GUILTY UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, murder of babies, 7 Guilty of murder verdicts; 7 Guilty of attempted murder; 2 Not Guilty of attempted; 6 hung re attempted #33

[Sarahlou]

Kind of off topic but not. About time this happened.

Criminals to be made to attend sentencing hearings - using force if necessary - under government plans - BBC News

 

[cottonweaver]

Kind of off topic but not. About time this happened.

the penalty doesn't seem to apply to WLO's like Letby but makes a good headline

'If a criminal continues to resist attending their sentencing despite a judge’s order, they will face an extra two years behind bars. This new penalty will apply in cases where the maximum sentence is life imprisonment, including serious sexual or violent crimes such as murder, rape, and grievous bodily harm with intent'

Criminals to be forced to attend sentencing in England and Wales

MoJ proposes new powers for judges, but caution raised over potentially disruptive behaviour by prisoners compelled to appear

www.theguardian.com

 

[Sweeper2000]

In that old link I posted the other day, it can also be seen that she was doing her compulsive note-writing rants while she was in the office - presumably with other staff around - at the Patient Safety Dept. ( If another staff member had seen that note, in a normal organisation, they'd probably see that as a sign that she wasn't fit for work)

Link gives a little bit of detail of what was found on the back of that Dept's annual leave proforma inside a blue folder during LE's office search.
Maybe she's more reckless and less of the devious, scrupulous master-criminal than we've been led to believe? Makes me wonder, but I don't know the answer

Lucy Letby: What police found at her Chester home at 2018 arrest

Crime scene investigators' photos taken inside serial killer Lucy Letby's Chester home were shown to the jury during the trial.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

ETA
also wondering why she wasn't tempted to go off sick once she was in that patient safety dept. I am not clear on the timeline of her CoC work between her secondment in 2016 and first arrest in 2018

scary facts from link I just read but too late to edit so pasting it here instead:
'The NHS across the UK as a whole is already one of the world’s largest employers with about 1.5 million personnel. It has the fifth biggest workforce after the US Department of Defense (2.9 million), the People’s Liberation Army in China (2.3 million), the US supermarket group Walmart (2.2 million) and the McDonald’s fast-food chain (1.9 million).'
The new workforce expansion plan would mean that 1 in 11 of every employed person in UK was employed by NHS by next decade.
"Houston, we have a problem....."

I don’t think anything she did was particularly sly. She’s devious yes but I see no reason to assume she ever made meticulous efforts to conceal her actions. Remember if the docs had had their way she would have arrrested years before she was. Might simply be the fact she was so forthright and in managers pockets that allowed her to continue without conseqhence.

I might think she didn’t go off sick when seconded was due to her being motivated to clear her name. She can’t manipulate people at home can she? she’s out of the loop at home, at work she’s got multiple reasons to be motivated. 1, continue to try to clear name, 2. Gather informatiom, 3, manipulate the power dynamic and presence is 100% vital for that.

 

[Rusty Braincells]

Absolutely the right decision to compel attendance for sentencing or there will be consequences. “The criminals might cause a fuss” is not a good enough reason not to change the law. The practicalities need to be worked out. But most criminals will not cause active disruption I think, they’ve just opted out because they can.

For a whole life order such as Letby, there should be other punishment, perhaps delay for approval to any enhanced regime when behind bars, for not attending.

 

[Rusty Braincells]

I don’t think anything she did was particularly sly. She’s devious yes but I see no reason to assume she ever made meticulous efforts to conceal her actions. Remember if the docs had had their way she would have arrrested years before she was. Might simply be the fact she was so forthright and in managers pockets that allowed her to continue without conseqhence.

I might think she didn’t go off sick when seconded was due to her being motivated to clear her name. She can’t manipulate people at home can she? she’s out of the loop at home, at work she’s got multiple reasons to be motivated. 1, continue to try to clear name, 2. Gather informatiom, 3, manipulate the power dynamic and presence is 100% vital for that.

I agree. Not being off sick allowed Letby to attempt to control what was happening and to observe events and developments at very least.

This isn’t your regular person in trouble with her job who might tap out and log onto Netflix because they can’t face the music, but a serial murderer keen to avoid punishment.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I agree. Not being off sick allowed Letby to attempt to control what was happening and to observe events and developments at very least.

This isn’t your regular person in trouble with her job who might tap out and log onto Netflix because they can’t face the music, but a serial murderer keen to avoid punishment.

I think she may have been looking more to delay punishment for as long as possible rather than avoid it altogether. I’m struggling to think why she made no efforts at all to hide the stuff in her house. I thought the Moment I heard about the home stuff that she obviously hadn’t made an effort to hide it. Why though? Why leave that diary with caveman level code about the murders and am with a confession note in a drawer? It would be very easy to think that a cry for help. “Do something about it because I can’t“.

im wondering if this theory could explain the contradictions that we see In this case?

the confession note for example, is it a confession or a statement of denial?

how about both?

 

[Rusty Braincells]

I think she may have been looking more to delay punishment for as long as possible rather than avoid it altogether. I’m struggling to think why she made no efforts at all to hide the stuff in her house. I thought the Moment I heard about the home stuff that she obviously hadn’t made an effort to hide it. Why though? Why leave that diary with caveman level code about the murders and am with a confession note in a drawer? It would be very easy to think that a cry for help. “Do something about it because I can’t“.

im wondering if this theory could explain the contradictions that we see In this case?

the confession note for example, is it a confession or a statement of denial?

how about both?

It’s difficult to understand how such a twisted mind works but perhaps she had some level of conflict, maybe some part of her knew she was doing the wrong thing. Then again, it was only powerful enough for some scribbled notes, not for her to stop or plead guilty when finally caught.

But showing up to work was an attempt to continue to exert influence and control to me. In terms of how she saw it playing out, she could not help herself but keep killing children and I don’t know if she had fully appreciated if the Little Miss Innocent, I care about babies, my parents and friends think butter wouldn’t melt etc act would eventually play itself out. The attention and high from hurting children was all-important even as it massively increased the risk of detection. Just IMO.

 

[cottonweaver]

Absolutely the right decision to compel attendance for sentencing or there will be consequences. “The criminals might cause a fuss” is not a good enough reason not to change the law. The practicalities need to be worked out. But most criminals will not cause active disruption I think, they’ve just opted out because they can.

For a whole life order such as Letby, there should be other punishment, perhaps delay for approval to any enhanced regime when behind bars, for not attending.

not necessarily doing that though

it mentions piping into cells, which had already been an option under existing law

'to make criminals appear in the dock or via video link will also be enshrined in law,'

 

[Sweeper2000]

I’m not actually for that chain em to the dock thing. I actually think if you force an already unwilling individual to do something you increase the likelihood of that person doing something nasty. I also think considering the type of person who would be in the dock, these are specifically people you don’t want to do this with. They could do some serious verbal damage with the opportunity, I wouldn’t want the victims to deal with anymore.

however blast it into the cell all day Long amped up. Make sure they hear the hammer fall.

 

[notsure]

Regarding motivation again, I don't agree that she necessarily enjoyed killing. Serial killers have described killing as an addiction: the more they do it, the more they have to do it, a bit like a drug. It's a compulsion that gives temporary relief from whatever demons drive them.

 

[cottonweaver]

I don’t think anything she did was particularly sly. She’s devious yes but I see no reason to assume she ever made meticulous efforts to conceal her actions. Remember if the docs had had their way she would have arrrested years before she was. Might simply be the fact she was so forthright and in managers pockets that allowed her to continue without conseqhence.

I might think she didn’t go off sick when seconded was due to her being motivated to clear her name. She can’t manipulate people at home can she? she’s out of the loop at home, at work she’s got multiple reasons to be motivated. 1, continue to try to clear name, 2. Gather informatiom, 3, manipulate the power dynamic and presence is 100% vital for that.

when i posted 'Maybe she's more reckless and less of the devious, scrupulous master-criminal than we've been led to believe? Makes me wonder, but I don't know the answer' I wouldn't go as far as saying she wasn't sly.
see judge Goss ' "There was pre-meditation, calculation and cunning in your actions..... etc

I agree with you though on the rest and was hinting that the particular conditions at CoC meant she was facilitated to continue her spree ( been reading views of nurses on another site & they think if u were LL, CoC NNUwas a good place because it was ' as slack as....'
Totally agree w you on 2nd para - she wanted to stay in the loop and if half your old Unit is in your corner and all of senior management, why not. Days out Chester races etc. Nonetheless she could have easily covered sickness absence because it could have bolstered the Grievance complaint she had submitted

 

[iamshadow21]

That's leaving out the ones who smoothly mask their double life like Letby did and only focusing on the most outwardly dysfuctional. Rex Heuermann, Dennis Rader, Gary Ridgway, Ted Bundy (prior to his capture in Utah), and, I should add, most health care serial killers, tended to live pretty regular lives on the exterior. Charles Cullen had exhibited some disturbing behaviour in his early life, but didn't have a criminal record before his arrest, and he may have killed as many as four hundred people during his time as a nurse. The fact is, many serial killers don't come with a convenient warning sign in the form of a lengthy criminal record. Often, the only people who see that dark side of them are the victims. This is very common when talking about those who attack victims in a health care setting. They get away with it because they pass for normal rather than having fifteen priors for GBH and stalking. They're a nurse, it's the perfect cover for murder.

MOO

I would like to make a correction, Cullen had had one prior run-in with the law for trespassing and stalking, he pled guilty, and got probation. That's what I get for not reading far enough down a page - it was well into his killing spree, so was listed in the murders section.

MOO

 

[Rusty Braincells]

not necessarily doing that though

it mentions piping into cells, which had already been an option under existing law

'to make criminals appear in the dock or via video link will also be enshrined in law,'

Well, attending by video link is still attending, and the judges don’t have the power to order attendance in any form at the moment as I understand.

 

[Rusty Braincells]

I’m not actually for that chain em to the dock thing. I actually think if you force an already unwilling individual to do something you increase the likelihood of that person doing something nasty. I also think considering the type of person who would be in the dock, these are specifically people you don’t want to do this with. They could do some serious verbal damage with the opportunity, I wouldn’t want the victims to deal with anymore.

however blast it into the cell all day Long amped up. Make sure they hear the hammer fall.

I do see what you mean but I still don’t think we have really encountered criminals who were “unwilling” to the point of causing grief. That hasn’t been the issue.

They didn’t have to go in the past so some of them chose not to, as simple as that. These aren’t people who we have any evidence would be disruptive or who would argue the point if they had no choice. I am sure a minority would but nearly all of them wouldn’t do or say anything if attendance was compelled is my guess the same way nearly all of them didn’t say or do much during their trials.

What they have easily been able to do is say “no.” If they want to take things up a notch or face actual consequences (as mentioned, for whole life orders I think an impact on prison privileges is called for), that’s a very different decision.

 

[nyvictoria]

IMO the murders had little to do with her feelings about the premies themselves, other than they were the available, convenient route to hurting the parents.

I’d really love to know if she chose Nursing intending to murder babies and relish the parents’ grief or if something triggered her after she started working with them.

 

[d0lphin]

I’m not actually for that chain em to the dock thing. I actually think if you force an already unwilling individual to do something you increase the likelihood of that person doing something nasty. I also think considering the type of person who would be in the dock, these are specifically people you don’t want to do this with. They could do some serious verbal damage with the opportunity, I wouldn’t want the victims to deal with anymore.

however blast it into the cell all day Long amped up. Make sure they hear the hammer fall.

I completely agree, it's a knee jerk reaction from the government and there have been cases of criminals laughing at the families in court (which I know they could do any time, not just during sentencing)

I

 

[Action Hank]

It'd be interesting to hear from friends of LL what she was like after a few drinks. Did an alter ego come out, etc.?

 

[Anxala]

I watched this analysis earlier today on another site. It's one of the most interesting takes on LL I've seen to date. Well worth a look/listen.

The psychiatrist is Dr Andrew van der Vaart.
Does Lucy Letby have a "split personality"? If so, what is she splitting off and why? I discuss BPD and its 4 archetypes as identified by Dr. Christine Lawson.

 

[Parker Knoll]

It’s quite simplistic to say “ you must go up for sentencing “ as 99.9 pc of defendants getting life or WLO are not like Letby.
Without digging out the stats the majority are men and highly dangerous and could be very disruptive which for the victims would be incredibly upsetting.
HOWEVER, it is not above the wit of man to arrange an alternative scenario in these instances. You don’t go up for sentencing on a WLO and immediately you are without privileges so visits/calls/letters/TV for a number of years, you are on your own would be one, you make a scene at the sentencing hearing and the same applies but that is fraught with issues in itself ( what constitutes a scene ? ) you get my drift.
You refuse to come up and the sentencing remarks and VIS are relayed to the holding cell, Christ it could even be played on a loop in the G4S van back up to wherever the defendant was being held but something has to change.
Legislative powers take time but the tories have sat in this issue for well over 12 months without doing anything which is shameful in itself. I see RS has pledged today things will change so let’s see but I’m not holding my breath.

 

[Rusty Braincells]

It’s quite simplistic to say “ you must go up for sentencing “ as 99.9 pc of defendants getting life or WLO are not like Letby.
Without digging out the stats the majority are men and highly dangerous and could be very disruptive which for the victims would be incredibly upsetting.
HOWEVER, it is not above the wit of man to arrange an alternative scenario in these instances. You don’t go up for sentencing on a WLO and immediately you are without privileges so visits/calls/letters/TV for a number of years, you are on your own would be one, you make a scene at the sentencing hearing and the same applies but that is fraught with issues in itself ( what constitutes a scene ? ) you get my drift.
You refuse to come up and the sentencing remarks and VIS are relayed to the holding cell, Christ it could even be played on a loop in the G4S van back up to wherever the defendant was being held but something has to change.
Legislative powers take time but the tories have sat in this issue for well over 12 months without doing anything which is shameful in itself. I see RS has pledged today things will change so let’s see but I’m not holding my breath.

They’ve appeared for the main trial whether in person or by video and all security issues have needed to be managed. As you say, a video link could be arranged if necessary. However, not needing to appear for sentencing is a loophole that ought to be closed, I have seen no evidence presented whatsoever that this loophole had ever existed for security reasons at all, but more to do with powers to compel appearance after conviction, which don’t exist and should be created. It would not be automatic but up to be a judge whether to make the order and they may decide in some cases the security risk was too severe. That being the case, I can’t understand any objection to it.

Getting back to Letby specifically, I doubt any judge would consider her a serious security risk given her profile which of course made her tragically target vulnerable victims unable to fight back. I am sure there was a risk of something callous being said by her or a smirk or similar due to her personality, or an outburst that she was innocent as her mother displayed, but I am also sure from their statements that most families would also rather she had been made to face them even with that danger advised.