UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #14

[Sweeper2000]

Where was she described as acting emotionless throughout the trial so far?

she wasn’t described as emotionless but was described as not showing anythin. Just still aside from passing notes here and there in the podcast by someone who was present.

 

[LorriB]

she wasn’t described as emotionless but was described as not showing anythin. Just still aside from passing notes here and there in the podcast by someone who was present.

Ah okay! I can't bear to bring myself to give Daily Mail any clicks so never listen.

Anyhow, not sure it is a sign of guilt or innocence either way. If she cried throughout some might think it was put on and melodramatic.

 

[Legal]

I guess maybe she might have talked more about the pain and difficulties the babies themselves were experiencing. Mostly she spoke about how she felt. Kind of made it about her?

I guess I am comparing her to my daughter's best friend----who works with dogs who are getting chemo treatments. She loses some of the sweet dogs and it is emotionally difficult for her, losing them and dealing with the grieving owners.

But when she does talk about it, she talks about how difficult it is for her to see the dogs in pain and stressed out and being sick. It really troubles her at times, even though it is often a successful process.

So it did seem odd to me that LL never seemed as focused on the babies and used words like rubbish, and was not as sympathetic sounding at times.

I've watched some great videos by peter Hyatt who is specialist in statement analysis. He states a red flag in missing children cases is when parents focus on how the situation has affected them 'eg I couldn't sleep, I'm so worried, rather than showing concern for the child ( I hope she'snot cold, hungry). Of course this case is slightly different but I feel there are parallels. After all, most of us on here have shown concern for the babies.

 

[e145]

Ah okay! I can't bear to bring myself to give Daily Mail any clicks so never listen.

Anyhow, not sure it is a sign of guilt or innocence either way. If she cried throughout some might think it was put on and melodramatic.

We have all seen this happen in previous trials. The accused gets judged on everything. Her reactions, body language, emotions, facial expressions etc will be scrutinized by the media and the public. Opinions re. Guilt will be determined by a crying episode, the way she sits, staring etc. Such a long trial, one person accused. People watching her for a sign, a clue, something to strength their theory about her. Human nature, do you think we all do it to a certain extent?

 

[Sweeper2000]

Ah okay! I can't bear to bring myself to give Daily Mail any clicks so never listen.

Anyhow, not sure it is a sign of guilt or innocence either way. If she cried throughout some might think it was put on and melodramatic.

Tbh I don’t think I have seen any details you wouldn’t find on here. Aside from a few texts here and there. I’m surprised really about the media coverage, this is a trial unlike any other I’ve heard,perhaps with implications for other aspects of the modern state but coverage has been scant. allot I think will depend on the Verdict and expect much writing and tv if found guilty.

 

[Tortoise]

Journalist Kim Pilling (in the courtroom every day, and responsible for the daily PA news reports on this case) interviewed on the trial podcast episode 4 (31st October 2022) -

"There hasn't been any noticeable reaction from her during the trial so far, that I've noticed, but she is following the case and occasionally has passed notes to one of the solicitors in front of her, very rarely.

In a case as complex as this, the aim for the jury at the end of the trial when they go out to deliberate, the aim is that they are experts in the case, so when we get to the very end of this trial and the verdicts come in, a reader who has been following the case, or maybe loosely following the case, they're not scratching their heads as to why the jury has come to that verdict."

I think that might be quite relevant, now that we are over 5 months into a 6+ month trial.

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 4: Baby B

 

[e145]

What do those of you claiming her texts show no emotion towards the babies expect to see?

Can the prosecution and defense pick and choose the section the text message they use to present as evidence? If so, I imagine the prosecution would not use anything that would show emotions towards the babies. They want to portray her as cold and emotionless.

 

[Phoenix Lazarus]

expect much writing and tv if found guilty.

There will be if she's acquitted. There'll then be big questions as to why she was charged and who or what was at fault if she wasn't.

 

[LorriB]

We have all seen this happen in previous trials. The accused gets judged on everything. Her reactions, body language, emotions, facial expressions etc will be scrutinized by the media and the public. Opinions re. Guilt will be determined by a crying episode, the way she sits, staring etc. Such a long trial, one person accused. People watching her for a sign, a clue, something to strength their theory about her. Human nature, do you think we all do it to a certain extent?

Yeah definitely human nature, and I think it's quite easy to find guilt if you look for it everywhere.

With the trials I've followed, I try to find innocence rather than guilt. It's what I would want people to do if I was ever accused of anything. I can be a right emotionless person so I'm sure I'd be crucified!

 

[Tortoise]

Can the prosecution and defense pick and choose the section the text message they use to present as evidence? If so, I imagine the prosecution would not use anything that would show emotions towards the babies. They want to portray her as cold and emotionless.

Prosecuting cases isn't about hiding evidence because the defence would expose that and make the prosecution look shady, which is not a good look in front of a jury.

The rule is disclose everything, whether it advances or hurts your case. Truth can withstand scrutiny, and I can assure you the prosecution has to present all the evidence, and the defence and trial system is set to ensure that's what they do. IMO

 

[LorriB]

Can the prosecution and defense pick and choose the section the text message they use to present as evidence? If so, I imagine the prosecution would not use anything that would show emotions towards the babies. They want to portray her as cold and emotionless.

Yes I'm not sure!

Tortoise you're usually quite good at knowing the rules around these things! Do you know if the texts are just what the prosecution has presented and defense have agreed? Can they just pick ones which back up their theory?


Ah I see you've already answered. Cross posted.

 

[Cardgame]

Can the prosecution and defense pick and choose the section the text message they use to present as evidence? If so, I imagine the prosecution would not use anything that would show emotions towards the babies. They want to portray her as cold and emotionless.

What isn't clear to me, IMO, and perhaps someone on here has a better idea, is what it is that these text messages are being used as evidence OF.

Are they intended to present evidence about her character?

Are they building an evidence picture about what she was doing around the time of each incident?

Are they presenting evidence about a relationship with a particular doctor?

Are they building towards an suggestion about motive?

Will further evidence be presented which contradicts information LL states in the texts?

Or is it just standard now to present phone evidence of whatever was happening at the time of any alleged incident?

 

[Legal]

What isn't clear to me, IMO, and perhaps someone on here has a better idea, is what it is that these text messages are being used as evidence OF.

Are they intended to present evidence about her character?

Are they building an evidence picture about what she was doing around the time of each incident?

Are they presenting evidence about a relationship with a particular doctor?

Are they building towards an suggestion about motive?

Will further evidence be presented which contradicts information LL states in the texts?

Or is it just standard now to present phone evidence of whatever was happening at the time of any alleged incident?

In closing statements the prosecution should weave together all the threads of evidence to create their version of events. We saw this recently in the murdaugh trial.

 

[squish]

Where was she described as acting emotionless throughout the trial so far?

Consistently, whenever reporters have mentioned her demeanour, the gist of what they say is that she is sitting there showing no emotion.

What do those of you claiming her texts show no emotion towards the babies expect to see?

She mentions things that demonstrate the parents' suffering, for example, them crying and begging not to take their (dead) baby away.

She doesn't do this when talking about the babies. She doesn't say for example, anything like "baby was screaming and absolutely inconsolable" "baby was squirming and I couldn't settle him, he seemed uncomfortable" or anything like that. She mentions what the babies look like but nothing that demonstrates the babies' have feelings.

 

[squish]

Being calm and being emotionless are very different things.

I also don't think because it hasn't been mentioned she was upset, doesn't mean she hasn't been. Though I'd agree not to such a dramatic extent as when Dr Choc came in.

Basically, the absence of evidence isn't evidence.

I never said that she wasn't upset.

It's obvious that she will definitely be upset right now. She faces a strong possibility of never seeing the outside world again.

I was talking about her sudden change from her usual calm and unreactive demeanour and what her reason might be for her sudden dramatics when faced with Dr Choc.

 

[notsure]

Prosecuting cases isn't about hiding evidence because the defence would expose that and make the prosecution look shady, which is not a good look in front of a jury.

The rule is disclose everything, whether it advances or hurts your case. Truth can withstand scrutiny, and I can assure you the prosecution has to present all the evidence, and the defence and trial system is set to ensure that's what they do. IMO

Somebody is choosing which texts to use, though, surely? They aren't showing every text sent to and from LL over the course of the year.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Can the prosecution and defense pick and choose the section the text message they use to present as evidence? If so, I imagine the prosecution would not use anything that would show emotions towards the babies. They want to portray her as cold and emotionless.

I guess the prosecution can present what they want but the defence will simply produce the whole of the texts if they think it beneficial or they think its quoted out of context.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Dbm

 

[Tortoise]

Somebody is choosing which texts to use, though, surely? They aren't showing every text sent to and from LL over the course of the year.

Yes the defence and the prosecution will have agreed what to leave out.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I’m wondering about some of the evidence around the collapses, that’s a bit of the cases I struggled with. I’m not sure but in most if not all cases the pros experts have stated that many of the collapses are suspect as there seems to be no underlying reason ie infection. Only thing is these are collapses kind of within collapses that are deemed normal. I’m wondering if there is collapses that aren’t surrounded by any other health issues at all? And if these required cpr. I totally get what people and the prosecutio have said that babies don’t just collapse like this but we have mr Myers saying they do and I’m wondering if they are like the collapses that seem to just happen out of the blue.