Revisiting The Lucy Letby case - what if she was innocent?

JKL33 · May 20

I was not convinced when I read about this last year. I commented here that on first glance the prosecution's case seemed quite underwhelming. I remember thinking that her diary/note that they blew up the press with did not read to me like what they were making it out to be; many of the comments about it seemed like an incredibly poor attempt at playing gotcha by truly stupid people.

I don't have access to the kind of evidence and reports that have been available for some high profile US cases, but I'm super not impressed with the information in the media on this case. It does indeed read like a number of either nefarious or just straight up dumb people noticed a single *apparent* connection (which, according to the New Yorker article is overblown and inaccurate in the first place) and that is it, that is *the only* "evidence."

I know nothing and my opinion doesn't matter one single bit, but I have a feeling it is possible that this is completely jacked.

JKL33 · May 20

I mean, what did I even just read? In one case they claimed she injected the baby with air but after finding out the child didn't have an IV they said well then it must have been suffocated (??)

Sorry that's just completely frightening

mtmkjr, BSN · May 20

Thank you! I saw your comment on another thread - it was the only one expressing doubt.

The article was well written and the account was so detailed, I don't think they left anything out in order to hold up the case for doubt.

I know that this happens with regularity in our judicial system - justice even when the cost is someone's life.

It just seems a step worse in the British system where they silence the other side.

If she's innocent, and I don't see anything to think otherwise, it's a beautiful life ruined.

Wuzzie · May 20

I'm surprised they didn't charge her with the deaths that occurred at the hospital across town. Makes about as much sense.

mtmkjr, BSN · May 20

Wuzzie said:

I'm surprised they didn't charge her with the deaths that occurred at the hospital across town. Makes about as much sense.

They included a baby that was declining all night, but died 3 minutes into her shift when she arrived on day shift.

**LibraSunCNM, BSN, MSN, CNM** · May 21

I read this yesterday! I actually wasn't familiar with the case at all, but finished the article totally horrified. It really does seem totally trumped-up and that she just happened to work a lot of hours at a desperately under-resourced facility.

JKL33 · May 21

In fairness have to say that I did a little looking around tonight and there are plenty who disagree; there are definitely other facts and facets of this that are a bit more compelling than just 'she happened to be there.' The commentary is still littered (IMO) with those who are assured of her guilt based on stuff that is certainly arm-chair psychology bolstered by the benefit of having a verdict. Some on the nature of 'psychopaths are all around us we just don't know because they are so cunning/no how to manipulate everyone.' I don't find that stuff too compelling usually; it seems like people with those comments enjoy their chance to look brilliant every rare once-in-awhile....AFTER the fact. I read one thread elsewhere titled something like 'What was the one thing that sealed it [her guilt] in your mind' and there were a fair amount of comments that just didn't know what they didn't know. [Example: if someone said, "I knew he was guilty when they found that saline syringe on a shelf in his bedroom!!! Why would any nurse have that if they didn't murder puppies?" Well >>> those of us who have been nurses long enough ALL know why a nurse might have a saline syringe, or 10 alcohol swabs or a tourniquet or what-have-you at home.]

In comparison, in the case that we have discussed a TON here there are plenty of character concerns but the well-documented facts are such that no one needs to lean on mostly character critiques and armchair psychology to believe that a thing really did happen in the general manner we think it did.

I may try to read more about this but don't have time to research enough to have a good handle on the more solid facts. There is a whole series I found elsewhere that looks like it would've been interesting to listen to (where the podcaster may have had access to much more info), but looks like it might have been taken offline for the time being because of upcoming legal proceedings.

MaxAttack, BSN, RN · May 21

This case is kind of scary. This all started because someone noticed that a particular nurse was on shift during patient deterioration and deaths. If you pick up shifts and are quick to help in an emergency, that would be you, too.

image.png.0c66693ca37139498b5ac0ddd52fd42e.png

The first thing I thought of when I looked at this was where are the hours worked and typical patient acuity? I know a couple of nurses that pick up a ton of hours and are usually given high-acuity patients. Would there be a correlation? Absolutely. Does that mean they're responsible for the deaths of their patients? Of course not.

Also this fun quote (Lucy Letby: What did the nurse do to babies in her care?):

Quote

Dr Bohin replied: "No. Babies like this should not collapse. You get prior warning that something is amiss.

"They don't go from being stable into a cardiorespiratory situation within minutes. They rarely collapse in this way but they are usually responsive to resuscitation and he was not."

My specialty is adults but you get prior warning on every single patient? Are neonatal bodies so different from adults that they are immune to sudden cardiovascular collapse? I've seen patients ready to transfer end up dead less than 24 hours later. Maybe neonates are just that special, though.

This does not seem like an investigation where all angles were looked at. This was a witch hunt with a single suspect in mind. I'm not saying for sure she didn't do it, but I am saying it's disturbing how quickly she became the first and only explanation.

mtmkjr, BSN · May 21

I have to admit I have not listened to other podcasts. This article is what got my attention and I do intend to look into it some more, because the accusations and then the guilty verdict seemed so bizarre.

Soon as I get a chance I will look into it some more. I hate to think that this writer would leave out important details. It could be that she didn't have full access because of the tight controls in place at this stage of the case.

mtmkjr, BSN · May 21

MaxAttack said:

This case is kind of scary. This all started because someone noticed that a particular nurse was on shift during patient deterioration and deaths. If you pick up shifts and are quick to help in an emergency, that would be you, too.

The first thing I thought of when I looked at this was where are the hours worked and typical patient acuity? I know a couple of nurses that pick up a ton of hours and are usually given high-acuity patients. Would there be a correlation? Absolutely. Does that mean they're responsible for the deaths of their patients? Of course not.

Also this fun quote (Lucy Letby: What did the nurse do to babies in her care?😞

My specialty is adults but you get prior warning on every single patient? Are neonatal bodies so different from adults that they are immune to sudden cardiovascular collapse? I've seen patients ready to transfer end up dead less than 24 hours later. Maybe neonates are just that special, though.

This does not seem like an investigation where all angles were looked at. This was a witch hunt with a single suspect in mind. I'm not saying for sure she didn't do it, but I am saying it's disturbing how quickly she became the first and only explanation.

My first 7 years of nursing were in a NICU. Granted that was the late '80s, but I disagree strongly. Neonates, and preemies especially decompensate very quickly. What a ridiculous statement

darnold38, BSN, RN · May 22

MaxAttack said:

This case is kind of scary. This all started because someone noticed that a particular nurse was on shift during patient deterioration and deaths. If you pick up shifts and are quick to help in an emergency, that would be you, too.

The first thing I thought of when I looked at this was where are the hours worked and typical patient acuity? I know a couple of nurses that pick up a ton of hours and are usually given high-acuity patients. Would there be a correlation? Absolutely. Does that mean they're responsible for the deaths of their patients? Of course not.

Also this fun quote (Lucy Letby: What did the nurse do to babies in her care?😞

My specialty is adults but you get prior warning on every single patient? Are neonatal bodies so different from adults that they are immune to sudden cardiovascular collapse? I've seen patients ready to transfer end up dead less than 24 hours later. Maybe neonates are just that special, though.

This does not seem like an investigation where all angles were looked at. This was a witch hunt with a single suspect in mind. I'm not saying for sure she didn't do it, but I am saying it's disturbing how quickly she became the first and only explanation.

Thank you! Adults' conditions can change in seconds. I have been a witness to it. I can't believe babies, especially in an ICU, would be any different. This doc is one I'm thankful is not mine. Sounds like he has no clue.