The Lucy Letby Case

[peemac]

At the risk of repeating myself - this woman should be released immediately pending a full review of the case & conviction. Have read the latest Private Eye investigation, which is damming (it'll be available online eventually.) There's also a lot of leaking going on - presumably from interested parties who were involved in the case too afraid to go public...

Three of Lucy Letby’s victims ‘could have deaths explained by medical problems’

A review found the deaths of Babies C, D and E at the Countess of Chester Hospital ‘may have been prevented with different care’

www.telegraph.co.uk

A leaked copy of Dr Hawdon’s report – which was never seen by the jury in the original trial – showed she thought 13 of the 17 deaths and collapses could be explained. The consultant made several recommendations, including that out-of-hours attendance by consultants should be reviewed, and that staff should be given further help with intubating babies and the timely administration of antibiotics.

Giving evidence at the Thirlwall Inquiry on Monday, Claire McLaughlan, a lay reviewer for the RCPCH, said she believed allegations against Letby were “not based on fact” and seemed to be the personal opinion of Dr Stephen Breary a consultant on the ward.
In a statement read to the hearing, she said: “In my opinion, this was the personal view, feelings, interpretation, of one person regarding Miss Letby. It was not based on fact; it was uncorroborated.

“Even now I would not consider his view as objective or impartial, as he was too involved, too close to the situation and had a conflict of interest.”
Giving evidence, she added: “They gave us a mixed picture because they told us in one breath about their concerns and the allegations they were making but in the next breath they were telling us what a good nurse she was.

Hawdon is claiming she was misled and would have approached it in a different way if she thought someone was under suspicion.!

That statement alone should alarm people.

In a way she is saying that if she was told to look for criminality, she would have found a way to find it.


I think in medical or financial type cases the jury should be made up from a panel that have some knowledge of the subject - otherwise it's very easy to steer a jury a certain way.

The UK post office/ horizon scandal is a classic example.

 

[Howth Head]

The first of many books on this disturbing case....a few excerpts from the review below.

Unmasking Lucy Letby: What if there was NO baby killer...?

Peter Hitchens dives into the trial of Lucy Letby in this new book from Judith Moritz and Jonathan Coffey.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Did the state, the police, the prosecution service or the media really presume Letby's innocence before she was judged? In which case, is there any solid basis for her conviction, or have we just witnessed a spasm of establishment groupthink and a nasty piece of injustice?

Again and again the authors stress the absence of any hard evidence that Letby did anything wrong.

They record that the doctors who first accused her of wrongdoing ‘hadn’t a shred of proof’. It is not even clear that anybody did anything wrong. They note that not long before Ms Letby’s first arrest there was still no direct evidence against her. ‘Not one of her colleagues could say they had seen her harming a baby’.

 

[Howth Head]

More revelations today....her new barrister must be feeling more and more confident. (Behind a paywall - an excerpt below.)

Lucy Letby hospital outlines 15 reasons why ‘baby killer’ was innocent

Neonatal ward manager lists why nurse, who would eventually be convicted of murder, could not be behind the deaths of babies

www.telegraph.co.uk

.

A neonatal ward manager at Lucy Letby's hospital outlined 15 reasons why the nurse could not be to blame for the deaths and collapse of babies, it has emerged. Documents released for the Thirlwall Inquiy, which is examining how incidents at the Countess of Chester could have been prevented, show that Eirian Powell, Letby’s boss, was unconvinced by allegations against the nurse.

She distributed a document entitled “Neonatal Unit review 2015-2016” in May 2016, which gave 15 reasons why it was unlikely there was a baby killer on the ward.

“There is no evidence whatsoever against LL (Lucy Letby) other than coincidence,” she wrote. “LL works full time and has the qualification in speciality (QIS). She is therefore more likely to be looking after the sickest infant on the unit, LL is also available herself to work overtime when the acuity of the unit is over capacity.”

The neonatal ward manager went on to point out that the spike in deaths could be accounted for by failings on the unit and elsewhere as well as health problems with the babies.