Current Lucy Letby - Paediatric nurse in the UK charged with the murder of 8 babies * CONVICTED

[Aristotle Pickett]

From all the reading I've done , I would say.

1/ Letby did it to feel power and control , for a big thrill, to get a sick thrill from watching the greiving families, to get an emotional thrill and to get sympathy and contact from 'Doctor A' . She was possibly having an affair with 'Dr. A' , even if platonic .

2/ 'Doctor A' possibly influenced bosses that she was of good character.

3/ All the bosses were highly negligent and probably had a bias against reporting her to police because she hid her narcissism so well and was a respected white middle class Englishwomen.

4/ Letby was a full blown narcissist who never revealed her real self and fooled her parents, her gullible friends, the bosses and Doctor A.

5/ Her parents and her group of friends ,who still defend her , are trying to find excuses to explain their lack of insight and defend themselves.

6/ There should be a statuary inquirey and the bosses should all be banned from working in healthcare .

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

'Francesca Fattore, who was locked up with paedophiles and murderers after being convicted of drug offences, told the Daily Star: “She will be treated like royalty.

“All these prisons have a wing for paedophiles and kiddy killers because they would get beaten up on any other wing."

The 43-year-old explained Letby will be escorted by one or two officers wherever she goes, including to get medication, and going to work.

She will have protection and in six months or 12 months time, that girl will be sitting there if you go to the library or she could possibly be serving you dinner," she added.

The former offender, who is now an assistant manager at a car company, claimed the evil monster will have protection for years.

But, Francesca also described the darker future that awaits Letby.

“She will get the most amount of abuse," she continued.

"If she is walking past people's cells they will scream through the window, they will threaten her, it has been all over the news."

Francesca claimed prisoners will launch attacks on the serial killer despite her protection.'

 

[Shell]

From all the reading I've done , I would say.


5/ Her parents and her group of friends ,who still defend her , are trying to find excuses to explain their lack of insight and defend themselves.

 

[Shell]

'Francesca Fattore, who was locked up with paedophiles and murderers after being convicted of drug offences, told the Daily Star: “She will be treated like royalty.

“All these prisons have a wing for paedophiles and kiddy killers because they would get beaten up on any other wing."

The 43-year-old explained Letby will be escorted by one or two officers wherever she goes, including to get medication, and going to work.

She will have protection and in six months or 12 months time, that girl will be sitting there if you go to the library or she could possibly be serving you dinner," she added.

The former offender, who is now an assistant manager at a car company, claimed the evil monster will have protection for years.

But, Francesca also described the darker future that awaits Letby.

“She will get the most amount of abuse," she continued.

"If she is walking past people's cells they will scream through the window, they will threaten her, it has been all over the news."

Francesca claimed prisoners will launch attacks on the serial killer despite her protection.'

At the end of the day, she is still young and she knows she will never, ever be released.

So that's the main thing, regardless of the protection.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

At the end of the day, she is still young and she knows she will never, ever be released.

So that's the main thing, regardless of the protection.

The other prisoners will be screaming at her and threatening her the whole time

 

[Shell]

The other prisoners will be screaming at her and threatening her the whole time

They better put her on suicide watch too. Don't want her taking the easy way out.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

'Letby fits the profile for the “typical” female serial killer (FSK) that my team and I compiled for The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology in 2015. By analysing cases in the US, we found that nearly 40% of female serial killers are nurses, nurses’ aides or other healthcare workers.

Our analysis showed that a FSK is likely to be white, probably Christian, average looking or attractive, and in her 20s or 30s when the crimes start. She has an elevated probability of being a healthcare worker, often in charge of caring for those who are helpless. Those familiar to her are at risk, especially vulnerable people such as infants and the sick. She may murder for money or power. She may be arrogant or at times withdrawn, and may have experienced a recent relationship issue. '

Was Lucy Letby an unlikely serial killer? To most people, yes – but not psychologists | Marissa Harrison

Forensic profiles aren’t infallible, but science can help challenge our preconceived notions of what a murderer looks like, says psychologist Marissa Harrison

www.theguardian.com

 

[CD Xbow]

She is apparently appealing.

Lucy Letby to appeal against conviction over babies’ murders

Former nurse found guilty of murdering seven babies files bid to challenge her conviction

www.theguardian.com

 

[BFew]

She is apparently appealing.

Lucy Letby to appeal against conviction over babies’ murders

Former nurse found guilty of murdering seven babies files bid to challenge her conviction

www.theguardian.com

'Elsewhere, the Guardian reported on Friday that the health service ombudsman said the upcoming public inquiry into the nurse’s crimes must be widened to examine the NHS’s “cover-up culture” over failures in patient safety.

Rob Behrens said the full statutory inquiry should also look into why so many hospital bosses ignored concerns about lapses in safety and victimised whistleblowers who raised them.

While the inquiry’s first duty was to give the families of Lucy Letby’s victims the answers they wanted, it should also explore how other hospitals had demonstrated the same “cover-up culture and dismissive attitude” that consultant paediatricians experienced at the Chester hospital, Behrens said.

“We need the inquiry to thoroughly examine NHS leadership, accountability and culture to contextualise what happened.

“Among the many questions the inquiry will need to answer, and without prejudice, is why did the leaders of this trust act in the way they did? And, related to that, why do leaders in the wider NHS too often act in a way that prioritises protecting the reputation of their organisation over patient safety?”

A Department of Health and Social Care source said the inquiry’s terms of reference are still being drawn up by the judge and families and it could not prejudge them.'

Excellent news.

Letby inquiry must also examine NHS ‘cover-up culture’, says ombudsman

Exclusive: Rob Behrens wants inquiry to look into why hospital chiefs often ignore safety concerns and victimise whistleblowers

www.theguardian.com

'Letby inquiry must also examine NHS ‘cover-up culture’, says ombudsman​

Exclusive: Rob Behrens wants inquiry to look into why hospital chiefs often ignore safety concerns and victimise whistleblowers
Denis Campbell Health policy editor
Fri 15 Sep 2023 14.00 AEST'

'Ministers initially said the Letby inquiry would be non-statutory, which prompted widespread concern that it would not be able to compel witnesses to appear or order the disclosure of documents. Following sustained criticism, Steve Barclay, the health secretary, announced last month that there would be a full statutory public inquiry.'

Even better!

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

'Elsewhere, the Guardian reported on Friday that the health service ombudsman said the upcoming public inquiry into the nurse’s crimes must be widened to examine the NHS’s “cover-up culture” over failures in patient safety.

Rob Behrens said the full statutory inquiry should also look into why so many hospital bosses ignored concerns about lapses in safety and victimised whistleblowers who raised them.

While the inquiry’s first duty was to give the families of Lucy Letby’s victims the answers they wanted, it should also explore how other hospitals had demonstrated the same “cover-up culture and dismissive attitude” that consultant paediatricians experienced at the Chester hospital, Behrens said.

“We need the inquiry to thoroughly examine NHS leadership, accountability and culture to contextualise what happened.

“Among the many questions the inquiry will need to answer, and without prejudice, is why did the leaders of this trust act in the way they did? And, related to that, why do leaders in the wider NHS too often act in a way that prioritises protecting the reputation of their organisation over patient safety?”

A Department of Health and Social Care source said the inquiry’s terms of reference are still being drawn up by the judge and families and it could not prejudge them.'

Excellent news.

Letby inquiry must also examine NHS ‘cover-up culture’, says ombudsman

Exclusive: Rob Behrens wants inquiry to look into why hospital chiefs often ignore safety concerns and victimise whistleblowers

www.theguardian.com

'Letby inquiry must also examine NHS ‘cover-up culture’, says ombudsman​

Exclusive: Rob Behrens wants inquiry to look into why hospital chiefs often ignore safety concerns and victimise whistleblowers
Denis Campbell Health policy editor
Fri 15 Sep 2023 14.00 AEST'

'Ministers initially said the Letby inquiry would be non-statutory, which prompted widespread concern that it would not be able to compel witnesses to appear or order the disclosure of documents. Following sustained criticism, Steve Barclay, the health secretary, announced last month that there would be a full statutory public inquiry.'

Even better!

The appeal has to be approved by a judge first.

 

[sandeano]

This piece in the New Yorker has been blocked for those in the UK due to Letby's upcoming court date.
It is a long piece, but well worth a read...

 

[emuboy]

The Lucy Letby case was back in the news again this week when she was convicted of another crime.

She is one criminal I just can't work out given her circumstances and background. Female serial killers are rare, and very few operate alone, most are in a duo with a sexual partner. It wasn't like Letby had an evil boyfriend or husband who got his kicks listening to her describing the infant deaths at the hospital, being the Karla Homolka or the Myra Hindley to his Paul Bernardo or Ian Brady.

Many, if not most serial killers come from dysfunctional, abusive and violent family backgrounds. But Lucy Letby was a much-adored only child born to a financially stable married couple. She wasn't a foster kid who was shuffled between her family, foster care placements and group homes for troubled children growing up. There was no known traumatic event in her formative years, such as a sick parent such as her mother battling cancer, a childhood illness for herself or being in some sort of accident. And if there was a 'Humbert Humbert' who blighted the younger Lucy Letby's life, it never came to light in the investigation and trial.

Some speculated that Lucy's actions came about from jealousy at not being married and having kids at her own. There was also much made about Lucy's alleged crush on a married doctor in the ward. While I don't doubt the crush on the doctor was real, the problems began even before he arrived on the scene. Lucy was in her early-mid 20s during the baby murders and didn't appear to have an obsession with finding a husband and starting a family, seeming to enjoy life and having fun with her single friends. There was still plenty of time for her to meet someone and have a family if that's what she wanted; she wasn't single in her mid-40s with these things having seemed to have passed her by. And there was nothing to suggest that these things wouldn't happen, it wasn't like Lucy had been having problems with her periods, was referred to a gynecologist for tests and told that she would find it hard to conceive and carry a baby.

There was no financial motive for Letby's crimes, nor did they appear to be cases of Lucy putting the baby at risk so she could be the big hero and save them, only she went too far in some cases and the infant couldn't be saved. It was just cold and calculating, seemingly no emotion at all.

I don't think we'll ever really know the truth of what lurks behind the pretty face of this very strange young woman.

 

[Pamcake1]

The Lucy Letby case was back in the news again this week when she was convicted of another crime.

She is one criminal I just can't work out given her circumstances and background. Female serial killers are rare, and very few operate alone, most are in a duo with a sexual partner. It wasn't like Letby had an evil boyfriend or husband who got his kicks listening to her describing the infant deaths at the hospital, being the Karla Homolka or the Myra Hindley to his Paul Bernardo or Ian Brady.

Many, if not most serial killers come from dysfunctional, abusive and violent family backgrounds. But Lucy Letby was a much-adored only child born to a financially stable married couple. She wasn't a foster kid who was shuffled between her family, foster care placements and group homes for troubled children growing up. There was no known traumatic event in her formative years, such as a sick parent such as her mother battling cancer, a childhood illness for herself or being in some sort of accident. And if there was a 'Humbert Humbert' who blighted the younger Lucy Letby's life, it never came to light in the investigation and trial.

Some speculated that Lucy's actions came about from jealousy at not being married and having kids at her own. There was also much made about Lucy's alleged crush on a married doctor in the ward. While I don't doubt the crush on the doctor was real, the problems began even before he arrived on the scene. Lucy was in her early-mid 20s during the baby murders and didn't appear to have an obsession with finding a husband and starting a family, seeming to enjoy life and having fun with her single friends. There was still plenty of time for her to meet someone and have a family if that's what she wanted; she wasn't single in her mid-40s with these things having seemed to have passed her by. And there was nothing to suggest that these things wouldn't happen, it wasn't like Lucy had been having problems with her periods, was referred to a gynecologist for tests and told that she would find it hard to conceive and carry a baby.

There was no financial motive for Letby's crimes, nor did they appear to be cases of Lucy putting the baby at risk so she could be the big hero and save them, only she went too far in some cases and the infant couldn't be saved. It was just cold and calculating, seemingly no emotion at all.

I don't think we'll ever really know the truth of what lurks behind the pretty face of this very strange young woman.

There is a fantastic long article on this case in the New Yorker Magazine published a few months ago, that blows open this case and would answer a few of your questions above. There is no motive because it is more than likely she was very unlucky that the NHS being starved of funds, the hospital she was in was below grade and few positions were staffed. A lot of the evidence does not add up and the junior doctors who put her in for it had motive to push that barrow. It took years from when the deaths happened for her to be looked at and obnly after lobbying by these doctors. I no longer believe she is guilty of murder after reading the above article and the details set out that culminated in a gross miscarriage of justice.

 

[Pamcake1]

The article about the article in the New Yorker mentioned above BFew

Why the New Yorker blocked UK website readers from its Lucy Letby story – an expert explains

Given the forthcoming retrial, anyone reporting or publishing must take care not to breach the law on contempt of court.

theconversation.com

There’s an article I shouldn't tell you about – is contempt law in a losing battle with reality? | Archie Bland

The concept behind the Contempt of Court Act is laudable, but in the age of social media it is clear an update is needed, says Archie Bland, editor of the Guardian’s First Edition newsletter

www.theguardian.com

 

[BFew]

The article about the article in the New Yorker

A British Nurse Was Found Guilty of Killing Seven Babies. Did She Do It?

Colleagues reportedly called Lucy Letby an “angel of death,” and the Prime Minister condemned her. But, in the rush to judgment, serious questions about the evidence were ignored.

www.newyorker.com

 

[BFew]

I no longer believe she is guilty of murder after reading the above article and the details set out that culminated in a gross miscarriage of justice.

I also now agree that there is no proof that Letby murdered anyone.
Much more likely a flawed prosecution and that she has been made a scapegoat.

Either way if it were a judges only trial, I can't see how a fair minded judge could possibly find her guilty beyond reasonable doubt

 

[Pamcake1]

I also now agree that there is no proof that Letby murdered anyone.
Much more likely a flawed prosecution and that she has been made a scapegoat.

Either way if it were a judges only trial, I can't see how fair minded judge could possibly find her guilty beyond reasonable doubt

Exactly.
So much makes sense once you read that article and you can see that it's a set up.
It reminds me of the injustice of Lindy Chamberlain in this country.

 

[BFew]

The problem with having an ex-DDP/CPS as the Prime Minister (like the UK now has) is that that any Miscarriage of Justices that can be attributed in part to the now PM ex-DDP/CPS, might never get independently enough reviewed due to the actual, potential or perceived damage or embarrassment to the PM or their Political party, and face a wall of protection (concious or unconscious) of the PM, in order to protect the National Interest and stability of the country.

IMO, no ex-DPP/CPS should ever be allowed to be a Politician (either house).

 

[BFew]

When BF Crime thread cases collide!

Mike Lynch 'questioned Lucy Letby murder convictions' before yacht tragedy death

Tech billionaire Mike Lynch, who was one of seven people to die in the sinking of his Bayesian yacht, had allegedly questioned the convictions of killer nurse Lucy Letby

www.mirror.co.uk

'Mike Lynch 'questioned Lucy Letby's murder convictions' before dying in yacht tragedy​

Tech billionaire Mike Lynch, who was one of seven people to die in the sinking of his Bayesian yacht, had allegedly questioned the convictions of killer nurse Lucy Letby'

'10:46, 26 Aug 2024
...
Late tech billionaire Mike Lynch considered funding an "Innocence Project" for Lucy Letby after questioning her conviction, a Tory minister has claimed.
...
Former Brexit secretary David Davis has now claimed the tech mogul had voiced concerns about the conviction of killer nurse Lucy Letby and was keen to look into her case further.
...
Writing in the Sunday Times, Davis claimed Lynch had "raised the case of the Lucy Letby trial as one that had already caught his attention", adding: "Mike was a world-class expert on probability theory, and saw straight through the statistical weaknesses that underpinned the Letby prosecution."

According to Davis, the businessman turned his attention to miscarriages of justice after his own experience in dealing with US authorities - and being cleared of fraud charges he faced across the pond in a gruelling decade-long case. Lynch was accused of inflating the value of his company, Autonomy, ahead of its sale to Hewlett-Packard (HP) in 2011, before being acquitted in June this year.

 

[Pamcake1]

Today NYTimes:

Inquiry Into ‘Killer Nurse’ Won’t Weigh Key Question: Is She Innocent?​

More than 20 experts have called on the U.K. government to delay a public inquiry into the case of Lucy Letby, who was convicted of murdering babies, because of growing concerns about the evidence.

By Mark Landler
Reporting from London
Aug. 29, 2024, 12:01 a.m. ET
A public inquiry into the case of Lucy Letby, a British neonatal nurse convicted of killing seven babies, has come under fire from scientific and medical experts who have called for it to be delayed or broadened to consider whether the deaths could have been caused by other factors.
The inquiry, set to begin on Sept. 10, will cast a fresh spotlight on one of the most haunting murder cases in recent British history. Conscientious and well liked by her colleagues, Ms. Letby was found guilty of killing seven infants, and trying to kill seven others, in a busy public hospital in 2015 and 2016.

..............................
.................................
...................................

In May, The New Yorker published a highly critical 13,000-word investigation of the case. The magazine’s publisher, Condé Nast, blocked access to online readers in Britain, for fear of being held in contempt, which can be punished with a fine or prison sentence, although the magazine was available in print and on the magazine’s app. British papers, like The Guardian and The Times of London, have since run articles questioning the evidence, as have broadcasters.
For all the concerns being raised, however, some doubt the new Labour government will delay or expand the scope of the inquiry.
“There isn’t a political energy or head space to do it,” Mr. Hammond said. “It would be so embarrassing if the biggest baby-killer case in British history was found to be unsound.”

 

[BFew]

“It would be so embarrassing if the biggest baby-killer case in British history was found to be unsound.”

A bit like Kathleen Folbigg who was dubbed as Australia's worst ever female serial killer, until she was pardoned and released and ruled to have not killed her 4 infants.

 

[Kurve]

The inquiry will probe the Countess of Chester Hospital — where Letby worked as a nurse — and specifically examine whether management was too slow to identify it had a serial killer in its ranks.

Lucy Letby was convicted of killing seven British babies. A judge has a warning for those who think she's innocent

The judge chairing an inquiry into an English hospital in which infant serial killer Lucy Letby worked tells a hearing anyone doubting the former nurse's guilt is causing her victims' families "enormous additional distress".

www.abc.net.au

 

[MrKK]

Today NYTimes:

Inquiry Into ‘Killer Nurse’ Won’t Weigh Key Question: Is She Innocent?​

More than 20 experts have called on the U.K. government to delay a public inquiry into the case of Lucy Letby, who was convicted of murdering babies, because of growing concerns about the evidence.

By Mark Landler
Reporting from London
Aug. 29, 2024, 12:01 a.m. ET
A public inquiry into the case of Lucy Letby, a British neonatal nurse convicted of killing seven babies, has come under fire from scientific and medical experts who have called for it to be delayed or broadened to consider whether the deaths could have been caused by other factors.
The inquiry, set to begin on Sept. 10, will cast a fresh spotlight on one of the most haunting murder cases in recent British history. Conscientious and well liked by her colleagues, Ms. Letby was found guilty of killing seven infants, and trying to kill seven others, in a busy public hospital in 2015 and 2016.

..............................
.................................
...................................

In May, The New Yorker published a highly critical 13,000-word investigation of the case. The magazine’s publisher, Condé Nast, blocked access to online readers in Britain, for fear of being held in contempt, which can be punished with a fine or prison sentence, although the magazine was available in print and on the magazine’s app. British papers, like The Guardian and The Times of London, have since run articles questioning the evidence, as have broadcasters.
For all the concerns being raised, however, some doubt the new Labour government will delay or expand the scope of the inquiry.
“There isn’t a political energy or head space to do it,” Mr. Hammond said. “It would be so embarrassing if the biggest baby-killer case in British history was found to be unsound.”

Peter Hitchens has been banging the drum about this being an unsafe conviction for some time but there are plenty of other media now asking questions.

PETER HITCHENS: Lucy Letby's case MUST be re-examined

When a leading witness in a famous criminal case says that he got a key piece of evidence wrong, you might think that the news would appear in letters of fire near the top of every TV bulletin.

www.dailymail.co.uk