UK - Healthcare worker arrested on suspicion of murder/attempted murder of a number of babies, 2018

[ZaZara]

These are all excellent points! It is not a simple area and when the press pipes up with ...cos deaths rose a bit.... that will be taken by a lot of people as being code for "she must be guilty". The whole issue surrounding shift patterns against deaths (if it even plays a part, but I bet it will) is that it's potentially a very, very complicated area. It took me a couple of times of reading that part about "statistically, most nurses will experience more deaths on their ward when on shift than off because more of them are onshift when people die" before it dropped as to what they were going on about. It would be quite a thing to have to sit on a jury all day for six months being continually bombarded with information like that.

I certainly think you're correct about what the initial experts were trying to do - consciously or not. The issue with testimony like this is that you need similar experts to refute it and such people I'd guess are somewhat thin on the ground. In the closing part of that paper he says (which I think you quoted) something to the effect of "I hope I don't end up working a Lucy Letby's case". I wonder whether it might an idea for her defence people to give him a call anyway rather than needing him for an appeal?

From an interview with Gerrit Timmer who was Chaiman of the Dutch Association for Statistics at the time when Lucia de Berk was convicted.
Convicting someone on the basis of statistical evidence is in itself pure nonsense, according to Gerrit Timmer even then.


Q. One is inclined to think that every answer that rolls out of an algorithm is true. But people have attached all kinds of variables and goals to such an algorithm beforehand. So as a mathematician, you actually determine the glasses through which I see the world.

A. "As a rule, this colouring is not put into an algorithm. Not consciously, at any rate. Perhaps you discriminate between men and women unconsciously, by the preselection you make.

Q. I think profiling in crime is a nice example: you can imagine that the police organisation wants to know where statistically the most crime will take place, due to undercapacity. In your algorithm, you might select by district, by gender or by ethnicity. And then you end up with profiling that is ethically unjustifiable. As mathematicians, you have simply solved a problem for a client, but unintentionally arrived at an ethically irresponsible solution. Are you aware of the unintended undesirable effects that your algorithms can cause?

A. "In my opinion, the danger lies more in ignorance than in ethics. I studied law myself, and at that time the subject of jurimetrics - statistics - was just coming up. What they did there was mathematically quite wrong. Those lawyers didn't understand enough of it. That led to the examples you are talking about now. They went looking for correlations in a large database at random. Every statistician understands that this is not a good method. If you start comparing billions of data, of course you'll find correlations. Random searches simply aren't allowed.

Q. But how do you work differently?

A. "You have to have a hypothesis first, otherwise you can't test it. We can distinguish a thousand items of clothing nowadays. Even if there is no relationship between clothing and crime, there will still be one type of clothing, perhaps striped jumpers, for which the link with crime is the highest. That says absolutely nothing. It is different if you had reason to suspect striped jumpers beforehand. Then you can use statistics to test that hypothesis. Then you've eliminated the 'coincidence' that you're reasoning towards the answer."

"Random search is the one mistake made out of ignorance. The other mistake is assuming that you can prove things with statistics. At the time of Lucia de Berk, I was chairman of the Dutch Association for Statistics. Lucia de Berk was convicted on statistical evidence. That in itself is nonsense. The chance that it was a coincidence was supposed to be very small in her case. Well, go to a casino and write down which 30 numbers have fallen in a row on the roulette table. The probability of exactly those 30 numbers falling in a row is virtually zero. But that is not proof that it did not happen, is it? Because it did happen. Everything that happens outside our window has a very small chance of happening. So relying on those odds is a close approximation of three times nothing."


Interview AI-expert Gerrit Timmer - 'Bol.com en Ahold zou waarschijnlijk béter zijn dan Amazon'

BBM

 

[Marantz4250b]

Mothers who helped uncover the biggest NHS maternity scandal

I've only just seen this so I'll be honest and fess up that I haven't read other than a couple of paragraphs but it's about the shocking state of maternity units in some places.

Whether or not any of it relates to LL's case I have no idea. Anyway, there's a Panorama programme on about it tonight at 21:00.

 

[whatawaster]

Mothers who helped uncover the biggest NHS maternity scandal

I've only just seen this so I'll be honest and fess up that I haven't read other than a couple of paragraphs but it's about the shocking state of maternity units in some places.

Whether or not any of it relates to LL's case I have no idea. Anyway, there's a Panorama programme on about it tonight at 21:00.

Wow. That's very interesting. I'll be watching that on catch up too. Thanks for sharing.

 

[HollyHunter9]

Mothers who helped uncover the biggest NHS maternity scandal

I've only just seen this so I'll be honest and fess up that I haven't read other than a couple of paragraphs but it's about the shocking state of maternity units in some places.

Whether or not any of it relates to LL's case I have no idea. Anyway, there's a Panorama programme on about it tonight at 21:00.

A couple of things I note from the very informative article you have shared, one is the mention of the bullying culture of the NHS and the other is regarding incompetent managers whose views do not line up with those of the clinicians, especially when clinicians try to make managers aware of unsafe practices which is resulting in patient harm. We see it time and time again. Trusts would rather preserve the outward appearance and reputation of a Trust rather than openly admit there are problems with patient care and try to address or learn from mistakes. I would not be at all surprised if LL is genuinely innocent and this is one very big cover up. I know to most people that sounds outlandish and absurd but I don't think people want to acknowledge the fact that 'our beloved NHS' which has bravely fought through the pandemic is actually very deeply and fundamentally flawed and has been for many many years! Yet it is still not changing! Why? Usually after these investigations staff eventually speak up and admit they knew there was problems and saw cover ups yet they did not speak up at the time because they were bullied or intimidated not to. There really needs to be a change in this toxic culture, particularly in the management, but no one ever seems to be held accountable when these stories eventually surface years later. I fear this is now such a huge and integrated problem within the NHS that it will never be corrected. Most of this is my personal opinion but to back up what I am saying here are some links...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...eport-offers-no-prescription-cover-up-culture

'I write this as an anonymous NHS consultant – I recognise the culture that led to Gosport'

Our NHS heroes deserve better than a culture of cover-ups
Redirect Notice

42 dead babies and a culture of arrogance and cover-up that scars the NHS : Ian Birrell

 

[Marantz4250b]

Am I correct in thinking that there is another court date in April? If so does anyone know the actual date?

 

[bluebird69]

A couple of things I note from the very informative article you have shared, one is the mention of the bullying culture of the NHS and the other is regarding incompetent managers whose views do not line up with those of the clinicians, especially when clinicians try to make managers aware of unsafe practices which is resulting in patient harm. We see it time and time again. Trusts would rather preserve the outward appearance and reputation of a Trust rather than openly admit there are problems with patient care and try to address or learn from mistakes. I would not be at all surprised if LL is genuinely innocent and this is one very big cover up. I know to most people that sounds outlandish and absurd but I don't think people want to acknowledge the fact that 'our beloved NHS' which has bravely fought through the pandemic is actually very deeply and fundamentally flawed and has been for many many years! Yet it is still not changing! Why? Usually after these investigations staff eventually speak up and admit they knew there was problems and saw cover ups yet they did not speak up at the time because they were bullied or intimidated not to. There really needs to be a change in this toxic culture, particularly in the management, but no one ever seems to be held accountable when these stories eventually surface years later. I fear this is now such a huge and integrated problem within the NHS that it will never be corrected. Most of this is my personal opinion but to back up what I am saying here are some links...

NHS whistleblowers report offers no prescription for ending cover-up culture

'I write this as an anonymous NHS consultant – I recognise the culture that led to Gosport'

Our NHS heroes deserve better than a culture of cover-ups
Redirect Notice

42 dead babies and a culture of arrogance and cover-up that scars the NHS : Ian Birrell

well look what happened to this whistleblower
Top NHS doc branded racist for reporting Asian colleagues wins £102k compo

 

[HollyHunter9]

well look what happened to this whistleblower
Top NHS doc branded racist for reporting Asian colleagues wins £102k compo

Thankyou for sharing this, it does not surprise me in the slightest. Having previously worked in the NHS for over 10 years I fully empathise with this comment by the whistleblowing doctor in the article you have shared...

The 56-year-old said “the very sight of the NHS logo makes me feel sick.”

The more I see articles like this the more I believe she may in fact be innocent.

All MOO of course.

 

[bluebird69]

Thankyou for sharing this, it does not surprise me in the slightest. Having previously worked in the NHS for over 10 years I fully empathise with this comment by the whistleblowing doctor in the article you have shared...

The 56-year-old said “the very sight of the NHS logo makes me feel sick.”

The more I see articles like this the more I believe she may in fact be innocent.

All MOO of course.

I totally agree, (also ex nhs) this chap has written two books about his experience which are a sobering read. I thought of him immediately the LL thread popped up here on websleuths

 

[Marantz4250b]

The more I see articles like this the more I believe she may in fact be innocent.

Same. The more I think about this and the more I read about the NHS and its underlying culture and practices I can't help think that LL might be racing towards a massive miscarriage of justice. Having said that, and what makes me think there is something really strange about this case, and what I still can't get my head round, are the attempted murder charges; they need to prove that she had formed the specific intention to murder someone and had engaged in some form of behavior in order to carry that out. Whereas in murder you can be found guilty if you only intend to do GBH, that is not the case with attempted murder. They must think that they have evidence as to that state of mind in her and that she acted upon it with murderous intent. That's a really high bar to clear! That makes me think that they think they have more evidence then a simple coincidence of shift patterns. They'll need to prove to the court as to what specific illegal act she carried out and that it was her intention that someone would die because of it.

What could they possibly have to that effect, though? These deaths weren't even investigated by the police until at least a year after they happened. We are told that no pm's were done. So what are they suggesting that she's done to try to cause these deaths? No one at all seems to be able to offer any suggestion as to what it might be. Also, given that it's a high bar to cross then the evidence must be pretty significant so why hasn't a trial happened yet if they are that confident?

She's been under investigation since she was, what, 27 years old and has been effectively under arrest for that whole time. She's currently 31, I think, has been incarcerated for at least 18 months and this whole saga isn't expected to be finished one way or the other until she's 32/33 or thereabouts. That's a massive chunk out of anyone's life and at that age it's a massive chunk out of a very important stage in life. I hate to think what her mental state will be like if she's actually acquitted of these charges.

 

[Sarahlou]

^ This is a massive trial to arrange and sort out, I'm not that surprised it's taken so long, especially with the added issue of covid delaying trials.

 

[Kemug]

It's not often that I find myself hoping that someone is guilty, IYKWIM?

 

[Marantz4250b]

And, coincidentally, a huge report is released into shocking levels of care at an NHS trust resulting in over 200 unnecessary deaths of babies.

Shrewsbury maternity scandal: Baby records on post-it notes went in bin - BBC News

 

[Marantz4250b]

It's not often that I find myself hoping that someone is guilty, IYKWIM?

I know exactly what you mean. I just can't shake the feeling that I'd not be at all surprised if she isn't though.

 

[annpats]

With the recent news story about over 200 babies dying within one hospital trust, I do wonder if the scandal is much deeper and she has been caught up in something and made a scapegoat.

Maternity scandal deepens as report is predicted to reveal that TWO HUNDRED babies might have lived | Daily Mail Online

201 babies died in biggest ever NHS maternity scandal | Daily Mail Online

 

[bluebird69]

not forgetting Furness
Furness baby deaths inquiry: 'Lethal mix of failures'

 

[HollyHunter9]

And, coincidentally, a huge report is released into shocking levels of care at an NHS trust resulting in over 200 unnecessary deaths of babies.

Shrewsbury maternity scandal: Baby records on post-it notes went in bin - BBC News

I came straight on here after seeing this! Over 200 babies deaths could have been avoided! That is utterly shocking! Just another example further cementing for me there is something very very wrong at the core of the NHS and I don't think it can ever be fixed. Whether LL is guilty or innocent the NHS needs to take on a portion of the blame because if she's guilty how did it go on for so long without it being noticed? If she's innocent then what else lead to the deaths of these babies? Short staff? Bad management?

Another horrifying example of the NHS...

David Fuller: Killer who abused mortuary bodies will die in jail

 

[Marantz4250b]

Anyone got any info as to when the April court date is going to be?

 

[Marantz4250b]

This is an extract from an interview with Dr David Wilson - everyone from the UK reading this thread will know who he is as he's on pretty much every murder documentary going.

He was asked directly about this case. Question and answer reproduced in full here;

Q. You also published a paper with Professor Yardley in 2014 on the contemporary nurse healthcare serial killer. This made me think about the recent neonatal nurse Lucy Letby case. She is yet to go to trial and the offenses are obviously alleged at this time but, it’s a case that reminds many of the Beverley Allitt case from 1991. I’m curious about your thoughts on both cases in terms of diagnoses like Munchausen’s by Proxy and the common factors in Angels of Death cases?

DW – As you say, the Letby case has not come to trial and so we should not discuss that. In fact we were able to show that in some so-called “Angels of Death” cases the evidence to convict them was very poor – to the extent that we thought that one man – Colin Norris – was completely innocent.

I doubt he has anything personally to do with the case and most probably has no more info than us. It seems curious, however, that although he says, correctly, that he shouldn't discuss it directly, he then immediately talks about similar cases where the evidence used to convict was, in his opinion, very poor. One might think that that is a way of commenting on LL's case whilst simultaneously not commenting on it. An interesting way of responding when lots of other responses were available to him, I thought.

If It Bleeds It Leads: A Q&A With Professor David Wilson

 

[Marantz4250b]

Apologies, that should of course be Professor David Wilson!

 

[Spoony]

1 hour ago
A nurse accused of murdering eight babies has made another appearance in court ahead of her trial.

Lucy Letby denies murdering five boys and three girls on a neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital between June 2015 and June 2016.

The 31-year-old also denies attempting to murder five boys and five girls.



Lucy Letby: Nurse accused of baby murders appears in court