| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. 02:13 - Sep 22 with 5117 views | Ryorry |
1. Police thought there was no indication any crime had even been committed, till a doctor at the hospital informed them that he'd gone into the ward & discovered her standing over a baby in distress for whom the alarm had been been turned off, but she was doing nothing to help them.
Now turns out that he'd emailed colleagues at the same time saying it was her who called his attention to the baby in distress, and that the alarm was still working. Has admitted he's changed his mind re his original statement to police.
2. Key evidence for the prosecution (because the only extant scientific evidence) was totally flawed.
a) Info re baby O's blood sugar level for April 9th, which showed it to be normal - thus proving insulin couldn't have been administered that day by Letby or anyone else - was not presented to the trial, but it was presented for April 8th, 10th, 11th & 12th.
b) Consultant pulmonologist said it would have been impossible to kill babies via the air injection method cited at the trial. There was actually handwritten timeline evidence by one of the doctors at the hospital that it was his injection catching part of one baby's liver which had already been damaged during birth, which was likely to be the significant factor in their death.
3. One of the parents whose baby died said it was entirely due to faecal infection (there was faecal matter coming out of the taps on the ward on a regular basis), but similar to several other babies' deaths at the hospital when Letby was not present, this was not recorded - because although the infant contracted the infection at the Countess of Chester Hospital, they were bluelighted away to a bigger hospital in Manchester to be treated, but sadly died anyway, so the deaths were recorded there & not included in stats for the CoC.
4. The jurors and court were told that all the babies who died were well and stable, so the only cause of death could have been deliberate harm. A senior nurse working on the ward at the time said this was manifestly untrue - the babies were all 'category 3' - the highest level of prematurity/illness/vulnerability - which the CoC Hosp was totally unequipped to deal with, particularly in extraordinary levels of understaffing.
A newspaper which most on here understandably shun, said it set out to prove Letby guilty in this docu, but actually ended up finding the complete opposite,
https://www.channel5.com/show/
[Post edited 22 Sep 3:27]
|  |
| |  |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 06:37 - Sep 22 with 2289 views | USA |
Didn’t police find notes saying she was a killer? That’s something I’ll never be able to move past. For me there’s no reasonable explanation for that, IF she’s innocent.
“I am evil I did this” and “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough to care for them” |  |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 07:08 - Sep 22 with 2209 views | Hugoagogo_Reborn |
I need to watch that documentary. I'm so on the fence about this conviction, and lots of new evidence keeps surfacing which looks to be very damning about a 'cover up'. |  |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:02 - Sep 22 with 2062 views | _CliveBaker_ |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 06:37 - Sep 22 by USA |
Didn’t police find notes saying she was a killer? That’s something I’ll never be able to move past. For me there’s no reasonable explanation for that, IF she’s innocent.
“I am evil I did this” and “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough to care for them” |
Not saying she is or isn’t responsible or there was or wasn’t intent to harm the babies, but in the event she is innocent, and just a caring nurse who wanted to do a good job, it would be a very distressing thing to go through. It’s not unthinkable that would make someone question their professional competence and have them hating on themselves.
In the same journals she also wrote "I haven't done anything wrong" and various other expressions of distress. |  | | |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:06 - Sep 22 with 2051 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 07:08 - Sep 22 by Hugoagogo_Reborn |
I need to watch that documentary. I'm so on the fence about this conviction, and lots of new evidence keeps surfacing which looks to be very damning about a 'cover up'. |
Yep, my first thought on reading Ryorry's excellent and thorough OP was, 'Is this some massive cover up by the hospital/NHS and because Letby was a bit - odd - they've chucked her under the bus to take the rap for it all?' |  |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:07 - Sep 22 with 2044 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 06:37 - Sep 22 by USA |
Didn’t police find notes saying she was a killer? That’s something I’ll never be able to move past. For me there’s no reasonable explanation for that, IF she’s innocent.
“I am evil I did this” and “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough to care for them” |
It could be just some sort of mental breakdown / extreme empathy blaming herself when it wasn't actually her fault? | |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:29 - Sep 22 with 1996 views | redrickstuhaart |
This has been through extensive reviews, and the decisions have been made with far more information and detail than a documentary which is designed to get viewers. | |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:49 - Sep 22 with 1915 views | Trequartista |
Just a matter of time I would think before an appeal. |  |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:53 - Sep 22 with 1897 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:02 - Sep 22 by _CliveBaker_ |
Not saying she is or isn’t responsible or there was or wasn’t intent to harm the babies, but in the event she is innocent, and just a caring nurse who wanted to do a good job, it would be a very distressing thing to go through. It’s not unthinkable that would make someone question their professional competence and have them hating on themselves.
In the same journals she also wrote "I haven't done anything wrong" and various other expressions of distress. |
One imagines this would have been the subject of questions at trial. What was said? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:00 - Sep 22 with 1850 views | catch74 |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:07 - Sep 22 by The_Flashing_Smile |
It could be just some sort of mental breakdown / extreme empathy blaming herself when it wasn't actually her fault? |
It was presented as an admission of guilt, whereas it was apparently part of her therapy. The therapist apparently got her to write down her darkest thoughts (and this is a well known technique.) |  |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:04 - Sep 22 with 1841 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:00 - Sep 22 by catch74 |
It was presented as an admission of guilt, whereas it was apparently part of her therapy. The therapist apparently got her to write down her darkest thoughts (and this is a well known technique.) |
Oh wow, well there you go then! | |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:04 - Sep 22 with 1837 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:04 - Sep 22 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Oh wow, well there you go then! |
This would have been the subject of questions at trial. What did she say? | |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:26 - Sep 22 with 1739 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 06:37 - Sep 22 by USA |
Didn’t police find notes saying she was a killer? That’s something I’ll never be able to move past. For me there’s no reasonable explanation for that, IF she’s innocent.
“I am evil I did this” and “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough to care for them” |
Wasn't she told to do this by her therapist? To write her feelings down etc?
She also wrote "I haven't done anything wrong and they have no evidence so why have I had to hide away?"
It strikes me as an outpouring of feelings, worries and more.
I dont know if she did it but based on the evidence that has come out I dont think guilt has been proven.
The man (expert) on whos work the prosecutions star witness built his conclusions has stated that said witness misunderstood and misrepresented his work and that he does not agree with his conclusions.
More and more questions about her conviction have come to light, feels like her defence team did a shocking Job (they made no real attempt to counter the scientific evidence which has now been questioned by a panel of experts) and i think she deserves a retrial. It really feels to me like there is more at play here. |  |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:28 - Sep 22 with 1736 views | Bluemike31 |
I have read and watched so much on this case that it is actually doing my head in now, I have to say that I always come back to the thought that she is as guilty as sin, just my take on it. | | | |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:29 - Sep 22 with 1728 views | _CliveBaker_ |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:53 - Sep 22 by redrickstuhaart |
One imagines this would have been the subject of questions at trial. What was said? |
It was discussed extensively in the trial.
The prosecution put them forward as admissions, her defence argued they were expressions of distress. I can see both sides. If you assume for a second that she was innocent, and struggled with what had happened, its not unthinkable that she would feel a sense of responsibility. One said "I don’t know if I killed them. Maybe I did. Maybe this is all down to me". Another said "I haven’t done anything wrong". If nothing else they were inconsistent. Letby's explanation was that she thought she might have caused deaths inadvertently, because began to think she wasn't good enough at her job. I think that explanation is plausible.
As others have said, it later came out that she had been advised to write down such thoughts by a therapist to help cope with the stress. That wasn't disclosed in court and to me that's quite an important point. | | | |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:36 - Sep 22 with 1702 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:29 - Sep 22 by _CliveBaker_ |
It was discussed extensively in the trial.
The prosecution put them forward as admissions, her defence argued they were expressions of distress. I can see both sides. If you assume for a second that she was innocent, and struggled with what had happened, its not unthinkable that she would feel a sense of responsibility. One said "I don’t know if I killed them. Maybe I did. Maybe this is all down to me". Another said "I haven’t done anything wrong". If nothing else they were inconsistent. Letby's explanation was that she thought she might have caused deaths inadvertently, because began to think she wasn't good enough at her job. I think that explanation is plausible.
As others have said, it later came out that she had been advised to write down such thoughts by a therapist to help cope with the stress. That wasn't disclosed in court and to me that's quite an important point. |
As much as anything, I am pointing out that most people who have formed a view, do not even know what she said on the subject. Which rather highlights the difference between a view formed on a documentary, and one formed by a jury listening to the whole thing. Of course, without being there and seeing how she explained it, one is missing a massive chunk of potentially useful information (albeit demeanour and delivery are dangerous things to rely upon). | |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:36 - Sep 22 with 1699 views | Swailsey |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:29 - Sep 22 by _CliveBaker_ |
It was discussed extensively in the trial.
The prosecution put them forward as admissions, her defence argued they were expressions of distress. I can see both sides. If you assume for a second that she was innocent, and struggled with what had happened, its not unthinkable that she would feel a sense of responsibility. One said "I don’t know if I killed them. Maybe I did. Maybe this is all down to me". Another said "I haven’t done anything wrong". If nothing else they were inconsistent. Letby's explanation was that she thought she might have caused deaths inadvertently, because began to think she wasn't good enough at her job. I think that explanation is plausible.
As others have said, it later came out that she had been advised to write down such thoughts by a therapist to help cope with the stress. That wasn't disclosed in court and to me that's quite an important point. |
Indeed. I'm surprised that isn't stated more. It's quite a common thing to do in exposure therapy. |  |
| Who said: "Colin Healy made Cesc Fabregas look like Colin Healy"? | We miss you TLA |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:39 - Sep 22 with 1690 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 08:29 - Sep 22 by redrickstuhaart |
This has been through extensive reviews, and the decisions have been made with far more information and detail than a documentary which is designed to get viewers. |
Also, didn't two of her defence team quit last week as new evidence cast doubt on her potential appeal?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk
I'd question who was behind the documentary too. |  | | |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:57 - Sep 22 with 1590 views | Ryorry |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:26 - Sep 22 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Wasn't she told to do this by her therapist? To write her feelings down etc?
She also wrote "I haven't done anything wrong and they have no evidence so why have I had to hide away?"
It strikes me as an outpouring of feelings, worries and more.
I dont know if she did it but based on the evidence that has come out I dont think guilt has been proven.
The man (expert) on whos work the prosecutions star witness built his conclusions has stated that said witness misunderstood and misrepresented his work and that he does not agree with his conclusions.
More and more questions about her conviction have come to light, feels like her defence team did a shocking Job (they made no real attempt to counter the scientific evidence which has now been questioned by a panel of experts) and i think she deserves a retrial. It really feels to me like there is more at play here. |
Exactly that - a therapist appointed from within the hospital, I think (happy to be corrected), to help her cope with the stress and distress of being arrested & charged.
In the same series of chaotic, scribbled notes - actually on the same page as the allegedly damning ones - she had also written "police slander" "victimisation" "Witch hunt" (or similar word, can't recall exactly), "I am innocent" and "I did nothing wrong".
What was presented in court though was *only* her self-accusatory ones. As with so much of the other evidence presented at the trials, massively cherry-picked by the prosecution; and Letby's defence team seem to have done a very poor job.
In last night's docu, Professor Gisli Gudjonsson (Emeritus Professor at the Institute of Psychiatry of King's College London) – and THE world expert on the forensic psychology of confessions – has said the notes should not be seen as a confession.
He feels so strongly about the case – claimed by experts to be the greatest miscarriage of justice of the century – he has quit the National Crime Agency over conflicts of interest with the case so he could give evidence to try and clear Letby’s name.
Prof. Gudjonsson said: “I had to resign to do justice to this case – it was in the interests of justice and fairness.
“I had already seen Lucy, and later realised there was a potential conflict of interest because of my role at the NCA.
“I didn’t know they had been involved in the case so I had to decide whether to withdraw from the case or resign from a job I loved.
“I couldn’t just withdraw because there was a case in Northern Ireland where I declined to produce a report and it was misinterpreted as evidence of guilt.
“I became concerned that withdrawing from this case could similarly be misrepresented.
“So I faced a choice: do I give up a job I love, or do I risk jeopardising the case? I could not risk jeopardising the case.
“I made a sacrifice in good faith and resigned. I do not regret it, although I am sad because I loved the job and my colleagues.”
Prof. Gudjonsson, 78, was working for the NCA on a consultancy basis to train cops in how to avoid false confessions.
However, the agency had ties to the Letby case which means he would not have been able to give evidence on her behalf.
After meeting her he was persuaded her notes did not amount to confessions.
Prof Gudjonsson said: “It is an admission, not a confession. A confession requires explanation of why and how. That is not present here.”
He adds: “So why does she write, ‘I killed them on purpose’? Because she is not good enough, and therefore if she had been better, if she had realised she was not good enough, then it must have been her fault.
“This is about self-blame. It is not about an intention to kill babies. I do not believe it has anything to do with that.
“It has to do with her feeling she was not good enough, and that the babies died because she was not good enough as a nurse or in her job.
“That is how I read the note. When I look at that so-called incriminating note, what I see is complete despair.
“If you take one word or one sentence out of context, such as ‘I’m evil, I did this,’ it may appear incriminating.
“But you have to look at the rest of the note, where she says, ‘I didn’t do anything wrong,’ ‘I hate myself,’ ‘I’m not good enough.’
“That note, in my opinion, has no evidential value. It has personal meaning. It expresses distress. She even expresses uncertainty.
“Taking sentences out of it and saying ‘this is all there is’ is misleading.”
He adds: “So when she uses words like ‘murderer’ or ‘evil,’ these have personal meaning.
“You cannot take ‘I’m a murderer’ as a factual confession. If she had written, ‘I murdered those babies, this is why I did it, and this is how I did it,’ that would be different. But there is nothing like that.
“There is no explanation of why or how. Therefore, this is not a confession. It is an admission of feeling evil, but not a confession." | |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:07 - Sep 22 with 1550 views | balcombeblue |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:39 - Sep 22 by ElderGrizzly |
Also, didn't two of her defence team quit last week as new evidence cast doubt on her potential appeal?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk
I'd question who was behind the documentary too. |
This has been described as the most significant body of evidence ever to be put in front of the CCRC
They didn't 'quit' in quite the way described. Their evidence is still in front of of the CCRC. They quit on the basis that they couldn't stand behind all of the submissions, but that's understandable because they didn't see all of the submissions or even know what was submitted.
I have spent a lot of time reading around this case. The statistical evidence was absolute rubbish. Many statisticians pointed that out to the prosecution but this wasn't disclosed to the defence.
There was ONE expert witness in this entire case. That is extremely alarming given that he isn't a neonatal expert or an expert in air embolism or insulin poisoning. A panel of 25+ experts has challenged his evidence, including the doctor who wrote the paper on air embolism.
The confession notes have been totally debunked. Shouldn't have been admissible.
The doctor who punctured one of the babies livers didn't fully disclose this fact, the hospital was failing as Lady Thirlwall has pointed out. |  | | |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:07 - Sep 22 with 1546 views | balcombeblue |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:28 - Sep 22 by Bluemike31 |
I have read and watched so much on this case that it is actually doing my head in now, I have to say that I always come back to the thought that she is as guilty as sin, just my take on it. |
Exactly why I said on another post that I fear a jury trial! | | | |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:09 - Sep 22 with 1530 views | balcombeblue |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:36 - Sep 22 by redrickstuhaart |
As much as anything, I am pointing out that most people who have formed a view, do not even know what she said on the subject. Which rather highlights the difference between a view formed on a documentary, and one formed by a jury listening to the whole thing. Of course, without being there and seeing how she explained it, one is missing a massive chunk of potentially useful information (albeit demeanour and delivery are dangerous things to rely upon). |
I see the documentary as the tip of the iceberg. There was very little new stuff in there, except Dewi Evans being told his evidence was bunkum by a real expert and the fact insulin measurement appear to have been 'removed' on the day of one of the murders.
The insulin poisoning evidence is rubbish too. | | | |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:11 - Sep 22 with 1522 views | balcombeblue |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 09:26 - Sep 22 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Wasn't she told to do this by her therapist? To write her feelings down etc?
She also wrote "I haven't done anything wrong and they have no evidence so why have I had to hide away?"
It strikes me as an outpouring of feelings, worries and more.
I dont know if she did it but based on the evidence that has come out I dont think guilt has been proven.
The man (expert) on whos work the prosecutions star witness built his conclusions has stated that said witness misunderstood and misrepresented his work and that he does not agree with his conclusions.
More and more questions about her conviction have come to light, feels like her defence team did a shocking Job (they made no real attempt to counter the scientific evidence which has now been questioned by a panel of experts) and i think she deserves a retrial. It really feels to me like there is more at play here. |
I agree, although if this is sent back to the Court of Appeal and quashed, there is no conceivable means of having a re-trial. Who would the prosecution call?
The police, hospital and CPS are in an awful place on this one. | | | |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:13 - Sep 22 with 1499 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:07 - Sep 22 by balcombeblue |
This has been described as the most significant body of evidence ever to be put in front of the CCRC
They didn't 'quit' in quite the way described. Their evidence is still in front of of the CCRC. They quit on the basis that they couldn't stand behind all of the submissions, but that's understandable because they didn't see all of the submissions or even know what was submitted.
I have spent a lot of time reading around this case. The statistical evidence was absolute rubbish. Many statisticians pointed that out to the prosecution but this wasn't disclosed to the defence.
There was ONE expert witness in this entire case. That is extremely alarming given that he isn't a neonatal expert or an expert in air embolism or insulin poisoning. A panel of 25+ experts has challenged his evidence, including the doctor who wrote the paper on air embolism.
The confession notes have been totally debunked. Shouldn't have been admissible.
The doctor who punctured one of the babies livers didn't fully disclose this fact, the hospital was failing as Lady Thirlwall has pointed out. |
Of course the notes are admissible. Its for the defence to put a case forward about them and the jury to decide.
Where did you get the idea there was only one expert? A brief Google suggests six. | |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:15 - Sep 22 with 1494 views | Ryorry |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:07 - Sep 22 by balcombeblue |
This has been described as the most significant body of evidence ever to be put in front of the CCRC
They didn't 'quit' in quite the way described. Their evidence is still in front of of the CCRC. They quit on the basis that they couldn't stand behind all of the submissions, but that's understandable because they didn't see all of the submissions or even know what was submitted.
I have spent a lot of time reading around this case. The statistical evidence was absolute rubbish. Many statisticians pointed that out to the prosecution but this wasn't disclosed to the defence.
There was ONE expert witness in this entire case. That is extremely alarming given that he isn't a neonatal expert or an expert in air embolism or insulin poisoning. A panel of 25+ experts has challenged his evidence, including the doctor who wrote the paper on air embolism.
The confession notes have been totally debunked. Shouldn't have been admissible.
The doctor who punctured one of the babies livers didn't fully disclose this fact, the hospital was failing as Lady Thirlwall has pointed out. |
Quite, and re your last sentence, the massive omission in court re the state of the hospital's infrastructure - repeated, ongoing backflow of faecal matter into the handwash basins; infestations of insects - was crucial.
In another hospital abroad (the Netherlands or Belgium I think) a very similar case for a nurse there later found the spike in deaths of infants was down to a particular type of infection, and the nurse was exonerated. | |
| |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:16 - Sep 22 with 1484 views | MattinLondon |
| Lucy Letby; C5 docu last night, new evidence. Appeal has to be allowed surely .. on 10:07 - Sep 22 by balcombeblue |
Exactly why I said on another post that I fear a jury trial! |
I think she’s guilty.
Saying that if there’s new evidence or serious doubt in her conviction then there should be a retrial.
Off-topic, but how can a trial of this magnitude which involves so much technical detail be decided by laypeople? I do think that professional jurors should be a thing where every single member will be able to understand the technical details relatively easily. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
