UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #2

[Marantz4250b]

I'm interested in how the prosecution is going to try this case. There are so many variables when dealing with infants in neonatal units that are already high risk babies. I fear this woman is going to be treated like a witch. There are too many cases where the kneejerk reaction is to accuse someone of foul play without any real evidence of intent. Babies die in neonatal wards. We've already mentioned other cases where nurses have been accused of being avenging angels only to find that suspicion is not evidence.

Here's a link to mysterious infant deaths in Argentina. Lots of suspicion but no proof.

Newborns kept dying in mysterious circumstances in Argentine city

The death of at least 5 newborn babies between May and June in a hospital in the Argentine city of Córdoba has made the news nationwide. There may be more cases, it was reported. Pending investigations, staff at the Maternal Neonatal Dr. Ramón Carrillo Hospital have been relieved from duty.

en.mercopress.com

These are interesting comments. Yes, she certainly is getting the flak from the haters and the generally hard of thinking but not as much as I thought she would. There are the usual uneducated idiots on FB, Twitter and other places calling for her to be thrown to the lions without a trail but I'm quite surprised to note how many people are saying the opposite.

There are a one or two FB groups which were clearly set up by self-serving idiots as Lucy Letby witch hunts/mob rants. I rarely go on FB these days but when I do and look at these groups it seems that there are more and more people on there expressing the opinion that they don't think she did this. Not what the originators of these groups expected, I think.

I still haven't found a single person who claims to know her, or of her, who says they think that she's guilty of this. Not one and this has been going on for years now. There are one or two on the various forums, and certainly one guy one of the FB forums who claims to know her, who is happy to say that he things she's innocent.

 

[branmuffin]

These are interesting comments. Yes, she certainly is getting the flak from the haters and the generally hard of thinking but not as much as I thought she would. There are the usual uneducated idiots on FB, Twitter and other places calling for her to be thrown to the lions without a trail but I'm quite surprised to note how many people are saying the opposite.

There are a one or two FB groups which were clearly set up by self-serving idiots as Lucy Letby witch hunts/mob rants. I rarely go on FB these days but when I do and look at these groups it seems that there are more and more people on there expressing the opinion that they don't think she did this. Not what the originators of these groups expected, I think.

I still haven't found a single person who claims to know her, or of her, who says they think that she's guilty of this. Not one and this has been going on for years now. There are one or two on the various forums, and certainly one guy one of the FB forums who claims to know her, who is happy to say that he things she's innocent.

It's not just other social media sites. When this case was first reported many posters here on WS called her evil. Over and over again. Not many people were neutral in their stances regarding whether a crime had been committed or not.

Back in the other thread I mentioned my healthy skepticism regarding this type of court case mainly because I remember the Susan Nelles debacle in Toronto in the 1980s. Three nurses at that hospital were excoriated and pilloried by the general public without any real proof of a crime committed. All charges were dropped because it was found out that the autopsies of the deceased children were done too late skewing the results of finding digoxin in the blood since body tissue releases it back into the blood stream after death resulting in accusations that these babies had been administered fatal doses of the drug by the nurses in the cardiac ward.

Then there was the Dutch case and now one in Argentina. I am not saying there aren't any people out there who have designated themselves as sisters of mercy who have killed children and elderly patients but facts and evidence matter in these cases.

 

[HollyHunter9]

I'm also of the view that she is innocent. Statistically serial killers build up to these types of crimes, comitting less serious crimes over a number of years first, also once they start killing they struggle to stop. She's accused of randomly killing babies for a year and then stopping and returning to work as normal. During her supposed "year long killing spree" none of her colleagues noticed anything untoward? The hospital doesn't have the greatest track record with its most recent CQC inspection outcome saying services are still inadequate despite recommendations. There will have to be absolute concrete evident to convince me she is guilty. All MOO

 

[Marantz4250b]

It's not just other social media sites. When this case was first reported many posters here on WS called her evil. Over and over again. Not many people were neutral in their stances regarding whether a crime had been committed or not.

I don't think I saw any of the earlier posts but I'm quite surprised that people on here expressed those sorts of opinions. I'd always had people on here as being a bit more rational and restrained than the mob of general humanity.

 

[Marantz4250b]

I'm also of the view that she is innocent. Statistically serial killers build up to these types of crimes, comitting less serious crimes over a number of years first, also once they start killing they struggle to stop. She's accused of randomly killing babies for a year and then stopping and returning to work as normal. During her supposed "year long killing spree" none of her colleagues noticed anything untoward? The hospital doesn't have the greatest track record with its most recent CQC inspection outcome saying services are still inadequate despite recommendations. There will have to be absolute concrete evident to convince me she is guilty. All MOO

Agreed entirely. To be honest, your post sums up nicely most of what has been said on this thread.

This girl is no murderer. If she is convicted then I very much doubt it will be on the basis of "concrete" evidence. Concrete evidence surely does not take six months to put to a jury? Unfortunately, if she is acquitted then, similarly, I don't think it will be because the prosecution's case has been utterly torn to shreds. There will forever be a cloud over her.

 

[Parker Knoll]

The prosecution opening will be very interesting to say the least.
Nobody seems to have a clue ( and quite rightly ) how they are suggesting she allegedly committed these crimes.
I am really on the fence with this one, not that one size fits all but a serial killer ??
Let’s see what tuesday brings.

 

[JosieJo]

Guilty or not its the "set up" theory that I find the most bizarre.
During 2019 7 out of 10 hospital trusts were failing CQC standards many were performing equally as bad and worse than Chester
Telford & Shropshire and Stafford have had extensive press coverage alongside public enquiries etc.
In these cases they don't just pick out a single nurse as a scapegoat that would be pointless and subject the Trust to far more scrutiny than they would like.
Usually what happens is a few sideward moves of directors/ senior staff are pushed to leave and the whole cycle starts again as these problems are due to funding and poor senior management.
I do think the difficulties the Trust was experiencing may have hindered the investigation and certainly will have had effect but full on scapegoat theory that is common on social media no chance imo

 

[Marantz4250b]

Guilty or not its the "set up" theory that I find the most bizarre.
During 2019 7 out of 10 hospital trusts were failing CQC standards many were performing equally as bad and worse than Chester
Telford & Shropshire and Stafford have had extensive press coverage alongside public enquiries etc.
In these cases they don't just pick out a single nurse as a scapegoat that would be pointless and subject the Trust to far more scrutiny than they would like.
Usually what happens is a few sideward moves of directors/ senior staff are pushed to leave and the whole cycle starts again as these problems are due to funding and poor senior management.
I do think the difficulties the Trust was experiencing may have hindered the investigation and certainly will have had effect but full on scapegoat theory that is common on social media no chance imo

I've never bought the "she was set up" theory, as such. To do so would imply that a failing hospital was staffed and run by people who were incapable of running a neo-natal unit yet were also criminal geniuses! It doesn't make sense.

I do think, however, that if rank incompetence has caused or contributed to these deaths, eventually resulting in the police being called in, then if their investigation uncovers circumstantial evidence to connect LL to them but they actually happened due to systemic failures then who is there to counter that notion? We aren't going to see hospital managers and directors getting all up in the police's faces with statements like "sorry, but you do realise that this hospital is run by me and my colleagues who, collectively, are barely capable of boiling an egg so do you not think you should be investigating us instead?". They are simply going to look the other way and hope no one comes along asking too many awkward questions. This, to my mind, is how a lot of miscarriages of justice in the medical field probably happen.

Anyway, unless we hear pretty early on tomorrow as to how, specifically, they are alleging that she committed these crimes then I'm sticking with my "not guilty" opinion of her.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

I am also very interested though do feel we will need a lot of patience due to the size of the case and the inevitable days full of "housekeeping" which surely will be huge.
I really do not know what to think until we hear the evidence but I'd be amazed if they have allowed LL to be held on remand for this amount of time without very good cause..I don't buy the train of thought that it is in her own interest

The assessment of the evidence by the CPS is required to be that there realistic prospect of conviction, in the first instance.

I would also hope there is 'very good cause', as you say, for such a lengthy remand, which arises as a result of the number of charges being tried in unison and the expectedly complex evidence to be presented by the Crown and in turn challenged by the defence.

Unfortunately, there is essentially no other option but for LL to have been held on remand. Some charged with murder are bailed if the specific circumstances warrant it. In LL's case the number of alleged offences and the duty of care owed to LL, by ensuring her personal safety and the risk of harm from others or herself would have sealed the deal.

If LL were to be acquitted on all charges then she may have to rebuild her life as 'protected person', depending on the threat assessment and her attitude to it.

My expectation is that the evidence should be compelling and will prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt. I am fully prepared for the lines to be somewhat more blurred and with the associated damning fall-out.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Absolutely! Whether she is convicted or acquitted, it needs to be unequivocal. She needs either to be convicted on evidence which is absolutely insurmountable or the defence case needs to utterly shred the prosecution's position. Any outcome which is remotely open to question will be very bad indeed and will leave a very bad taste.

As far as a conviction is concerned, I have my doubts as to whether the prosecution have such a level of evidence in their favour. She's been arrested three times, held for the maximum period without charge on two of those occasions (requiring magistrates authority) and was only charged on the final arrest. Hence, the police obviously didn't have the required evidence they needed to charge her for years. I think that the chance that they suddenly had utterly damning evidence after years of investigation is remote, quite honestly. From everything we know of her - which, to be fair, isn't a great deal - she appears to be an entirely normal, if slightly timid, young woman rather than some hardened criminal or unhinged psychopath. She certainly doesn't come over as the type who's used to confrontation, especially not with the police. If she was guilty I think she'd have cracked long before they actually charged her.

I think that the time period over which the investigation was conducted is due to the need for sufficient weight of 'evidential consistencies' throughout the incidents in question.

There was a point when the CPS threshold was crossed in providing a realistic prospect of conviction. At this point LL was charged.

It will be interesting to assess if any of the charges can be proven under the weight of their own evidence or if they are dependent on a pattern of activity/conduct present in some/all the allegations of murder/attempted murder.

Proving the required intent to kill/cause serious harm in those who died, over and above error/insufficient care/natural demise in a department with operational and management issues could be an insurmountable challenge. Proving a mental element is not easy at the best of times.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Guilty or not its the "set up" theory that I find the most bizarre.
During 2019 7 out of 10 hospital trusts were failing CQC standards many were performing equally as bad and worse than Chester
Telford & Shropshire and Stafford have had extensive press coverage alongside public enquiries etc.
In these cases they don't just pick out a single nurse as a scapegoat that would be pointless and subject the Trust to far more scrutiny than they would like.
Usually what happens is a few sideward moves of directors/ senior staff are pushed to leave and the whole cycle starts again as these problems are due to funding and poor senior management.
I do think the difficulties the Trust was experiencing may have hindered the investigation and certainly will have had effect but full on scapegoat theory that is common on social media no chance imo

Where the NHS is concerned absolutely nothing would shock me anymore.....I've witnessed it more than once first hand!

 

[ChatteringBirds]

This girl is no murderer. If she is convicted then I very much doubt it will be on the basis of "concrete" evidence. Concrete evidence surely does not take six months to put to a jury?

Putting together a professional case always takes a long time.
Why not wait to see the evidence while keeping an open mind in both directions?

 

[JosieJo]

Where the NHS is concerned absolutely nothing would shock me anymore.....I've witnessed it more than once first hand!

I agree it's difficult to shock when it comes to the NHS but having worked in the NHS as a nurse manager for 34 years I really cannot see any point in a set up of a single nurse in its purest form

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Putting together a professional case always takes a long time.
Why not wait to see the evidence while keeping an open mind in both directions?

Ideally, one should begin with a 'not guilty' position and only be persuaded otherwise on account of the Crown's case proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The reality is folk speculate, because they're human. Unless on the jury it's well within bounds.

 

[Bakers]

I can't see her name listed for tomorrow in either of Manchesters crown court . Looks like it's not starting tomorrow

 

[Alyce]

The Crown Court
at Manchester

Daily Courtroom List for Tuesday 04 October 2022​

FINAL 1​

Warning - There are cases within this court list with reporting restrictions.
Any breach of reporting restrictions is punishable by sanctions up to and including imprisonment.

Court 7 - sitting at 10:30 am

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE GOSS​

For Trial

T20217088

***** ****

07WZ1014618

*****

***

Order made under s45, Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999

www.courtserve.net

 

[Whitehall 1212]

The Crown Court
at Manchester

Daily Courtroom List for Tuesday 04 October 2022​

FINAL 1​

Warning - There are cases within this court list with reporting restrictions.
Any breach of reporting restrictions is punishable by sanctions up to and including imprisonment.

Court 7 - sitting at 10:30 am

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE GOSS​

For Trial

T20217088

***** ****

07WZ1014618

*****

***

Order made under s45, Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999

www.courtserve.net

@Alyce what makes you think this case is subject to reporting restrictions relating to LL's identity as the defendant? I was under the impression that only the names of the victims were subject to reporting restrictions.

 

[Alyce]

@Alyce what makes you think this case is subject to reporting restrictions relating to LL's identity as the defendant? I was under the impression that only the names of the victims were subject to reporting restrictions.

No idea, I was just posting up the listing.

 

[Marantz4250b]

So, presumably, this is indeed going ahead tomorrow?

 

[Alyce]

So, presumably, this is indeed going ahead tomorrow?

Looks like it. The case has always been down to be heard by Justice Goss and that's his listing for tomorrow.