Lucy letby

Legz said:
I knew we'd get more information after the trial finished but Jesus! I was naive and when read about babies crashing and then dying I just assumed they were all really poorly and probably unconscious but that's not the case. Some weren't even necessarily ill...just only.in there for being premature....and the physical abuse too....my god the suffering that was caused.
I'm the furthest away from being a fighter...but my god even I'd like 5 minutes on my own with her....be at the back of an immense queue though!
Click to expand...
It’s often the case that the real story often emerges after the trial.
 
Centralscrutinizer said:
Seems like a very severe case of Munchausen syndrome by proxy ?
Click to expand...

It’s not called that anymore. Now known as FII (Fabricated and Induced Illness).

Not what’s happened here though. Carers who are involved in FII do so because it brings them attention and confirms their child as ‘unwell’.

Letby did not intend to get caught so would have got no recognition or attention from her crimes.
 
sherlock1969 said:
It’s not called that anymore. Now known as FII (Fabricated and Induced Illness).

Not what’s happened here though. Carers who are involved in FII do so because it brings them attention and confirms their child as ‘unwell’.

Letby did not intend to get caught so would have got no recognition or attention from her crimes.
Click to expand...
Plus her shunning of the spotlight for the verdict shows this as well that was her last moment Ever to be around other people (not in the prison chain) and she hid.
 
Jedi boro said:
Plus her shunning of the spotlight for the verdict shows this as well that was her last moment Ever to be around other people (not in the prison chain) and she hid.
Click to expand...

People engaging in FII rarely want attention after they are found out to be honest. They don’t want to be caught, they thrive on the attention having a ‘sick’ child brings.
 
sherlock1969 said:
It’s not called that anymore. Now known as FII (Fabricated and Induced Illness).

Not what’s happened here though. Carers who are involved in FII do so because it brings them attention and confirms their child as ‘unwell’.

Letby did not intend to get caught so would have got no recognition or attention from her crimes.
Click to expand...

We will never know her true motives but it does appear she enjoyed attention from colleagues and doctors judging by her texts.

I’m not even sure some part of her didn’t want to get caught. She knew she was massively under the spot light and that consultants had suspicions about her, yet rather than stop she continued to try and kill babies.
 
I used to work with people who would create situations at work for some excitement. OK it did not physically hurt people, but it could be frustrating. A simple example would leave something to be very last moment and a routine tasks becomes a semi-emergency. I didn't really understand them, but managers would call them fire fighters, some of the managers fitted this category too. The fire fighter often gets more attention and feels more important.

With Lucy Letby I think it was more playing God and possibly for some reason she seems to have taken a dislike to babies. Instead of transferring to another nursing role she seemed to take that dislike in a purely evil way.
 
Unbelievably a public group has been founded in support of her appealing the sentencing as being too harsh

Anyone in support of her needs to have their heads checked
 
I still can't believe she was allowed to work with babies even after say 4 deaths in her care died in quite a short period. There was obviously something very wrong well before she was stopped. Shows there were problems at the Hospital too.
 
The New Yorker had an article (now removed) that provided a lot more context to this conviction and questioned some of the evidence. I honestly don't know how I feel about this because I don't 100% believe what was released in the media is all the information. I know this makes me seem like a conspiracy nut, but my gut tells me there is more to this.

What happened to those kids was truly truly awful and the poor parents. I'm not disputing that.
 
BaronSmoggie said:
The New Yorker had an article (now removed) that provided a lot more context to this conviction and questioned some of the evidence. I honestly don't know how I feel about this because I don't 100% believe what was released in the media is all the information. I know this makes me seem like a conspiracy nut, but my gut tells me there is more to this.

What happened to those kids was truly truly awful and the poor parents. I'm not disputing that.
Click to expand...
That article made alarming reading and had none of the trademarks of a conspiracy theory.
 
I have looked into this in some detail and the more I read, the more I am convinced that Lucy Letby is innocent and that this is one of the worst miscarriages of justice in legal history.

A good starting point is the attached article. For a more in depth analysis look at the articles on this blog:

lawhealthandtech.substack.com

Law, Health and Technology Newsletter | Mr Law, Health and Technology | Substack​

Law, Health and Technology. Click to read Law, Health and Technology Newsletter, by Mr Law, Health and Technology, a Substack publication with thousands of subscribers.
lawhealthandtech.substack.com
lawhealthandtech.substack.com​
 

Attachments

  • A British Nurse Was Found Guilty of Killing Seven Babies. Did She Do It_ _ The New Yorker.pdf
    2 MB · Views: 11
The guardian has provided some further information on the recently failed appeal. The appeal apparently included the medical Dr who researched one of the very specific ways she has been found guilty of doing, back in the 80s I think.

The fact that there is so little know about this causes me to question how anyone could be sure she actually caused those babies to die by injecting air.
 
iamborome said:
I have looked into this in some detail and the more I read, the more I am convinced that Lucy Letby is innocent and that this is one of the worst miscarriages of justice in legal history.

A good starting point is the attached article. For a more in depth analysis look at the articles on this blog:

lawhealthandtech.substack.com

​

Law, Health and Technology Newsletter | Mr Law, Health and Technology | Substack​

Law, Health and Technology. Click to read Law, Health and Technology Newsletter, by Mr Law, Health and Technology, a Substack publication with thousands of subscribers.​

lawhealthandtech.substack.com
lawhealthandtech.substack.com​

Click to expand...
Very, very disconcerting, especially "bias confirmation" by a group of Hospital Managers and Consultants. There are many unanswered questions and many questions "answered", which provide only supposition, not credible evidence. I don't think we've heard the last of this case.
 
After the New Yorker article I feel the investigation needs to be reopened and she should possibly be retried.

Awful for the parents for all this to be dragged up again but an awful misjustice may have occurred
 
No doubt in my mind that she did it. She was the only one on shift for all of those deaths and attempts.

She was also the last person to interact with the babies before they died or took ill.

She was also witnessed interfering with the breathing tube on the case she was found guilty of yesterday.

The b!tch is pure evil and wants hanging

The New Yorker report is smoke and mirrors paid for by private health providers trying to discredit the NHS so they can push their agenda for this country to turn to private healthcare and do away with the NHS.

Ask yourself why this has not been picked up by the media in this country if it’s that much of miscarriage of justice
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top