctors. I mean there was a poster recently that wrongly suggested baby H had died (they lived) because of poor care and the poor care of doctors caused the death and that it had been tagged on to cover up that poor care. Claims like that are wild and Gilly imo. Perhaps you missed it and you’d never make such a suggestion and yeah I’m just finding your points so difficult to understand

 

[CabalofBolorneaise]

You’re talking about the management. Even then causing death is an interesting turn of phrase imo.

I’d like to think that I would be able to see people like Breary, Gibbs and Jayram as victims of Letby too and see the obvious pain they have that they attempted to get this looked into properly and deeply regret not being more aggressive in their approach. I’d like to see that those same people accused by others actually desperately tried to save my babies life. On some occasions their quick thinking and skill was the only reason babies survived rather than “causing death”

What I object to is the suggestion any of the babies in the trial died because of the actions of the doctors. I mean there was a poster recently that wrongly suggested baby H had died (they lived) because of poor care and the poor care of doctors caused the death and that it had been tagged on to cover up that poor care. Claims like that are wild and Gilly imo. Perhaps you missed it and you’d never make such a suggestion and yeah I’m just finding your points so difficult to understand

I wasn’t saying the doctors, I meant the hospital as a whole - so yes, largely management and I accept I worded that wrong.