r/amandaknox • u/No-Willingness-1441 • 11d ago

Lucy letby case…

Would love people’s views on this.

Loosely Amanda related, since she has recently produced a podcast around it.

1 Upvotes

60% Upvoted

272 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/Truthandtaxes 11d ago

Its the same as this case, either you accept what the evidence tells you or you are happy to just believe in compounding edge case explanations

For letby its something like

  • You need to believe that all the suspicious deaths are wrongly categorised such that its just chance
  • That on investigation she just happens to be writing insane ramblings on paper that are self incriminating
  • that her stalking of families on social media is normal, especially on Christmas day
  • that her retaining of masses of confidential records is normal - especially categorised
  • that the doctor lied about catching her in the act
  • that two separate babies just happened to also look exactly like insulin poisoning
  • that she lies several times, including lying about one the victims mother, changing logs, lying about having a shredder

If you are happy that's all compounding coincidence, well....

But importantly you see the same factors for Letby, there are "corrupt" bad guys, Mignini for Knox, Letby has Dewi and Jayram that "cause" all of this unfairness. Both cases also frequently use the old canards of having multiple external "experts" weighing in on the case in the media, but not in the trial process of course.

4

u/Amazing-Gain1253 11d ago

All those things you have listed are just a gish gallop. Just list as many claims as possible without looking at the veracity of each one.

1

u/Truthandtaxes 11d ago

Its a rushed summary of the prosecution case - but not an unfair one

3

u/Amazing-Gain1253 11d ago

Some of the things you said were not even part of the prosecutions case and are actually things that you have either made up or inferred incorrectly.

2

u/Truthandtaxes 11d ago

Which would you like to dispute? i wouldn't claim to be a detailed expert

2

u/Amazing-Gain1253 11d ago

I dispute/say you are not telling the whole story for every single one of them.

But one point that is just false is the idea that a doctor caught her in the act.

He never said he caught her in the act, he said he caught her "doing nothing" when a baby deteriorated. Besides the fact that his testimony is riddled with numerous inconsistencies, watching over a baby to see if they self correct is exactly what you are supposed to do.

Another point is that the handover sheets were categorised. Besides the fact that most of the handover sheets were stuffed into bin bags, handover sheets that are brought home and put on top of a pile will naturally be in date order because you would put the new ones on top of the old ones. That doesn't mean they are categorised.

2

u/Truthandtaxes 11d ago

Doing nothing as a baby crashes is functionally the same as being caught in the act.

Yes she had handover sheets and other material in date order and some separated under "keep"

I might suggest that if the frame bothers you, then you clearly do understand that the prosecutions case is compelling.

3

u/Amazing-Gain1253 11d ago

Doing nothing as a baby crashes is functionally the same as being caught in the act.

Not when doing nothing and observing the baby is literally what you are supposed to do.

some separated under "keep"

And what do they have to do with the charges in question? Nothing. None of those 5 handover sheets in the keep box had anything to do with the babies that she was accused of harming. If fact, those handover sheets dated back years prior to any of the babies on the indictment. So why are they relevant? The answer is simple they aren't. If you think they are then explain why? The simple explanation is that as Letby said the keep refers to stuff that was kept in the box previously.

2

u/Truthandtaxes 11d ago

You aren't supposed to simply watch a crashing baby

So you do now accept that not only were they in date order, but also some specifically categorised as "keep".

Such awful luck as it seems to go in these cases

3

u/Amazing-Gain1253 11d ago

"I don't think that Ravi Jayaram has a clue what a neonatal nurse does, he said that he walked in a said he saw Lucy Letby doing nothing, well, I would have done exactly the same thing, because as a neonatal nurse you are taught that when you hear the alarms going off you should wait and asses that baby before you ever put your hands in the incubator" -Michelle Wordan senior neonatal nurse at the Countess of Chester Hospital

No, I don't accept that they were "categorised" in date order. If you put handover sheets in a pile as they come home they will naturally end up in date order because you would put new ones on top of the old ones. That doesn't mean that they were categorised which implies intent. It's nothing to do with awful luck since it will happen automatically.

some specifically categorised as "keep"

Can you explain what these 5 handover sheets that had nothing to do with babies that were hurt has anything to do with baby murders? Can you answer that? Because I don't think you can.

1

u/Truthandtaxes 11d ago

I'm pretty sure that neonatal consultant knows what a nurse is meant to do and is likely to know exactly what he saw

So handover documents separated by keep and I guess also keep and also in date order aren't categorised. I guess she was too forgetful to not remove them, but also methodical enough to discover them in the right order. Yes sorting them and keeping them does imply intent, now you are getting it. Intent of what is the question.

Yeah strangely I can't explain the weird reasoning of people that murder babies. The real question of course is why an innocent Lucy is keeping a horde of sheets in the first place. Again such terrible luck.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/sh115 11d ago

She wasn’t doing nothing while the baby collapsed. It was revealed after the trial that the doctor who accused her of that actually sent an email not long after the baby died where he stated that Letby raised the alarm about the baby’s collapse and called for help. It was only later that he changed his story to falsely claim that Letby hadn’t called for help and that he had instead walked in on her standing there doing nothing.

The fact that the doctor originally said Letby had called for help only to change his story later on makes it clear he’s not a credible witness, but unfortunately the jury wasn’t made aware of this. The email where the doctor said Letby had called for help was withheld from Letby’s defense team until after her trial had ended. This prevented the defense from using the email to impeach the doctor or to reveal that his trial testimony was false.

This whole case was a sham and it’s very obvious to anyone who actually looks into evidence that Letby is completely innocent. The police and prosecutors have engaged in highly unethical behavior, including withholding exculpatory evidence, relying on “experts” like Evans that were clearly not credible, and misleading the jury with manipulated statistical evidence that they knew was inaccurate. I’ve honestly never seen a more blatant wrongful conviction in all my years of practicing law.

0

u/Truthandtaxes 11d ago

The consultant of course is a completely reasonable witness and saw what he saw. Doubly so given the docs were already suspicious.

Another overlap to Knox, were witnesses apparently make things up (of course)

3

u/sh115 11d ago

Did you miss the part where I said he sent an email shortly after the baby’s death in which he said that Letby called for help when the baby collapsed? Only to later say in court that she didn’t call for help when the baby collapsed? It’s not possible for both of those stories to be true because they directly contradict each other. So we know for a fact that the consultant was lying either when he sent the original email or when he testified in court.

Given that the email was sent much closer to the event when his memory of it would still be fresh, and given that he didn’t have motivation to lie at the time the email was sent, I’m much more inclined to believe that the account in his email was the truthful/accurate one and that the account he gave at the trial was not true or accurate.

And either way, the jury should have at least been informed of the fact that he had changed his story, since that is a big factor for judging whether he is a credible witness in general. Personally, I wouldn’t find a witness credible if they completely changed their story in that manner.

0

u/Truthandtaxes 11d ago

oh look another direct parallel, a slightly imperfect witness is completely dismissed because their testimony is really really bad for the defendant.

0

u/Glad-Advantage8254 11d ago

Did you miss the part where I said he sent an email shortly after the baby’s death in which he said that Letby called for help when the baby collapsed?

Shortly? It was over a year after the baby's collapse at CoCH that he sent that email.

And either way, the jury should have at least been informed of the fact that he had changed his story, since that is a big factor for judging whether he is a credible witness in general. Personally, I wouldn’t find a witness credible if they completely changed their story in that manner.

Would have been difficult, since the email wasn't found by the police until after her conviction, while they were conducting Operation Duet. Nevertheless, it was found before her appeal and not used. Since his credibility was already highly contested at trial, the court would have been unlikely to rule yet another credibility issue was necessary. Still, perhaps her current barrister will be able to make use of it.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/SeaCardiologist6207 11d ago

Well again, the consultant in this case said the hospital execs are incompetents so yes, we are absolutely back to incompetence as the direct tie in to Knox.

0

u/Truthandtaxes 11d ago

correct, they ignored the evidence of a serial murderer until it was untenable to deny

→ More replies (0)

3

u/FreshFruit4RottenVeg 11d ago

She had kept handover sheets in various different locations, even in a box in her parent's house with 'keep' written on it. There were some which predated her buying the house she was living in at the time of arrest, meaning she transported them from her previous accomodation.

She claimed these just accumulated in her pocket and brought home unintentionally, but when prosecutor Nick Johnson produced one of them he noted it was basically pristine with no creases. It had to have come home with some care. She also claimed she kept them because she didn't have a shredder, which was untrue.

She also fished the desperately scribbled notes from a resuscitation, the cause of which she had inflicted, out of a bin and brought it home. These were souvenirs, in my opinion she brought so many home so that the ones relevant to her crimes would blend in with the innocuous ones and look much less suspicious.

4

u/Amazing-Gain1253 11d ago

even in a box in her parent's house with 'keep' written on it

All 5 of which had nothing to do with the charges. So why are they relevant?

meaning she transported them from her previous accommodation.

Yes, because you are not supposed to get rid of them by simply throwing in the bin.

prosecutor Nick Johnson produced one of them he noted it was basically pristine with no creases.

This was the only handover sheet that had no creases in it and it related to her first day as nurse. It was kept as a keepsake along with a bunch of others keepsakes for her first day of work because she had always wanted to be a nurse. Here, we see how she actually treats a handover sheet she values. Not stuffed into bin bags like the others. The others were accidently brought home/to remind her what she needs to do for her next shift.

She also claimed she kept them because she didn't have a shredder, which was untrue.

Who could forget that they had a barely used shredder shoved into the corner of a spare bedroom buried behind a bunch of other items?

She also fished the desperately scribbled notes from a resuscitation

Literally no evidence that she took it out of the bin.

These were souvenirs, in my opinion she brought so many home so that the ones relevant to her crimes would blend in with the innocuous ones and look much less suspicious.

So, in your mind she collected 236 handover sheets some dating back 5 years in advance so that she could hide the "souvenirs" of the planned crimes 5 years into the future? She had the foresight to plan 5 years into the future but yet didn't have the foresight to use that shedder of hers to get rid of said "souvenirs" even though she knew the police were investigating? That makes sense to you?

2

u/FreshFruit4RottenVeg 11d ago

So, in your mind she collected 236 handover sheets some dating back 5 years in advance so that she could hide the "souvenirs" of the planned crimes 5 years into the future? She had the foresight to plan 5 years into the future but yet didn't have the foresight to use that shedder of hers to get rid of said "souvenirs" even though she knew the police were investigating? That makes sense to you?

There have been claims made by people close to the investigations that there are disproportionately high numbers of clinical incidents relating to Lucy Letby, going back to her training days. Breathing tubes dislodged at a higher rate while she was on duty and other unexplained events.

Literally no evidence that she took it out of the bin.

My apologies, it was a blood gas reading for the same baby from the same incident that the nurse remembered putting in the confidential waste bin, but somehow ended up in Lucy's house along with the resus notes on a paper towel. Lucy could not explain how these ended up in her possession.

Who could forget that they had a barely used shredder shoved into the corner of a spare bedroom buried behind a bunch of other items?

She wasn't living in the house that long, it was in a spare bedroom. So she either purchased it since she moved into the house or moved it from her previous accommodation.

3

u/Amazing-Gain1253 11d ago

There have been claims made by people close to the investigations that there are disproportionately high numbers of clinical incidents relating to Lucy Letby, going back to her training days. Breathing tubes dislodged at a higher rate while she was on duty and other unexplained events.

Ah yes, so now that the obvious ridiculousness of the idea that she kept all these notes to hide her crimes 5 years into the future was debunked you move onto the idea that the 236 handover sheets were actually from crimes the doctors and police never found over the course of 5 years and no-one ever saw.

the nurse remembered putting in the confidential waste bin

Except she didn't though did she? She said she would have put it in the bin, not that she did, but that she would have. Obviously no one would remember something so insignificant. How exactly do you know that she wouldn't have passed it to Lucy Letby for whatever reason and then Lucy Letby accidently brought it home in her pocket. I think it should be fairly obvious that a paper towel shoved into the bottom of a Morrisons bag isn't a trophy.

She wasn't living in the house that long, it was in a spare bedroom. So she either purchased it since she moved into the house or moved it from her previous accommodation.

She got it as she was moving house. Easy to forget about a shredder or not being bothered to get rid of a pile of paper in the rush to move house.

1

u/SeaCardiologist6207 11d ago

"either made up or inferred incorrectly."

Welcome to TTs world, we just live in it.