Nurse Lucy Letby found guilty of murdering seven babies

Contrary to TV crime series, circumstantial evidence is often the most reliable. Eye witnesses are the single greatest source of miscarriages of justice.

The evidence in this case was overwhelming. The babies had air injected into their blood stream and lethal doses of insulin were given to babies who had not been prescribed any.

There was a consistent pattern of this behaviour which could not have been accidental and there was only one person who had access to all the babies at the relevant time.

Fortunately, the jurors used their common sense and weren’t too influenced by TV dramas (or social media).

Appeal on what grounds? Her defense offered no mitigatiing circumstances ahead of sentencing.

One thing which surprised me about the defence case was that they didn't present a statistician to "blind 'em with maths". Or more specifically examine in detail the likelihood/possibility of clusters of deaths, chances of one member of staff always being present etc.

*******

This is a decent 'Letby could be innocent' blog. It's by statistician Richard Gill who was instrumental in having Lucia de Berk declared innocent after the original trial was marred by incorrect probability theory. Conversely he has also unsuccessfully campaigned in other cases, so there is a chance that having been correct once he has become obsessed with trying to strike gold again.

The Lucy Letby case – Richard Gill Statistics (gill1109.com)

Richard D. Gill - Wikipedia

Edit : Another convicted nurse case he was successful on in Italy Italian nurse acquitted of murder after statistical analysis - Leiden University (universiteitleiden.nl)

That seems fairly stretchy TBH.

The reality is people have a very hard time wrapping their head around why someone so ordinary would commit crimes so horrific and extraordinary.

The reality is she ticks quite a few boxes for the profile of a female serial killer. They are by definition very ordinary at least on the outside.

Interestingly they are usually married or have been married.

If she is innocent she does have one thing going for, the families are pushing for a wide ranging independent review. You would imagine something would be highlighted in that.

If there was evidence she was insane the defence would have clung to that as best they could. There'd be eviddence from allher colleagues and friends and families to support that hypothesis if it was the case, and pschiatrists would have then backed it up in the court case if the defence felt it was viable route to go. But obviously it wasn't which means it's incredibly unlikely she is insane. Her brain is absolutely different to most of ours in all the wrong ways but 'insane'( as in has diminished responsibility for what she did) she is not.

By all accounts shipman was gaining financially from some of his patients when they passed away

I believe that's the reason why he was investigated firstly

You'd thought she had shown the same level of caring towards those babies..after all we are all living creatures... be it human or animals...maybe she couldn't accept other mother's happiness of having a baby...as she seemed to really target twins or triplets born there...who knows... maybe being a only child had a effect on her

Well she didn't so not really relevant.

Her killing, as mentioned was very thought out, cunning, methodical, precise and devious.

Insane my arse, and if so, then a very devious and dangerous and "with it" insane person.

And still some folks are questioning her guilt. Nobody else killed those babies, and they didn't just die! Plenty concise/credible evidence shows her as the killer. Labeling the evidence "circumstantial," as if to diminish it, doesn't change this. Most convictions rely on circumstantial evidence.

And seriously, what is with the bringing up miscarriages of justice got to do with this clear cut conviction? Miscarriages of justice have always occurred, and will always occur. It's part of a human society. Letby's case is not at all a possible miscarriage

I forgot you’re clinging to your 1 percent chance theory.. 🤔