Lucy Letby Is Innocent: A Perspective Shift
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лют 2025
- If you think you're having a tough time just think what it would be like for the entire country to despise you for murdering children. Children who, in reality, were babies you cared dearly for and fought to save.
#lucyletbycase #nhsfailings #uk
Fancy Leaving A Tip?: buymeacoffee.c...
Facebook: www.facebook.c...
Instagram: / edukate___
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @educatingkate
The poor girl had a breakdown before the trial and was put on a heady dose of relaxants, sleeping medication and antidepressants, they had to delay it by a week until she was more stable. She then faced criticism over her body language in court and then for not appearing before the judge for sentencing, despite protesting her innocence the entire time.
If she truly was a 'psychopath', would she have trouble sleeping? Would she really need medication for anxiety or depression?
Occam's razor says she's a normal person.
What those idiot doctors the media , the police and courts have done to that young woman is beyond evil words can't wield the matter
Having worked as a nurse in the NHS, I would suggest that a cascade of poor decisions by managers, lack of staff/inadequate skill mixes in the nursing teams, and failures of the consultants to challenge the judgement of managers was more likely the cause of the poor care which resulted the deaths of those babies. The trial was a witch hunt, and Lucy Letby was the scapegoat.
Not only is Lucy in jail for life, she has also been branded one of Britains' most evil people. What this poor woman has been through is unimaginable!!
Hopefully she has not been kept in solitery for her own safety like some one else we could mention.
I have no idea if she is innocent. Yet when the prosecution says there is too much circumstantial evidence to be anything else, but then much of the circumstantial evidence is exposed as nonsense, it demands a retrial with the evidence that survives
Circumstantial evidence only matters if it illuminates a theory of murder. Here, there were none. It's horrifying.
I can tell you what she is guilty of , Lying about wearing pyjamas. lying about owning a shredder , having an affair with a married doctor , pissing off the doctors , oh and doing too much overtime . As for killing babies utter nonsense you only have to listen closely to the main prosecution expert witness Evans and how he makes up the story to get her convicted with zero evidence to back up what he is saying
Amazing video. Your parents should be proud. I've subscribed. Quote from an inmate with Lucy at HMP Bronzfield: "She's been made a massive scapegoat!"
Because if there is one thing that is 100% reliable, it's hearsay from a convicted criminal... 🙄
Her notes that Lucy made was used as evidence against her, even though they were notes made in a therapy session around her investigation. The notes she made should not have been used as evidence in her trial, and if the verdict was hung on those notes, as a "confession", then the whole trial is corrupt and should have been thrown out. The whole process of her trial was a mess from the start. She was not taken as 'innocent until proven guilty'.
Also, they are out of context. I don't think the nonsense we write down should ever be used against us - it's meaningless. BUT IN CONTEXT she is explicitly saying SHE DIDN'T DO IT.
She also wrote that she didn't commit the murders but there was no mention on this during her trial. A big cover up by NHS. Go figure!
Her notes were NEVER made in any therapy session. Never discussed at trial if a health therapist or professional told her to write them nor at the Thirwall enquiry. In a 9 to 10 month trial her notes were talked about for 6 minutes.
The press, the BBC in particular, found her guilty before the trial.
The paper did not full report the notes one read I am innocent ,another "They went I did this I killed them I am evil " She had written down what the police accused her of . "They went" is used in parts of Britain meaning they said some times people sy they go meaning they said
Apart from all you said, which btw I absolutely agree with, imagine if you adored children so much you decided to devote your life’s work to making to helping them when they are at their most needy. Only to find yourself struggling against the tide of a failing department, with an inadequate and poorly managed team and horrifically poor patient outcomes. Now you sit alone in your cell with the threats and taunts of other prisoners who despise you for what you did….only you didn’t !
And don’t forget, you’ve been handed 15 life sentences and are never, ever getting out. And you’re innocent.
It's pure horror for all
I think she is innocent. They are using her as a scapegoat, to cover their own mistakes. Two things: 1./She looks like somebody who is still trying to wake up from a bad dream, somebody who is trying to figure out what is happening. 2./I have story for you. It happened with one of my clients. It's a first hand information, not hearsay. This Romanian lady (she's a very lovely person, great character, I respect her a lot) was 7-8 months pregnant when a TEAM(!) of UK doctors advised her to abort/kill the baby, because she, the baby has a very serious heart condition, she would die maximum 2 days after birth. This lady wanted a second opinion, so she went back to Romania, paid few private doctors. They said the opposite: the baby is fine, nothing wrong with her. So she decided to keep the baby, she came back to the UK, and guess what: the baby was born 100% healthy. No heart condition, nothing at all. When I met them, and heard the story she was around 1 years old.
Lmao.
I have heard other stories like this
Totally agree with you CT my friend.
@@sarah-kk4om It's just shocking.
Be honest it's cos she a white blonde woman ... she IS GUILTY
It has been revealed that the original list of suspicious events had 28 events and that Nurse Letby was not in the hospital for 10 of those events. ☮️
If the babies werent murdered she cant be guilty. Some people need to get that thru their heads
Yes this amazes me if the medical evidence was incorrect she is innocent ,the rest of the so called evidence against her was straight out of a witch trial ,and should not be a factor
This is a grave miscarriage of justice. As a nurse, I find it impossible to understand how Lucy could have committed mass murder in a busy neonatal unit where parents and a multidisciplinary team are constantly in and out, 24/7. No one witnessed her causing harm. The evidence is entirely circumstantial. Six of the seven post-mortems were initially classified as natural causes, and the seventh didn’t happen at the request of the parents.
Dr. Dewi Evans, the prosecution's expert, overruled all the original post-mortem findings. Those post-mortems were conducted by a neonatal pathologist who physically examined the bodies, yet Dr. Evans, who never saw the bodies, built his case on a hypothesis. It's also crucial to note that Lucy had a grievance filed against four consultants, which were upheld. These same consultants testified against her at trial, raising questions about their impartiality.
The list of concerns surrounding this case goes on, and the deeper you dig into the details and evidence, the more it becomes clear that this conviction is far from safe. Many nurses I know have serious doubts about the integrity of this verdict, and it’s hard to see how justice was truly served here.
The way people hated on Lucy before even knowing anything, just mention babies and a possible killer and she was guilty straight away.
Kate you provide a complete encapsulation of the set of issues and dilemmas in this case. Whatever happens Lucy Letby's life is destroyed like the babies' parents. The mounting case now demands a retrial, but there has also to be an open national inquiry into 2 things: the miscarriage of justice that sought to convict her and also a full open, public investigation of institutional failures and coverups (if the case) at the hospital, otherwise Lucy can never be free, the parents will not have had justice and the public will have no confidence. But thanks for your compassionate video
The problem with public investigations into institutional failures like this, is that it would entail the system investigating itself. People do not realise how powerful those behind it are, how ruthless and evil they are, who will stop at NOTHING to maintain their power and wealth over the population. Of course according to their media wing, it would be anti-semitic to say this...
With our current government, don't hold your breath for anything that is fair or has integrity.
@EgoChip indeed it is really a hope
Thankyou for your bravery in highlighting Lucy's plight, it is an upsetting issue that needs strong public backing to force these stubborn courts to reconsider her case. I've had difficult problems as a carer too when no one believed me, or more like they did, but was easier for them to blame me to save themselves accountability. Thankyou Kate, God bless.
Social Services in England are in my experience absolutely corrupt and evil. Anyone who has been on the wrong end of them, has my total sympathy.
That our system can't prevent such a miscarriage of justice is just yet another example of Broken Britain. Add to that, the people who ran post offices - all prosecuted on 'expert' evidence from a flawed computer system. What other lower profile cases have we not heard of?
The whole system, Justice, NHS, Welfare, Government, is flawed beyond repair. Our society has become low trust because those who are entrusted to manage our institutions for the benefit of the British people so obviously fail to do so and there is no accountability, lessons learned or improvement.
Low trust societies fail. No wonder good people are leaving.
All tied in with class if you ask me; especially the Post Office thing, but Letby too.
The Equality Act is also so weak and badly implemented that it gives no real protection for the most vulnerable in society- and I believe that is how it has deliberately been set up to be. It is a whitewash. The media are starting to pick up on bits of it now, in regard to wheelchair access, but what they report is the tip of the iceberg. Judgements on discrimination cases are often not even published.... we dont even know how many cases are won for service provider cases... nobody keeps records on it.
Ive had bad experiences with NHS too; I think its too far gone and I think that is also intentional (and also based on class).
I don't think it's just Britian. I'm Irish btw. The West's judiciaries and prosecution departments are antiquated systems that have no way reliable way to process this level of info.
Look at any comments section - this is your jury. pool.
You really hit the nail on the head: people do not want to question things that undermine their beliefs. In this case beliefs of the effectiveness of the NHS, justice system, but also the notion that some people that are "pure evil" and more generally what it means to live in a Western country and what that's supposed to look like.
Visiting jails and doing a lot of research on them in college made me realize half of the justice system is about upholding societal values, politics, and more than anything, ensuring people have trust in the system/government.
Like everything, the justice system is run by people and has flaws, but any acknowledgement of that is uncomfortable to sit with. And, at the end of the day, even if it is impossible to relate to them, the individuals that end up in jail are people too.
I think it's called 'confirmation bias'
why are you spelling it, realize? Its realise. But yeah, she's white, so they framed her to cover for the minorities truly responsible. It's depressing.
The police hired a statition to line up her shifts with the deaths and was unable to! That fact was kept from the defence. That one fact alone makes the conviction unstable.
"They hired a statistician? " Where did you hear that ? The only person they hired was a retired paediatrician who did not have a license to practice.Your point is made,however.
Said paediatrician insisted one of the babies was killed by letby and came up with a hypotheses on how she killed it. But later data showed she was not, actually, on shift when that baby died. Strangely said doctor suddenly changed his evaluation on the cause of death of that child...
@@neilsmith9799 They were apparently told by the CPS to drop that line of investigation after statistician, Jane Hutton, who the police had gone to for advice said she thought the shift table wasnt good statistics.
There is a Guardian article that mentions this titled "Lucy Letby: police and CPS handling of case raises new concerns about convictions".
@neilsmith, you’re wrong and clearly don’t know much about the case. The contacted Jane Hutton, she herself has come forward and stated that the statistical evidence against Letby is a complete farce.
From the media: Neither the initial engagement with Hutton nor the CPS instruction to the police to drop their line of inquiry into the “validity of the statistical evidence in the case” were disclosed to Letby’s defence team, the Guardian understands.
The CPS new that an actual statician would find Lucy to be a scapegoat so they asked the police to drop the contact with Hutton. That in itself shows a total stitch up.
The police, CPS, Courts, Prosecutors are all corrupt in this case.
Well done, Kate. Speaking truth to power is hard enough, but speaking truth to the baying mob is on another level. Thank you for your courage.
Thanks for sharing your feelings about this case.
A team of top international neonatal experts has reviewed the medical evidence and found that the deaths were caused by natural causes and poor care by the doctors and hospital. ☮️
ua-cam.com/video/zCLYQuJt3Uo/v-deo.htmlsi=4GX5QIpUnNU8hLza
As Lucy has some been known to have some Christian faith and morals, it is highly unlikely that she is any kind of murderer. I know that this doesn’t mean that such a person cannot hide amongst the faith, as there are ‘bad apples’ anywhere, however, given her choice of career in wanting to help and look after babies, is consistent with Christian caring principles, I consider her conviction highly unlikely to be true or accurate. When this is considered against the new panel’s findings which concluded that there was no evidence of any murders being committed, then we are NOT looking at “The worst serial killer of babies in the UK”, but instead, “The worst miscarriage of justice in the UK in modern times”!!
I thought she was innocent from the very beginning. It all just seemed too odd. A scapegoat of a very broken NHS.
Lucy was very efficient as a Nurse 😨believe she is innocent 100%..we want the truth & accuracy of the facts.Junior Doctor's are to blame in this case..
Look up Beverley Hallet 1980..NHS is going down! Lucy needs a big loving HUG❤
I always believed she was innocent..NHS is at fault here!
Kate.I am in my sixties.Had I been on the Jury I would definitely have found her guilty given the evidence.
But I have been looking at various failings in the prosecution case I have come to the realisation that there is no evidence against the woman that stands up to any kind of scrutiny.Its a terrible situation.She will be freed,it's just a case of when.But she is so traumatised,it's heartbreaking.
I think all those who don't want to entertain the thought of Lucy being innocent are afraid to consider the alternative, and that then means that they can't trust the NHS and the justice system. The reason I knew from the beginning that Lucy was innocent was because the NHS almost caused me to die from undiagnosed blood cancer, and the judicial system failed to acknowledge this! I think about Lucy every day, and the relentless trauma she has been enduring. I am praying for her release every day. When you have been let down almost to the point of death, you have already lost trust in the NHS, and therefore this obvious miscarriage of justice is easy to see. Thank you for raising awareness of how people's fear of fractured systems is blinding them from seeing the truth. I am also very emotional about all of this. Fantastic video 👍
can you tell us more about what the NHS did to you?
The fact is, if the evidence is deemed unsafe, then Lucy must be set free, even if she really did it. That is the law, which says someone must only be convicted if there is beyond reasonable doubt based on the available evidence. So even if experts disagree over the medical evidence, that means it cannot be beyond reasonable doubt, and a guilty verdict would be unsafe.
So many accurate points. Our justice system is not fit for purpose. Access to legal aid has been systematically removed, affecting the poorest. Lucy has by all accounts been an exemplary professional and been unreasonably called on by the hospital because of her superior training and staff shortages. An excellent video Kate.
@@duplicitousdemocracy2246 Lucy was not an exemplary professional by all accounts part of the reason for where she is now.
JUST NO cos she is a white blonde woman, even wrote a note saying she DID the murders
This platform is so important for people to be able to speak without being beaten down by the other thinking side before being able to finish what you are saying. I see so often those I describe as lefties like to shout down what some one has to say just so others cant hear it. "The right can also do this" for balance. Well done with such an early speaking career.
Hi Kate - I like your videos - From day one I have thought Lucy was Innocent - Just a kind caring nurse !
By now, it should be clear to everyone that she is innocent. Release her immediately, and bring in the consultants and experts who misled the process to face justice. This is Britain, where everyone is equal before the law.
Well said, Kate, it had to be said and you’re brave enough to say it. Thank you.
Various UK specialist publications and Private Eye magazine have been covering this fairly well. They are all highlighting that her prosecution case is extremely flawed. While the mainstream seems oddly not to touch the topic, it is known that the case has been extremely poorly defended by her legal support.
I am UK based.
Wow, I had a very similar experience when I brought up certain issues and tried to discuss some alternative views with my parents (and brother) a couple of years ago. Their reactions were so shockingly negative and unpleasant, that since then I've stopped talking about serious issues to them almost completely. It turned out to be impossible.
Unless there is video proof (and even that is questionable in this day and age), we can never be 100% sure. So what percentage of certainty is enough to convict? That is the question. Is 95% sure enough? Is 99% sure enough? That is the question we have to answer as a society.
It should be beyond reasonable doubt, is there reasonable doubt?
@@lornanicholson3659
Yeah I like this response. There certainly is reasonable doubt. Innocent until proven guilty and a low power hypothesis test is not proof.
That kind of "95% sure?" "99% sure?" way of thinking has been based on the frequentist probability paradigm in this case. Said paradigm assumes abstract attributes of probability which are often unsuitable for the evaluation of cases such as these.
A Bayesian statistical analysis should be performed. A prior should be set. It should be heavily weighted towards her innocence which we should assume until proof of guilt.
This should be a much fairer analysis.
That question was answered centuries ago. "Beyond reasonable doubt" means what it says. The question "we have to answer as a society" is whether that standard has been reached.
The current evidence says she is 100 pc innocent.That should be enough. I was sure of it before the first trial concluded .It was frightening seeing the proceedings reported day after day and seeing crazy media reactions to the doubtful evidence presented
You are a good soul Kate!
FREE LUCY LETBY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The medical evidence matters. The circumstantial evidence doesn't. When there's overwhelming medical evidence. She was scapegoated. The doctors who accused her belong in prison. The NHS can recover if it hangs on to what works and lets go of what doesn't. This horrible story might be a new beginning.
Do not worry I have been crying for Lucy and what they did to her. It horrific- what sort of life can she have ever!
I wanted to share some thoughts with you regarding the Lucy Letby case and the broader issues of justice, institutional failures, and the dangers of pretrial publicity. I am old enough to remember firsthand several high-profile miscarriages of justice, and my personal proximity to these events has made me particularly attuned to how the system can go disastrously wrong.
On November 21, 1974, I narrowly avoided becoming a victim of the Birmingham pub bombings. As you will know, the ensuing investigation led to the wrongful conviction of the Birmingham Six, a case that took 17 years to be overturned. At the time, I had grave misgivings about the rush to justice-it all seemed too neat, too convenient. And yet, despite my own layperson’s doubts, the convictions stood for nearly two decades before they were quashed.
Similarly, I had serious reservations about the Guildford Four, and again, those convictions were later overturned. More personally, I worked in a warehouse where a colleague and his brother were convicted of murder. They spent 18 years behind bars before their innocence was finally recognized. Again, I had suspected their conviction was unsafe from the outset. These experiences have reinforced my belief that when justice is hurried, and when authorities are more concerned with securing convictions than uncovering the truth, innocent people suffer.
The Post Office scandal follows the same trajectory-an institutional failure allowed innocent people to be scapegoated, destroying lives in the process. The pattern is undeniable: systems and authorities protect themselves at the cost of individuals, and any effort to correct these injustices is slow-walked, burdened with hurdles, and often obstructed outright.
This brings me to the role of the media and pretrial publicity. When Cliff Richard was falsely accused, the media sensationalized his arrest with helicopters circling his home before he had even been questioned. The public was encouraged to see him as guilty before any evidence was tested. This phenomenon is not about civic righteousness-it is macabre entertainment masquerading as public interest. It serves to demonize arrestees long before they can defend themselves, and if they are innocent, the stigma lingers forever.
In my view, pretrial publicity does nothing but contaminate the process. It creates a situation where fair trials become difficult-if not impossible-because the court of public opinion has already rendered its verdict. Once someone is branded a criminal in the public eye, even exoneration does not restore their reputation.
So, if I-as a layperson-had serious doubts at the time of these wrongful convictions, it begs the question: why didn’t others? How could entire legal and investigative institutions miss what seemed so obvious? And how can the media justify fueling these miscarriages of justice through reckless coverage?
The Lucy Letby case raises many uncomfortable questions. While I make no definitive claim about her guilt or innocence, the public, the media, and the justice system should all take a step back and consider whether what we saw was another rush to judgment-one that may take years or even decades to correct.
Justice delayed is justice denied, and righting a miscarriage of justice delayed is double justice denied. If any doubt exists, we must act swiftly rather than allowing years to pass before the truth emerges.
I would be very interested in your thoughts on the balance between public interest, media responsibility, and the duty of the justice system to prioritize truth over expediency.
The reason this case is the worst miscarriage of justice in British history is because a nurse has been jailed for life for non existent crimes
#lucyletby
It's really important that you speak about the Lucy Letby case, your parents reaction, not ill-meant at all, but it's this we need to overcome to get her home for Christmas 2025
See also the case of Dr Chris Day who was chased out of the NHS and sued and attempted to be prosecuted for whistleblowing that a ICU ward he was covering was unsafe back in 2013/2014, (he has a very small youtube too)
All the leading studies agree that around 5% of people incarcerated are innocent. That's for ALL cases, including those where there is zero doubt. So when you look at a case where there is considerable doubt, it really isn't far-fetched to assume that person is innocent.
Is it really 5%? That's worryingly too high! And I agree with your final point.
She is innocent.
The cat is out of the bag now, thank god, and she will be released at some time hopefully soon.
Your video here is very reminiscent of the videos released just after she was found guilty (not wanting to commit one way another 100%), saddling the fence as too scared of the social consequences of speaking in such a way.
Keep looking into it and any doubt of her innocence will eventually evaporate.
There have been a number of YT channels that have worked tirelessly over the last 18 months proving the absurdity of the case against LL, Mark Mayes is one such channel, I suggest you check it out.
In the USA we are supposed to be innocent until *proven* guilty. I know the rest of the world has their own legal standards. Looking at the case, there's nothing to link her to the deaths except statistics. I know people get convicted without hard evidence, but the bare minimum should be "only one person could have done this, or had a reason to do this." I just don't see either in Lucy's case.
The UK is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. The problem generally, not just with British people, is that we are emotional animals. We always want someone to blame, we always want to infer things that aren't there so that we may feel settled in our opinions.
When she wrote "I did this" in her diary, even then I never believed she meant it. The ramblings of someone who is going crazy and someone who feels guilty only because she was the nurse on duty, not because she actually carried out the acts.
A massive miscarriage of justice.
all they had was a letter which said "i am evil" "i did this" and they took that as if it meant she killed babies.
The innocent until proven guilty tenet, is only the position of the court. It's firmly the position of any prosecution service is that one is guilty.
Good to see you doing some critical thinking. We need more of this. Not wishing to be critical of your parents, but many have closed minds as they don't want to face what is likely to be the reality.
How can she be guilty? There were no murders.
She went from worst serial baby angel of death to exonerated complete innocent nurse. What does that say about a justice system looks for scapegaots to protect the established substandard institutions.
Rather an innocent woman is scapegoated than the not fit for purpose system held accountable. They know shes innocent but will still uphold the conviction to protect the justice systems integrity.
Her accusers might well depend on peoples rejection of possible alternatives, yes, absolutely. I saw her face and no serial killer ever looked like that.
If I ever want to know what the mainstream media wants the public to think about an issue, I'll ask my father
You said “this is what she has been ‘caught doing’”, but that’s precisely the point - she wasn’t ‘caught’ doing anything at all! The entire case is built upon the imaginations of people focussed on one individual in order to explain these deaths!! As the international team has pointed out, no murders were actually committed!
This is not the first time people have been convicted on statistics that were later proved to be wrong. The only "evidence" is the book of thoughts she wrote in that was advised by her councillor after her arrests. They weren't even admissions but notes on how people would/were thinking of her & how she felt about herself.
She wasn’t convicted on statistics - no statistical evidence was presented by either side
@@Swordfishtrombon I will have to disagree with that because the whole investigation started with the statistics that pointed her out as the perpetrator by probability. And using probability is using statistics.
@ no statistical evidence was used in court, it may have started the investigation but it wasn’t what got her convicted
@@Swordfishtrombon Statistics put her in that seat regardless of anything else & she was convicted on the no smoke without fire basis with the help of "experts" who put theories out dressed up as scientific facts to explain those statistics to fit the narrative & of the statistics given to them. The very fact that every single death was presented as murder because it fitted in to the probability is pretty much concrete evidence to you, & anyone else, that statistics were indeed used in the process, from the start & right up until the end, including in the trial.
@@gzl7657tg Thank you!
That is a tough one. Ten years later and we still don't know for sure. The old expression, "Loose lips sink ships", comes to mind. Probably a lot of that going on in this case. I personally have a respect for UK NHS
No motive, no evidence, no confession. Luckily for Lucy, time tries the truth in everything.
The British justice system rests on 2 things,one you are innocent until proven guilty by your peers.2proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, lucy literally had almost no defence only one witness a plumber how could this have happened, we are now hearing from people who offered there services but were not called the system cannot be blamed for this,the defence side were allocated 1 and a half million pounds easily enough to pay for experts,lucys barrister asked the judge not to allow Dr Evans as a expert witness as he had been discredited by another judge the judge refused to ban Dr Evans and said get your own experts to challenge Evans, this wasn't done,some say lucy said that she didn't want any experts and refused them which is a defendants right,if true what was lucys reason for this,.
the 'authority' is evil at this point in time
I think you mean police there are too many stupid people in their ranks that make no attempt to establish the truth but look only for a result ,,, locking some one up , As a DS said to me once if we were not cops we would be criminals
There are so many things that never sat quite right with me about this case, outside of the obvious horror of so many deaths. For a case based on statistical likelihood, not a lot has been said about the relative statistical probability of a serial killer nurse escaping the notice of her peers and superiors for years, vs the relative probability of a series of institutionalised failings and scapegoating leading to, and covering up, avoidable deaths.
She could well be guilty, but with questions hanging over things as basic as whether some of the postmortem tests were even fit for the purpose they were used for, it begins to call into question whether this was even the result of any premeditated crimes at all.
Hi Kate.I am glad that you are getting emotional about this case. It is confirmation that you are sensitive to the horrors that Lucy has been enduring for the last 8 years. I, and probably thousands of others, have also been emotional about her situation regularly for the last18 months and will only be able to really return to normality when she is freed.I was a little xonfused by your "right outcome,wrong method" comment.Maybe you could explain that at some point. I have been wondering if your parents have seen your interview with the axcellent Paul Golden .They should be proud of that.
Thanks again, and both of your points are well worth considering. Nuanced perspective is incredibly difficult for many people, if not most. Its a sunken cost fallacy that disallows the individual from accepting any possibilty of having been mistaken. Instead of rejoicing in their newfound understanding, they struggle with acknowledging they could ever be "wrong" which is tantamount to being a "loser".
If you've never been wrong or mistaken, how can you ever be certain what is right or correct. And to what lengths will you go to preserve your initial position versus protecting the integrity and process of your deliberation.
Forgive your parents. They created you, and being subject to their stubborness have gifted you with an incredibly open mind and compassionate heart. We need you as you are now, and that means im grateful for them as well.
Ah. I should have made it clear in the video - I wasn't upset at my parents at all, just surprised at their reaction. I am very lucky to have 2 wonderful parents.
It's just part of my style to draw on personal experience to highlight more broader points about how people in society feel x
Great to hear. Message received. Thanks for interacting with your audience and hope HK has been hospitable toward you.
If she is innocent, the facts of the case were made more difficult by her believing that she may have caused those deaths through a failure of treatment. Who made her think that? Or is it just an elaborate ploy from a seriously wicked individual? As someone else pointed out, she has looked totally shell-shocked throughout the whole investigation, so either she is a very capable villain or she is innocent. The courts have decided, and may decide again, but in reality, we will probably never know the whole truth and that is why we should be careful about calls for the death penalty.
Sadly it doesnt just look like an incompetant court coming to the wrong conclusion-- it seems far more likely that it was a deliberate set up to cover up others failings.
It’s almost as if the defence were in on it aswell.
ALL of us are caught up in this and the pain will be with us for life. We have a duty to restore human dignity and recognize the motivations behind the prosecution.
I am open to the idea that she is innocent and that she could well have been used as a scapegoat to make this go away for the powers that be ..
It's a cover up. Not the only one. Curious response from your mother and father. What are people afraid of when discussing something contentious. Easier to sit back and watch Gavin and Stacey.
It's ultimately cowardice from those who refuse to criticise or fully research and investigate an issue, event or miscarriage of justice. Whenever something is ringfenced and protected from investigation or even mere criticism, this is a sure sign that there are people with power and wealth, that do not want anyone to threaten their position of power by exposing them with the truth. The best example of this would be the H0loc@u$t, where they are so desperate to hide the truth they have laws to imprison anyone that dares to expose the truth about this "event".
This is such a powerful video Kate. Thank you.
I think those of us who are oddballs are able to empathise with Lucy as we have generally found ourselves in similar, if much less intense, situations where groups ganged up on us.
Definitely
Wow your parents are really NPCs.
You are speaking from a point of view where you still doubt the top experts who clearly and emphatically spelled out in detail the reasons why the babies died , even down to the monitor alarm .
She is innocent full stop
I said this from the very start and I got threatened and called all sorts of things. It's nice to feel vindicated tbh
All u had to do was read the mew yorker article to kmow this was coming eventually
She is 110% innocent as shown by the top of the top world peer reviewed experts .
110 percent certainly sounds overwhelming😜
I'm not saying you're one of them, but it's always interesting to me how many people who routinely dismiss "renowned experts" and their "peer reviewed research" when what they are saying DOESN'T square with what they believe. In which case it's very much what do these "elites" know, they're probably on the payroll of big pharma/ George Soros/ the WEF 🙄 - I'm not a sheep, I do my own research!
I have trouble conceiving of the enormity of what has been done to Letby should this turn out to be the case. Hitchcock in all his worst "wrong-man" nightmares could not have come up with this. How could you give back anything resembling a life to this woman?
She is innocent, I have always said that, there’s no evidence, my son in law had a manager ( a former nurse)with no managerial training, she destroyed her team and careers , setting people up to fail, not letting nurses move up the scale, absolutely lazy women who sat in her office with the chosen few, my son in law nearly had a breakdown being blamed for nothing he had done, trying to get him to go against consultants asking him to report anything to her, she’s been reported And hopefully gone
The notion that because when she was removed, the incidents stopped occurring at such a high rate in that hospital, is so flawed I don't even know where to begin.
It's the same thing in aviation -- the safest time to fly is right after a big accident because everyone is on high alert. Thankfully the FAA in the US doesn't scapegoat people (for now).
It seems completely plausible that once they were under the gun, they cleaned their act up.
I've always said she never did it and is innocent.
"Sudden possibility she might be innocent"? We've all known she's innocent from day 1
Have we ? Wow, definitely not a sweeping statement.
Well I'll put my hand up and confess that I personally didn't know she was innocent from day 1 and I certainly hope you don't end up on any juries yourself with that mindset because typically one has to examine all the evidence before rendering a judgment. Yes in our adversarial trial process we have the presumption of innocence - ie innocent until proven guilty - but that's very different of course from knowing it as a fact otherwise we wouldn't even need courts / a legal system we could just ask sooth sayers like you at the outset.
I thought she was guilty based on the reporting of the trial I heard and now based on current reporting I'm far from convinced, but I haven't sat through a trial or studied all of the gazillion pages of testimony/ evidence so I honestly don't know at this stage.
One thing I do know is that there is not proven v not guilty ( at least in the Scottish legal system there is I'm not sure about England) and these are of course two distinct things.
I think based on some of the reporting coming to light now there increasingly looks like a case could be made for not proven. But again I'm not a legal expert or in possession of all the evidence.
The power at be at work 😢
Whilst it is tragic that medical failures end in death, how many times have you messed up at work when you had a bad nights sleep or it is extremely busy?All of us have probably done it at least once. But doctors and nurses are overtired, busy and overworked every single day. I know so many who live off of max 2-3 hours a day of sleep, living off of sweets from the vending machines in the hospitals. This is not just the fault of one person, because even if she was murdering those babies, no one stopped it.
I don't understand how you can think it's only a possibility she's innocent after the last press release. The NHS has gone to shit, the money people control it. The soul of it --which i was part has gone. It doesn't stand for anything any more.
I agree. I posted a positive comment to Kate late last night when I was tired but I did ask for a clarification of one of her statements relating to this. I think, aftert looking again at the transcript, that she may not yet ,surprisingly, have seen or heard Tuesday's expert's report.She did not mention it.
Hi Dave - I said in this video that I had been researching the possibility she was innocent for the second half of 2024 and this is actually my second video on Lucy :)
@Yes saw the other one, love you to bits. The general way of expressing about this by those in the media or people representing her is just, ' we have concerns about the conviction'. Rightly so, but for me as i don't have a channel or anything i can just be more forthright in my language. So i can say 'release her and lock up Evans'. ) So maybe i should have worded my comment better.x
Trial was so complex, easier for the establishment (Government, Cps, Chester Hospital) to blame it all on 1 Woman
Good video- personally I think a lot of people deliberately skew arguments against the death penalty. It is entirely possible to bring back the death penalty, but make it so that it is not possible to apply it in cases like this. Just as there are sentencing guidelines (which we may agree/disagree with) for cases where a perpetrator is underage, we can also have sentencing guidelines with regards to the nature of the evidence. Arguments for the death penalty usually refer to cases where the perpetrator was caught in the act, with CCTV and witnesses (eg Bushey, Lee Rigby and Southport). Letby's case has never fallen into these categories. It would therefore be disingenous to use this as an argument against the death penalty.
It has to be 100% proof for us to ever say someone is guilty. If there is even the slightest chance she didn't do it, then we must say "Not guilty". It is better to allow 1000 guilty persons to go free, than for just one innocent person to be wrongfully thrown in prison. People too often only think of wanting to destroy the gulity, rather than protect all who are truly innocent.
The inability to process cognitive dissonance has become a real issue of late, particularly in countries like the UK where politics has become so mainstream and so polarised. Just because you rely upon an institution does not mean that said institution is incapable of error just because you will it so.
I wonder if free thought is handled any differently by the populace in a one-party state like China (and, by extension, HK)?
I completely agree. Bringing the masses into politics as a form of entertainment almost is a catastrophe. People have no idea what they're talking about and they're very easily subverted by an omnipotent political cabal. From education to media, they people have control over the fools who believe what they read. Other nations seem to have a more sensible, pragmatic approach to life and they question things naturally. In britain there is a cult like following of any authority. It is our greatest downfall.
Remember Stephan Kishco poor bloke !
She'll be hated forever even being innocent, flaws in this case everywhere , does anything in this country operate the way its supposed to anymore
please get on the Lotus Eaters
Good call, that would be a good move.
Recent report by Prof Lee and colleagues has given a clinical
explanation for each of the baby’s tragic deaths.
I watched the entire press conference. Very interesting.
I’ve been a nurse for nearly 20 years and currently working as an advanced clinical practitioner in emergency medicine and paediatrics.
I believe she is innocent.
I think like any system that is devised and used by people, the justice system is going to make mistakes because humans are flawed. Any system that uses people is by definition flawed therefor. One can only hope that, as seems to be the case here, mistakes are picked up and addressed. So I think the justice system in this case is working as it should. I imagine the children's parents must be so confused right now but also want to be absolutely sure that the person who took their perfect new world and ripped it apart is really now in prison and not still out there plotting their next move. I think ideally every case has to be rigorously checked after a verdict but that obviously will require funding. Funding is a dirty word amongst bean counters. All this also means I agree that the death penalty is too final a word in a system that is and can only be flawed.
As for the NHS, it's an enormous institution. It's the 7th largest employer in the world with north of a million people working in it. I doubt something that large can be perfect. I think people should constantly challenge and demand those charged with its care to always be assessing what is and isn't working but also accept that as new challenges arise, new ways of thinking are developed and the health care landscape shifts and evolves, the NHS is always going to be a work in progress. Some things will work, others wont. Those in charge need to be humble when they get things wrong too, so mistakes don't linger. Too often people won't admit they got it wrong. I don't think there can ever be a final answer for the NHS. But I'm grateful and proud we have it.
Не всё так однозначно в этой теме и неоднозначно оно в свете восприятия людьми реальной действительности.Реальную действительность младенческая психика всегда настроена видеть изумрудной,но реальная действительность перестаёт быть изумрудной как только человек взрослеет...
The NHS needs to be funded properly
The NHS needs to revert to how it used to function before fat cat, ludicrously highly paid managers were installed.
@@jobo1053 exactly.
Simon from History Debunked was onto this story years ago. I think you two could have an interesting conversation.
Sonia Poulton too has done a lot of proper investigative journalism on this story since it first broke.
Lucy Letby will come out of this stronger.
Remember how they broke her spirit, called her names and stripped away everything and everyone she ever cared about.
She was at the bottom and the direction Lucy Letby will be headed is upwards.
I believe there will be opportunities for her to do whatever she chooses.
Lucy Letby will go on in life to do great things. You'll see!
I really hope you are right!!!
It is very easy for people to fail to recognise bias. You really need to be very careful.
For example when the Brodie helmet was introduced into the British army in WWI, the number of head injuries went up.
Initially they thought the helmet was no good. But they realised it was because more soldiers were surviving shots to the head but were coming away with head injuries.
Just a general comment, I know very little of this case, even if she is found not guilty millions will not believe it, she will need a new identity just like Maxine Carr- who was legitamaly involved in the murder of two children. Also it's strange how we now talk about NHS like a dead relative that we have fond memories of.
the story in the atlantic is a must read
I don't know what to make of this situation. The courts usually get these things right. They sat through months of evidence and testimony, and there were two trials. Unless there is a systematic coverup then I am inclined to go along with the judgements. But knowing what I know about British society, it's entirely possible she has been set up to take the fall for poor healthcare and management failures. But she could just be a cold hearted killer. I haven't sat through all the evidence, and I wouldn't understand most of it. What does concern me is the refusal of her appeals. They are so eager to draw a line under this, using the distress of the families as a reason. But surely the families should have absolutely all doubt removed?
I also can't help but think if this was an overweight 40-something who was not photogenic, people wouldn't care so much about her.
Your parents sound fully vaccinated.
They will definitely still believe in Contagion Theory as well I suspect. They will also believe the Holocaust story.
The holocost "story"? Wow you far right head cases are always willing to plumb new depths.
As for contagion "theory" you don't believe infections diseases are contagious? Do you know what infectious means?
Agreed!
they said it was lack of care and wrong treatment . she might not killed '' killed'' them but also these kids died because of lack of treatment. Its not only her fault I think its all NHS failed.
They meant lack of care and wrong treatment by the consultants.
@@KingBee24 is not what investigators said .
У вас в Британии есть профессионал экстра-класса по хорарной астрологии.Его зовут Джон Фроули.Обратитесь к нему с вопросом:"Причастна ли Люси к тому,в чём её обвиняют или нет?" и закроете эту тему раз и навсегда,возможно открыв другую, "но это уже совсем другая история"....
Difficult topic, Kate, but not all that unusual. The case I was very close to related to a Sunday football buddy and the Vicki Hall murder in Suffolk. We should also refer to the Charlie Peters interview on Triggonetry this week. We should never stop asking questions, and thank you for doing so.
Question is not if Lucy is innocent the question is why children stop dying after she has been caught?
They haven't?
because the hospital was downgraded and stopped taking critical care babies
i always knew she was innocent
because i know what Loxism means