Nurse Lucy Letby found guilty of murdering seven babies

I found it a very dull read. Sorry! Is there any new evidence, or basically its a long-winded way of saying:

- it was only statistical evidence, which they think was flawed

• the public mood/media/etc had already judged her guilty.

I look at it from the opposite point of view, is there any evidence, except flawed statistical evidence, that points to her being guilty? And no seems to be the answer to that question.

That leads on to asking whether flawed statistical evidence makes a person guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. I have a very very hard time saying yes to that personally.

The big thing that is a bit concerning about the case is so many are under impression a crime definitely occurred. The actual evidence for murders seems pretty weak at this point.

The dumbest things said on TV cop shows:

1. We got an eye witness! Case closed.
2. All that evidence is just circumstantial!

More people have been wrongly convicted by mistaken eye-witnesses than any other cause.

Most convictions depend on circumstantial evidence. In fact, it is increasingly rare for anyone other than the victim to go into a witness box and give direct evidence of a crime.

If Lucy Letby is innocent, she did an outstanding job of incriminating herself.

The lack of defence was really very concerning and bizarre.

There was also a very interesting part of the New Yorker article that was removed following concerns raised by an English court 🧐

The latest conviction is based on direct evidence, not statistics. Her defenders will find this very hard to explain away

Consultant paediatrician Dr Ravi Jayaram had caught her "virtually red-handed" as he entered the unit's intensive care room at about 03:45.

Dr Jayaram, who intervened to resuscitate the child, told jurors he saw "no evidence" that Letby had done anything to help the deteriorating baby. He said he heard no call for help from Letby, or alarms sounding as Baby K's blood oxygen levels suddenly dropped. Letby told the jury of six women and six men she had no recollection of any such event.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c98q74dn91do

This is the amount of 'evidence' required to establish an attempted murder conviction btw. A possibility based on a belief based on a suspicion that was neither reported to anyone nor recorded in medical notes at the time. Despite there being not enough evidence to even charge Letby with the murder of a baby that died 3 days later she somehow can be found guilty of the attempted murder of the same baby.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jun/19/lucy-letby-doctor-oxygen-levels

She was also confirmed to have been in another room feeding and changing a different baby (whom I assume is alive and well) at 3.30, a process which is 10-15 minutes long just for the feeding.

She also expressed reservations about jayorams good faith in a written defence statement. This stinks to high heaven.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jun/24/lucy-letby-denies-having-killed-babies-at-attempted-murder-trial

Agree.

Very good read that article.

Always wondered what exactly was the "evidence beyond reasonable doubt ."

Looks like there are a lot of holes in that investigation and probable grounds for appeal at the very least .

Thought the electric chair would be fairly inexpensive

Well for some to be so flippant when they're not spending the rest of their days in prison.

Transcript from the original trial showing zero corroboration between the nurse charged with baby K's care and Jayoram..

https://www.reddit.com/r/lucyletby/comments/11e3cm1/lucy_letby_trial_prosecution_day_63_28_february/?rdt=33100

Judge Goss directed the jury that if they concluded that Letby had deliberately harmed babies one way, they could also conclude that she had inflicted deliberate harm on others, even if jurors were not certain of her methods.

So basically, they could find her guilty for the other deaths for no other reason than she was there. This direction from the Judge alone should have been grounds for appeal.

At least the press have finally been allowed to expose this travesty now the courts process is over, this will just grow and grow now.

That article mentions the shift chart in the negative for once. I'm sure this has been done to death in this thread but I've always taken that chart as evidence of how easily they can be used to influence juries and the public. There was a recent Behind the Bastards podcast about nonsense forensics that I thought sounded like this.

(There were 25 suspicious events making up the rows, these were a list of all the events occurring while Letby was on shift. Events that happened when she wasn't there were not on the list. Surprise surprise, she's present for all the listed events. Complete drivel. Also there were only nurses across the top, like no doctors or other staff worked in the hospital).

if Lucy is let off, she probably won't be working as a nurse again, but many here would seem to have no problem her working as a baby sitter for them ? the presumption of innocence and all that

The biggest issue here is that the jury was made up of 12 ordinary people and they can be easily swayed by "expert" OPINION. Frankly, for complex medical cases they should have a jury with some form of medical knowledge.

Just look at some of the early posts here and the total assumption of her guilt because the media narrative said so.

The guardian article is good, but if you have an interest in it, read the New Yorker article. Its a good couple of hours of a read, but it raises a huge number of questions.

Her legal team don't seem to have had much expertise in the field and they were up against the very best.

Remember, you don't need to look far in the past to see how bad the UK system is - Royal Mail / Horizon is a classic example of making the evidence fit and only now have they accepted that they knew the software was flawed all along yet that didn't stop people being wrongly convicted and people committing suicide because the people in charge didn't want to be found out - even if it cost innocent lives.