Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Norman Fenton interviews Dr Scott McLachan on concerns about the evidence in the Lucy Letby case
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 сер 2023
- For more information about concerns at the way the Lucy Letby trial was conducted see:
lawhealthandte...
gill1109.com/2...
rexvlucyletby2...
One of our members on FB group that was created to discuss Lucy case . The member said that “ I have joined this group because my sister was a midwife in the NHS.
My sister has been scapegoated in the past for whistle-blowing and raising DATIX's - to hide management failings - and to try to stop her from raising further issues. She has now been hounded out and got a new job.
I think the same thing could of happened to Lucy.
Just look at the failings at Morcambe bay, Shrewsbury, Nottingham etc etc.
It would be easy to scapegoat a nurse to hide similar failings at Chester...” . I think we need to pay attention to the failures by the management at the hospital as I believe that the hospital have covered their failures by setting up Lucy
Then how did management decide which nurse to fit up then?
It’s about a conspiracy theory. These lots things not really clear in this investigation. Having gone through Dr Scott’s interview in this video I am not convinced of the quality of the investigation and its outcome. In terms of ppl who linked her behavior of her having teddy bears in her room ! Well lots of ppl adult and old having them as well and it could be gifts from her parents or family when she was young or anything else but not necessarily because she was obsessed with babies . The truths still not out yet but it will . However Looking back at how Me Andrew Malkinson who spent 16 years in jail for crime he never committed after a fresh DNA evidence proved his innocence, this proves and exposes a miscarriage of justice in uk
Agree. Total set up!!
@@rainbows9060 Lucy was picked on because she was a competent hard working nurse, always ready to do extra shifts. She also complained about incompetent doctors. The consultants at the CoCH failing neonatal unit were the subject of a critical report from the Royal College of Paediatrics & Child Health, a scapegoat had to be found...
The hospital management actually tried to protect her for ages
I'm a retired ICU nurse( Adults not Neonates) I followed the case closely through out and was astounded she was found guilty. Thank you Norman for putting this out.If some sort of financial incentive is required to aid an appeal then I hope the funds could be found.
Why as a retired ICU nurse do you feel that? Thanks.
Another plausible cause of deaths could be neonatal enteroviral gastric infections caused by sewage contamination of ward. It also matches with seasonal viruses. Summer to Autumn. ENTEROVIRUSES. Can be lethal for neonatals. This aligns with Letby's thought about Sewage Contamination and it being important. The ward should have never been open if it had sewage contamination. Enteroviruses are fecal oral. They could have been inserting contaminated equipment into the baby. 😢
She is completely innocent and has been scapegoated for the fuck ups of senior management and doctors it seems. I hope Lucy gets justice
Why is this man saying the early neonatal deaths were 30 or 31 between 2015 and 2016? There were 15…. He must be including the stats for stillbirths and late fetus deaths too but she wasn’t being charged for those that was a different unit but neonatal is where she was
@@andyryan3756 im injured by enteroviruses myself. Disabled. I believe its an alternate plausible explanation for the deaths. Ive thought this the minute i heard it reported in papers during the trial. First thoughts in head upon hearing sewage on ward. I was thinking call the trial off for further investigation of letbys claims. I was thinking its going to be a mistrial. Also the river in chester has had sewage dumping for years. Look it up. The viruses are summer viruses in sewage. Theres sewage contamination all around that fucking area. Its 100% dangerous to the public. Im injured myself. Hospital wards are supposed to be spotlessly clean. My mum was a domestic cleaner in a hospital. Any responsible person in charge should of shut down the ward if this was an issue. If a neonatal goes through anything similar to what I went through they are dead. They can cause chronic infections. No antivirals. They can kill babies quite easily. Most doctors aint trained properly in these viruses. So Letby wont be either I doubt. I do find it interesting shes so aware to say it could be this though. I find that very interesting. Could be telling the truth? She comes across as pretty intelligent to me. Just had a defense missing a plausible big jigsaw piece. She did write in a note scapegoat. Writing how she feels. Liver damage in one baby? Did they have viral hepatitis? Another had white matter injury. Enteroviruses can injure the white matter. An awful lot of gasto complaints from the babies. GI bleed. Bleeding from mouth. Bleeding out backside. Projectile Vomiting. I had bleeding out backside after i fell ill and had a severe milk allergy. Id imagine they giving these babies milk. Did the babies have gastroparesis and not clearing the milk? Overfeeding? The viruses can injure stomach leading to gastroparesis. Like I say theres another plausible possibility. The viruses can lead to severe constipation and back everything up.
It would be interesting to know how many people here have attended jury service and what they think of it. I do not have faith in the jury system myself due to witnessing a scary lack of critical thinking within the group I encountered and a tendency for the more timid to go along with the more dominant personalities influences. Others for various reasons frankly showed clear indifference, reluctance and impatience towards being involved in the whole process. In the Lucy Letby case my mind boggles at the the sheer scale of medical language and scenarios they were expected to decipher and I would not like to have been anyone's shoes as a juror for this case, but to imagine the group I encountered dealing with it, is sadly frightening. I wonder if there is a need for juries to be made up of people taken from the medical field somehow to deal with medical cases of such gravity. I don't think we can rely on modern culture to support a big enough or clear enough sense of right and wrong any more sadly and the prevalent encompassing of moral relativity within our education system and all our institutions now has just resulted in people conforming to groupthink that the Machievellian media use very effectively to control the minds of the general population for and on behalf of shareholders and other corrupt corporate entities serving the elite.
Dumbing down the public and upcoming young people from critical thinking, and proliferating prejudice, is systemic and politically by design, across broadcasting and media, so how can jury service be meaningful.
Specialist individuals need to be proven independent players.
I've always thought that (in return for free university education, of course) graduates with uk citizenship could be eligible to serve on juries for highly technical trials. There are so many cases that never get to court because the prosecution can't build a case. I'm thinking of a lot of white collar crime that needs a jury capable of getting to grips with International Tax Law, for example. Or what about bringing some of the people responsible for the tragedy at Grenfell to trial. That evidence would look very different to graduates in civil engineering, architecture, or town planning.
Maybe. I am a retired registered nurse and I also have experience of being a juror. Based on what I know of this case, I would have a hard time believing she was guilty beyond reasonable doubt and would probably vote to acquit. This does not mean that I positively think she's innocent either. I just don't know with any degree of certainty. I think it would be even harder for people without the medical background to form an opinion.
Your experience of jury service 100% mirrors my own. Stronger 'personalities' certainly bullied the quieter ones and preconceived ideas of class definitely clouded their judgement. It was certainly a wake up call for me as to how our justice system works .
I've done Jury Service and it left me with a fear of ever being a defendant in court.
Most of the people were too stupid to be there, but what scared me most was that some of them didn't understand the difference between evidence and proof. This led them to believe that the Prosecution's claims were already proven fact and should not be disputed. When I argued a particular point, one guy told me that it was not my place to disagree with lawyers!
Plus, some of them didn't want to be there and one guy listened to his headphones throughout deliberations.
There needs to be some kind of test for the most basic understanding of terminology before people are allowed to do Jury Service. As things currently stand, I have no faith in any convection.
As a paediatric nurse myself, this is why I left the nhs a long time ago because they run it with dangerously low staffing levels and yet when things go wrong they will look for scapegoats. It is clear that the unit was out of its depth during that period, as they were taking babies that were a lot sicker and a lot more premature and the staffing levels were extremely low that would put these babies at risk. I have heard of at least 3 instances now, where treatment was delayed for several hours, which for a neonate can be the difference between life and death. LL did a lot of extra shifts at the time because she lived on site for most of that period, so statistically she would have been more likely to have been there, and yet there were still quite a few babies that died when she wasn’t there. This wreaks of a set up by the drs, nhs bosses and police all conspiring together. The prosecution evidence is cherry picked and the defence is non existent, and not because there isn’t any, but because the defence have been warned off. The reason that the death rate dropped after LL was removed from the unit was because the unit was downgraded to taking non complex babies, which to me is screaming that the issues were that the unit couldn’t cope with the complexity of the patients, both from a staffing point of view and also from a clinical or medical viewpoint. They were out of there depth and looking for a scapegoat, and while it may look like the managers were supporting LL and not believing the drs/asking them to apologise to her etc, it wouldn’t surprise me if they were setting her up to build a case against her. The nhs stinks.
Manslaughter is still a crime
Yes for the person commiting it.
I think you just summed this up
Perfectly… why is no one questioning the consultants role in this whole thing. It is clear now that there was a massive systemic failures in that unit. For some
Of those failures you need to look at the management and the supervising medics. I’m really glad I have never done my done my nurse training. I fee
So sorry for Lucy. She has clearly been sacrificed for the failings of others. I see now the prosecution are now trying to bury Lucy by going for another prosecution. That will
No doubt be to jeopardise her appeal
You were right to get out. You go into nursing or HCA because you care and get a life sentence without a scrap of physical direct evidence. How in a normal civilised society would this case even be taken to court. It would be seen for what it is.. hospital incompetence, especially by those consultants. That Ravi jayaram seems to care more about his tv media career than his patients. Lucy has been sacrificed because of there fuck ups and the hospital failings in general. Unfortunately I don’t think Lucy will be the last nurse to be stitched up. The PICU nurse from Birmingham will be next. If they use the same shite and weak evidence then she doesn’t stand a chance. X
@@andyryan3756 I haven’t heard about the picu nurse from birmingham. Jeez this is awful. And yeah, they’ve got away with it once so…. Bradford hospitals are under investigation for covering up the circumstances of the deaths of 2 babies and one that was left with life threatening injuries due on their neonatal unit.
There was I think 7 other deaths on the unit in those 13 months when she wasn't on shift. Normally there would be between 2 & 3 per year on the unit on average, so even without the deaths attributed to her the unit was failing badly. Definitely those other deaths and the circumstances around them needs looking into.
That isn't true.
@tiff4s606 It is, I researched it and looked up the numbers, suppose you have a source that shows it isn't true?
God bless you men for doing the right thing. I really believe you are on to something here. As soon as I looked at the photo and article, God told me there was foul play.
Going with your instincts is never a bad thing and I’m most cases it’s correct x
I wish I'd not watched this. I struggled with her guilt at first, then i resugned myself that she really was the culprit now i don't know!
I was a nurse for 25 years. I whistleblew over elderly abuse and it destroyed my career and mental health. I saw how the court systems and police investigations work, how they made evidence fit and defence and prosecution chummed up together with what to allow into evidence and what to leave out, neither of them seemed interested in what the actual truth was.
I'm so conflicted now
None of us know. Justice and the truth often come second to the desire for retribution and a fear of being publicly shamed. The media make it feel like you should pick sides as it's a done deal the moment the verdict is given. In reality there have been many miscarriages of justice and also the likelihood of an appeal is quite high, so there is no need to finalise your opinion yet but if you do you are still free to change it of course.
The NHS employ teams of solicitors, full time, even when they aren't part of any high profile court case. The primary concern of administrators has never been the well being of patients, or staff. They are only interested in covering their own backsides. Personally I think Letby is guilty, but opinions are irrelevant. The jury could only reach a verdict based on the evidence presented to them, and I doubt jurors would have felt able to question what they were told.
Look up mark mayes aka the green note. Its not a confession.
If only everyone cared so much about justice. All we have got in this case, as the public, is the evidence that is against her, but looks like a lot has been left out for the defence
I still don’t see the stats of neonatal deaths between 2015 and June 2016 compared to previous few years be convincingly challenged by the people saying she’s innocent the numbers in those years were over double that’s huge
The NHS is very good at omitting evidence
So are police
and good at destroying it.
Very good at it
I think the doctor has made a mistake about the number of deaths though. I saw on a website supporting her the number of deaths for CoCH neonatal unit & it wasn't 30 deaths in total 2015 & 2016 combined. I believe the doctor here has accidently got the figures for more than one hospital, I think they're 2 hospitals in Chester & West Cheshire with all 3 being sister hospitals. I think that's what's happened here. I think it's worth pointing that out.
Yes we know that. But consider 2 mothers who witnessed her behaviour.
Also drafting a card for a child still alive!!
I noticed that in the report of the trial that I read in the Telegraph last week there was always 1 person on the jury who found her not guilty of each accusation. I thought that was strange. I think there is going to be a lot more to come out regarding this case in the future
Indeed, I think you're right
I wonder if it is the same person?
@@davidbowman2035 Not sure, it didn't say. In fact for each charge it said 10 found guilty, 1 not guilty, making only 11 verdicts, so perhaps there was one other who refrained. I don't know how the system works though..
@@benedwards1047 There were unanimous guilty verdicts for 1 murder and 2 attempted murders. All the other guilty verdicts were 10:1. One of the jurors was dismissed for personal reasons towards the end of the trial, so only 11 jurors gave verdicts.
@@sheepyo Thanks for the info - so that confirms that for 6 of the murder charges 1 person found not guilty. Interesting - I I wish the press would tell us more about this!
Strongly suspect that Lucy is a victim of circumstance and has been made a scapegoat to save other people's reputations from being put under the spotlight. I posit that the British justice system has failed catastrophically in this case and an innocent young woman has been locked away apparently forever based on flakey evidence and lousy media reporting. I know that some keen minds are working away on Lucy's behalf and hopefully their work will come to fruition at a successful retrial.
Like the anonymous Dr A
She had no defence witnesses at first trial so where r they going to find any for a second trial?
If she is a Scapegoat then why her? There were about 7 other nurses on that unit but only 1 at every collapse and we know who?
Please do not hold your breath for a retrial ,
@@rolandhawken6628 No they are going to have to find some defence witnesses!!
Maybe this good doctor will be kind enough to help Lucy’s parents and barrister with Lucy’s appeal.
Who'd have ever thought it - medical 'experts' with no grasp of statistics (and possibly medicine) and with an eye on a consultancy fee - That's not happened before !
Dr Dewi Evans was a retired paediatrician not a forensic scientist or pathologist and he had no experience of investigating murders in a hospital setting. Moreover Evans had previously been admonished by a senior judge in another case for writing a report that was worthless.
@@ruthbashford3176 Theres more to Dewi Evans...
Corrupt experts exist. I suspect Lucy is being used as a scapegoat. Alison Kelly & Ian Harvey escaped questioning & punishments for their parts in negligences. So did Tony Chambers now ex ceo. Ian & Tony now former employees. Are they though or have they moved them to a different department, covering up for those? Are they being hidden & protected to save the NHS reputation & their own backsides!?
@@grantmitchelIs there. Tell me please?
@@SoldUrSoul24982 Search Dr Dewi Evans Justice for Linda. I don't know much about is but it seems sketchy
The case of Lucy Letby is almost identical to that of Lucia de Berk, a nurse wrongfully convicted of the murder of 7 babies in the Netherlands on circumstantial evidence, but later exonerated after 7 years in prison.
No. They identified 25 suspect cases and she was working at the ward in all 25, while all the other 20 nurses were present at an average of 5-6 times, and 8 at most.
You haven't watched the video clip have you ? @@gulanhem9495
You are right, that case was very fishy as well. Once people are labeled and seen as guilty, then you can be sure the 'evidence' will be fitted around that view, and anything pointing towards another outcome will be ignored, not seen or dismissed.
@@sheilasydneynotyerbizniz2933Exactly! And such confirmation bias is extremely potent. It's made even worse by the fact that everything is a numbers game to police. Securing a conviction to positively affect the percentage of crimes solved takes precedence. Seeking and establishing the truth comes a very distant second to this aim. Quite chilling, don't you think?
@@anthonytownsend9717
The doctors and the investigators.
I have a question if anybody knows the answer to this
Hypothetically, if one nurse is found responsible for numerous baby deaths, does that mean that the hospital is not liable and therefore cannot be sued by the parents if it turns out that it was actually something systemic in the hospital?
Whichever way you look at this it is so tragic and so heartbreaking But I am now suspicious of absolutely everything since I woke up to what’s been going on in so many other ways. Thank you as always Professor Fenton for bringing our attention to this. Christine
Yes, I think so. There's even talk of bringing back capital punishment, so they could execute her ASAP. Dead people don't confess and are no threat to the powerful.
Me too Christine, suspicious of EVERYTHING nowadays.
There is going to be an inquiry.
The NHS is still liable to compensate their patients regardless of a criminal conviction as medical malpractice/negligence was still at play. If the concerns of the other staff members were taken seriously from the beginning, the NHS could argue against it but they were complicit in the continuation of the deaths of the babies. Now Letbys been convicted of killing their babies, they can also claim criminal victim compensation. This case alone will cost the government millions.
I believe the parents are already suing the hospital and it doesn’t matter that she’s been found guilty they will probably have to pay millions to the parents.
They are still liable for it as it happened in their hospital.
I’ve worked as HCA and have found changeover sheets in my pocket when I got home . I know this is common but not permitted . It’s easy done but have used them to remind me about a patient’s needs for following shift but did destroy them and kept them to myself before destroying them . We all know about confidentiality of patients .
The evidences presented against LL leading to her being convicted did not sit really right with me from the start.
I had a 6 week stay in the countess earlier this year and I became sick and that was due to the plumbing.
Why doesn't anyone mention agency staff because the countess has loads of them from 8.30pm to 8.30am and they knew diddly squat?.
Also I lost my long term girlfriend of 17 years due to a hospital error that was the countess and I never even got an apology so to me that speaks volumes for board at Chester.
Really great video and very informative thank you.
Thanks for saying this, it seems more and more agency staff are being used to plug deficits. They get paid ridiculous amounts and this causes resentment amongst regular nhs staff. I’m sorry to hear about you girlfriend. I have also felt the rough end of nhs fuck ups.
@@andyryan3756 Thank you for your kind words it's really much appreciated.
The NHS has a gone to pot I really think it's in last years if they don't get their act together.
I'm sorry you have suffered with them too NHS that is.
@@adrianwilliams469 it’s important that people keep talking about this miscarriage of justice because this is not just about freeing Lucy letby it’s more than that. The nhs is all we regular people have and most of cannot afford private healthcare. The service is being decimated for this purpose. I think covid was the catalyst for this. Lucy letby is also a part of this in my opinion
@@andyryan3756 They certainly have thrown Lucy under the bus.
They need to cut down on agency staff, I don't believe when they say no-one wants to work for the NHS.
This is a good thing in a good thing because it puts the spotlight on how COC is so crap and other hospitals sadly pretty sure there are more crap hospitals are.
We have the next thing coming up a Birmingham nurse accused.
Lucy has been totally framed and I have no doubt she is 100% innocent and sent her message of support on science on trial it's a great site so much evidence that should give her a new trial pieced together by people like you and I..
@@andyryan3756🎯
Anybody who thinks this girl is Guilty - Then i hope it never happens to your Daughter/Son - Because being called a serial killer and being banged up for life. IF YOUR INNOCENT is the most terrible thing i can imagine. That poor girl - im convinced this is a miscarriage of justice - numerous people were alone with those babies. Doctors aswell. You cant call someone a killer WITH NO PROOF
Well said & I agree
There is much evidence stacked against her
@@agnesbiney4272 There are no evidences & no proofs. Listen to this video properly
@@agnesbiney4272 There were no murders. Apparently leaking sewage pipes is probably the silent killer. Deaths still happened after Lucy left the hospital. Norman Fentons video is a must watch, listen to it properly. Google Rex v Lucy Letby and Richard Gill Statistics. What do you see there!?
@@agnesbiney4272 Answer the questions. Don't let us catch you trolling again. Do you understand!?
In 2022, years after Letby left, the Countess of Chester hospital was repeatedly found to be unsafe, dangerously understaffed and inadequate in snap inspections, with reports of poor management and a culture of bullying. To quote a June 2022 BBC article "Notably there were not enough staff with the right qualifications or skills to keep women and babies safe, or suitable equipment" and "some staff saying there was a culture of bullying and discrimination." (Occam's razor?)
Oh dear this is starting to look very bad for the hospital, the consultants, the police and the judiciary system! How did something like this ever even get to a murder charge, let alone a sentence to a whole life tariff ! This poor poor nurse and the poor parents who may have been misled to believe their children have been murdered. This needs to be rectified immediately, the consequences of so many lives are at stake, not to mention the safety of our judicial system .
if it’s ever rectified it will be at least 7 years
@@WSMITHify actually an appeal could be applied for and granted within 28 days from the conviction.
This happened before overseas I can’t quite remember where but was the same - and the person was in prison for seven years before being released.
I agree. I suspect they are using Lucy as a scapegoat, do you!?
@@ronniepace8778 I think you are referring to lucia de berk? I believe it took 7 years to find new evidence. It seems in this case the evidence is alreasdy there it just wasn't presented at trial for some reason.
Having worked as a nurse, it's entirely believable that the junior doctors would have repeatedly attempted failing procedures to avoid the disapproval of an unapproachable consultant. Consultants can be rude, dismissive and will easily look down on those who they regard as under performing. The hierarchy and need to please is tangible. I've seen many ward rounds in which you can see the junior doctors are trying to avoid humiliation and want to impress and look competent. Winning approval is like getting a big part on the back and being on the way to being accepted and part of their club.
Very true
Read Adam Kay's book 'this is going to hurt' to get an idea of how true this is
Thanks for this. When i saw that chart i expected to see every death and every nurse or doctor on it. Not just the ones they can fit her up for. Scary how anyone can be serving life for nothing more than circumstancial evidence.
That chart was amature, the notes were quite clearly not an admittance. Whatever went on in that ward wasn't one person. If those drs genuinely had suspected her they had cameras on phones and could have set up surveillance any time. Yet they didn't. Not one person looked for evidence at the time. At least with Allitt they had real evidence.
Everything you have said is spot on. I think the authorities knew the reaction of the public gove that 30
Years before with Beverly allit. People are easily manipulated. It takes a lot to say hold
On a minute this doesn’t seem right. Given the evidence that Scott mclahan has presented the picture becomes clear to me
This is so scary for genuine health workers who try their best
If I were expecting a child in these days I would not go near the NHS -
Absolutely understandable. Neither would I.
Absolutely, safer just to squat and give birth on the living room floor than in a hospital setting!
My NHS experience has been great so far. Apart from the terrible hospital buildings the staff have been amazing.
@@louiseanderson1505No that’s absurd. Why walk the streets there are murderers out there?! Irrational.
One case doesn’t make the whole of the NHS unsafe 🙄
@@andyxox4168 Until something goes wrong and there's two dead bodies on the living room floor. Stupid comment.
I thought she was guilty before ever hearing there was proof. This is the evidence I was convinced by: "She had notes saying she did it", "Staff were suspicious of her but they were ignored", "An unusual number of deaths happened when the babies were in her care." I think the strongest evidence is the notes. But as suggested in this video, it comes off as if she felt guilty for failing to save them as opposed to guilty for intentionally murdering them. The statistical case against her is deeply flawed. Now, I want to know why staff found her suspicious.
She's as guilty as sin. Timeline of text messages as things were getting worse on the ward tells all imo
@@scorps192 Nah. Too easy. Something fishy about this case all along.
That last point is key! Absolutely
They've said why they found her suspicious. Because of the statistics (which are nonsense)
Confirmation bias does the rest
@@scorps192 Who murdered the babies that died in the unit when she was not on duty? Why was nobody interested in their deaths? And why were the babies Lucy was found guilty of murdering initially found by pathologists to have died of natural causes? More babies died in 2017 and 2018 when Lucy had left than in 2015 and 2016 so was there two serial killers at work on the neonatal unit?
I defy anyone to read SCIENCE ON TRIAL and still believe Lucy Letby had a fair trial and the verdict is safe.
At last someone with a brain and not the usual lynch mob mentality. I am convinced she is innocent
Well said & I agree with you
Your not alone. I do think
That the population of this country has been duped and manipulated into a frenzy. When a person is angry they stop thinking logically
I agree.
Thank you for posting this interview. I discovered the transcripts in audio form on UA-cam towards the end of the trial. Before I listened, I tended towards thinking LL was guilty. As soon as I heard the testimony I was shocked at how many holes I could find in the evidence (due to my professional experience). I am so sad for LL that she did not get a fair trial and I am also sad that we have a group of parents who think their babies were murdered, when it is very likely they died from either natural causes and/or systemic causes/human factors.
Have you got a link to them.
Where did you find the transcripts, please.
She for more than a fair trial and also, stop pretending you have ‘professional experience’ on a UA-cam comments section
@DARKOvibrations I am not pretending. I think I wasn't precise though. To be clear, I do not have any legal knowledge or experience, rather, I was referring to knowledge and experience in the area of healthcare that the trial relates to.
@@kerrygold6494They're on the Daily Mail's channel playlist ua-cam.com/play/PLPGifL5wOEZyFeEIrBCv3albzHUSMWREc.html&si=SwcVIn7n6Lo3FEQI
How can anyone watch and digest this and not come to seriously question the soundness of the guilty verdicts?
Because sheeple. Look how the vast majority of the UK population fell for the "safe and effective" nonsense.
the stats he states don’t add up though wasn’t 30 or 31 deaths for pre neonatal in those two years
@@deepblack2193I noticed that, I think it's the 3 sister hospitals, the 2 in Chester & West Cheshire figures combined. There was 15 deaths on the unit in the time frame she was convicted of killing 7.
When the police were called in its my understanding that they should have investigated all the characters in and around this dreadful situation. Everyone should have been considered a possible suspect until they were eliminated from the investigation. Instead numerous characters immediately became witnesses for the police without elimination. This beggars belief.
Years ago i was a very close witness to a RTA, so close i was nearly part of it. The police quiet rightly listened to my evidence but told me to not leave until they eliminated me to make sure i had no part in the cause of the accident. It appears that the police far from investigating the deaths with open minds, investigated Lucy and from the beginning worked to frame evidence around her.
If you disagree point me to just one other avenue they looked at during the investigation.
This is horrifying; potential sewage contamination in a neonatal ward, of course the hospital know about it. It's more expedient to blame an innocent nurse than face the cost of replacing and rerouting waste pipes, not forgetting the expense and embarrassment of litigation if bereaved parents found out that poorly babies were exposed to harmful pathogens which the hospital ignored.
I remember an incident when a relative was in a ward and the lift broke. It took 3 days before it was working. Nurses and porters had to wheel patients a considerable distance to use another lift that was, of course, very busy. Would such a situation happen in, say, a bank? Sloppy estates management is the norm in NHS and other public buildings!
Horrifying how they are so willing to chuck their dedicated staff under a bus!
@@nickjung7394 NHS is essentially run as a communist institution. No wonder there. Communism always works the same way.
And now that building has been demolished, so any evidence gone with it.
@@tattlevixen2581the building hasn't been demolished at all it's still there the NICU was moved because they raised millions of pound for a new state of the art unit that won't be in use in a few years time once the new women's and children's unit is built further up on the hospital grounds
Scott at approx 2:58 refers to a FOI request that showed 30 babies dying on the neonatal unit over 2015-2016. Yet Richard Gill’s blog gives links to the FOI data requested which shows 15 deaths not 30 deaths between June 2015-June 2016. Would love Scott to explain discrepancy. Thank you.
He did say something about the death rates depending upon who you ask? Like the hospital say one thing, the ONS say another, MBRACE say something else again
There were 36 deaths over 2015 and 2016 if you include late fetus and stillbirth deaths but there were 17 neonatal only deaths (15 of those were Early neonatal) over those years that’s the official stats
@@deepblack2193 yes, so Scott wrong to say 30 ‘neonatal’ deaths.
ETA it was 15 both early and late neonatal deaths between June 15-June 16, and 17 early and late neonatal deaths across the whole of 2015-2016.
Yes that was a slight of hand. The FOI showed the deaths fell away after she left. The ONS are total under 1 year old deaths, not linked to any ward.
@@helenn6061The deaths stopped or slowed down because after a visit to assess the unit it had to be downgraded. It could no longer take premature babies from 24 weeks to full term it became level 1 unit 34 weeks onwards. So those babies are normally OK,not requiring life support.
I also had juniors work on my nose years ago, the damage they did is irreparable, it's effected my ears and I believe my eyes, my gums and teeth, the NHS is not to be trusted.
I really hope Dr McLachlan is central to the efforts to exonerate Lucy. I hope the best of the best legal minds would be prepared to work pro bono as I believe this is one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in UK legal history.
There will be someone but maybe not an experienced appeal barrister. There'd definitely be some law firms who would be interested because of it being such a high profile case.
I to hope that his work is used but given what has happened so far. I think
The authorities will try and minimise his input
Please get involved in the appeal, please please please please please! I can't stand this injustice! I've been obsessed with this stuff for days now because it makes me so sad and angry, especially that everyone says the most rotten stuff about her in the media.
It's a modern day witch hunt against an innocent nurse. When this media led hysterical witch hunt calms down more and more people will realise she did not have a fair trial and the verdict is unsafe.
While I’m on the fence about her guilt, or otherwise, I think it’s mighty dangerous to automatically presume her innocence. There’s enough for me to suggest an unsafe conviction, but she might very well be guilty here.
The appeal isn't presuming her innocent (although the evidence here and on rex vs lucy substantially exonerated her and indicates no murders ever took place, just tragic natural deaths) it is asking for a fair trial, which she was not given. Although I do see the conviction and sentence both being quashed once proper scientific evidence is provided. And then the real trial of who has covered everything up and put her in this situation can begin.
You have got to be kidding... seriously? One is always granted the presumption of INNOCENCE in a trial, and most importantly a MURDER trial. The prosecution's burden is to PROVE with solid, credible evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, the charges. Clearly, there is a lot of problems with this case... a lot of doubt. There is NO direct evidence of Ms Letby doing anything that directly caused the death of any of these at-risk neonates... and NO credible scientific evidence to back up any claim that she did.
Well she'll have to get some defence witnesses!!
In a 2017 report from North Wales Live reported that The Countess Of Chester Hospital had one of the highest baby death rates in the country. It goes on to say..
"This week a major study revealed the rate of babies born dead at the site was at least 10% higher than would be expected at other similar maternity units"
This of course implies that something may indeed be wrong at the COCH. Letby was a neonatal nurse and could not be implicated in stillbirths.
Don’t mention the stillbirths, the “other collapses” Gibbs referred to or the 6 unexplained deaths she was not charged with, as they did not have strong enough evidence - might have confused the jury. Apparently having secured the initial guilty verdict police are now planning to charge her with the others. British justice providing a very fair trial yet again!
Defunding of the nhs, as highlighted by the low, baby to staff ratio, and the ongoing neglect of the hospital infrastructure, are of deep concern.
Unfortunately harms of a similar nature are present in the privatised care system also. Nobody wants to adequately train or staff these units. All they cry for is more tech surveillance which won't solve the underlying issues.
The patient-to-nurse ratio is but necessarily be because funding has been cut.
Somewhere has to have the highest rate, and sometimes by a fair margin (that's the way chance rolls). Unless there is a consistently wide margin, to have the highest rate is meaningless, if grounds for doing better.
I’m deeply uneasy about this case and the sentence imposed as a result - the trouble is that it involves babies and that is deeply emotive.
I’m not convinced at all about it.
@@massivehero4871
Same here ..
The C o C hospital is 15 miles from me so I followed this trial with interest .
Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt ?
Sadly, I think not .
Ditto
This case sounds very much like the one of Lindy Chamberlain in Australia. Linda was accused and jailed for killing her tiny baby at a camp site in Central Australia. Prosecutors said they found a blood spray in the front seat of their vehicle. Linda said she had discovered a dingo had gone into the tent and taken her baby. Years later it turned out the forensic evidence was wrong and it was proven a dingo did take her baby. The problem is, that once police and others decide on a person's guilt, they build their case around that decision, rather than investigating thoroughly. It seems the same injustice has been done here because the knives come out when babies are involved... the media plays it up, then the court of public opinion exerts pressure for a guilty verdict, Prosecutors want the accolades fir bringing a so-called baby killer to justice and before you know it, an innocent woman gets convicted. The lawyer should have used the Chamberlain case in court. Why did Lucy's lawyer only present the plumber. There are other cases too. One where an Australian woman went to jail for 20 years for murdering her 3 young children. She recently was released because a team of tenacious lawyers eventually proved her kids died from a genetic condition. Lucy's case must be appealed. And for God's sake, organise a Go Fund Me and get her a decent lawyer with the brains to present similar cases and get Norman's guest in this video on the stand as an expert witness!!!
Powerful post. I imagine there may be difficuties getting funding for an appeal, given the enthusiasm with which the media have fastened onto Lucy's presumed guilt. Campaigns for the release of wrongly convicted persons can take many years, sometimes decades . . .
Nothing like that case.
It seems the defence team didn't do a very good job.
As a layperson i think there are very strong grounds for appeal.
As someone with a law degree the defence was insufficient.
It is often a poor defence that results in a miscarriage of justice.
@@katarinanicol1651 what do you mean by 'insufficient defence'. Genuine question.
@@davidbowman2035 The defence did not challenge medical doctors with very little scientific investigative experience. These so called "experts" should have been ripped apart on the witness stand as being woefully out of their depth and engaging in wild unsupported speculation. The reason why Lucy's defence failed will become apparent in the months and years to come.
@@davidbowman2035 LOL - genuine answer! I think they mention that there were 200 pages of journal entries, or hand over nursey notes? The prosecution focused on two pages which are self flagellatory in nature and highly prejudicial if taken in isolation. The law states that the prosecution must hand over everything that would assist the defence. It's absolutely key in getting a fair trial. The barrister was a KC (Kings Counsel). So he either didn't get them, prosecution's error, and Lucy Letby should be on bail pending a re-trial. If he got them but didn't read them, insufficient defence, the least you can expect from a QC/KC is that they will read what the solicitor (or the Crown Prosecution Service) sends them.
How can a nurse afford a legal defence?
Legal aid.
Royal college of nursing. Each nurse has to have indemnity insurance this covers the families or person if any mistakes are made by the nurse . It also provides legal costs for the nurse .
@@IndigoDisco But it is unlikely to fund the proper experts such as forensic scientists to counter the flawed medical evidence given by medial doctors.
@@theempoweredwomen8167 Also she sold her house to help fund her defence. She has been financially ruined although of course that is the least of her worries for now.
@paulroberts7544 100%
I would say statistically speaking hospitals are probably one of the least safest places to be!
I would say statistically more people die in hospitals than most other public buildings.
Most of the people I know that have died, died in hospital. You're right.
I would say you are not a statistician
"You can prove anything with statistics, except the truth." George Canning
@@notanumber1311 thanks for citing a comedian when discussing a complex murder case. Moron
I'm married to a nurse. It is common for them to accidentally bring handover notes home, but my wife always destroys them when she realises because of patient confidentiality. Pretty sure they are not told to keep them at home
They shouldn't ever leave the Ward. I worked in a public service department. I would never have dreamt of taking home confidential documents, and if I had, I would have been sacked.
@@franm.8343They don't need to be lectured by you, miss high & mighty. I doubt you did work in public service. If you did, what as & which public service department?
@@SoldUrSoul24982 she is entirely correct. Medical confidentiality is extremely serious and no one would be encouraged to stockpile them at home. That is why patients' notes are filled in at the bottom of the bed'
What you state is true but doesn't make her a murderer I knew of Doctors who used to take medical notes home to work on.
@@franm.8343 lots of people keep them….just in case you get accused of somthing.
This is *exactly* the reason I don’t believe in the death penalty.
Yes - same here.
yes
I think some kind of forced hard labour would be better, any way
And might tell something about the people in favor of introducing the death penalty..
Thank you for this extremely interesting perspective - a deeply disturbing situation with regards to the tragic loss of wee babies lives but have been feeling uncomfortable about the whole case from the beginning. This perspective is hitting my gut hard, as some time ago I wondered if letby is being used as a scape goat for the n h s - imagine the cost re compensation for parents as opposed to ‘locking someone up’… especially in these now times/the n h s is already falling apart. Could it also be that this ‘paves the way’ for more cameras/chipping neonates/AI that the powers that shouldn’t be are advocating? Hmm, food for thought. But, the truth will out in due course. RIP little ones.
Patients are still entitled to compensation regardless if there's been a criminal conviction. The NHS will still have to pay out a lot of compensation to everyone affected, even to those whose babies survived but were still mistreated by Letby.
Can you imagine being this hard working nurse and to then find yourself in prison for life. She must think she's living a nightmare. So many holes in this case
They sentenced Lucy before trial. What shame of human being.
She was sacrificed for the mess ups of others. Those doctors who accused her should be prosecuted for negligence
Not really her defence had 9 months to present her case
If she dies in prison, her blood is on the government and media hand.. and those consultants who lied about her.. this poor woman will be traumatised but it seems that a lot the general public have fell for the government/media sales pitch.
You’ve hit the nail on the head there. Everything you said I believe to be correct. I work in the nhs and see it every day. It’s running dangerously low on staff and equipment. In essence the uk is slowly becoming a 3rd world country. The nhs will be privatised in our lifetime I believe. If that happens we are all screwed. This case could be a catalyst for that
@@deepblack2193 That is one of the mysteries of the case, why Lucy's defence didn't defend her?
The standard of proof in this case is a very long way from 'beyond reasonable doubt.'
Justice must be done and 'be seen to be done'
If Dr Scott McLachan is right about Lucy Letby's defence he should contact Lucy's parents or her defence team or the Crown Prosecutors Service.
Failing that, he should start a grass roots movement of people writing petitions and demonstrating for Lucy's freedom. Maybe this video is the start of his grass roots movement.
Excellent interview - clearly in an ideal world, these are grounds for an appeal. However, it's disturbing that these matters were not fully addressed, or allowed to be addressed, in court. I'm surprised that Letby was convicted - the evidence addressed, in this interview, seems very flimsy and not substantial enough to convict her. If the prosecution are producing this kind of 'evidence' in many different cases then one has to conclude that there is something wrong with the 'justice' process.
FREE LUCY LETBY innocent girl been used as a scapegoat
The neonatal unit was downgraded to a level 1 at the same time Lucy was reassigned, meaning they weren't taking the extremely vulnerable intensive care neonates.
Kathleen Folbigg was recently pardoned and released. 'Diary entries were central to the initial guilty verdict' according to a Guardian article in 7 May 2023
Imagine actually being innocent of such a crime & effect that a guilty verdict would have on your own life for your family & friends. Then there is also the likelihood that she would potentially suffer while being incarcerated from staff & fellow inmates. There does appear to be reasonable doubt in this case, but the herd & the media have their hate figure as a dispensable distraction from what is likely to be the actual sordid reality - all within a growing age of unaccountability which effects us all.
It was the self-righteous fulmination of the media that made me suspicious of the verdict (irrational, I know, but instinct is often correct). I then remembered the Lucia de Berk case, found this case was similar, and after watching this conversation I am convinced the verdict was unsound. I hope a go-fund-me site is set up to pay for an appeal.
@@fredneecher1746 Yes & i agree on the GFM - perhaps I am wrong but it appears to me that she has been thrown under the bus in order to protect others.
I think she will be in solitary confinement but as time passes I think staff and inmates will realise Lucy is innocent. I hope that will happen.
@@ruthbashford3176 Unless I am very much mistaken it was mentioned in the above video that the nurses she worked with, refused to believe that she was capable of such behaviour.
@@ruthbashford3176 Sorry, am short on time so misread - but I also hope so too.
This case sounds like a shambles, but also the idea that handover sheets are handled so randomly and taken home is insane. That's a major safety issues, case in point having to phone people in the night. they should be standardised and held on the patient record. furthermore taking patient records home without consent. Data Protection anyone?!
Maybe in Australia or New Zealand they're encouraged to take them home and keep them but definitely not here. He's inaccurate on a couple of other things but overall he makes a compelling case that they've got it wrong.
Thank you Norman and Scott! Have felt deeply uneasy about this case from the beginning, amazing how hateful people get despite knowing that they know very little about it, weird zombie world!
Now there will be a further shortage of neonate nurses as they flee from the profession, and who could blame them?
The reason people are hateful is because nearly everyone would feel outraged and deeply upset at the thought of a babies being murdered. If a court and jury find someone guilty of mass murder in the U.K. then you tend to believe that. The fact that the statistics have been ‘massaged’ is very concerning.
@@jacc88888well, i think it’s very telling when people have an excuse to spew bile. As someone on the receiving end of that, having refused the jibby jab, it’s an unsettling thing to see.
@@sgu02nsc66 I agree with you about people wanting to spew bile. I’m sorry about the abuse you experienced over the jab. Doesn’t surprise me. The majority and brainwashed, especially brainwashed with fear. However I feel this is very different. I was deeply upset and angry about this particular case as killing babies is pure evil (presuming she did murder them).
If she didn’t kill them then ’d still feel angry and a sense of outrage about the cover up and neglect by the hospital.
@@jacc88888 appreciate your reply and understand what you’re saying. Seeing the mainstream media orchestrated hate at Lucy reminds me of the enforced jab time. I worked for the NHS, was treated by many as a “selfish granny killer”, because of the propaganda, with little sympathy of expecting to get sacked.
I couldn’t work for the NHS again after going though that experience (plus seeing the NHS fall apart).
Based on this interview, imagine if it was the hospital vents and Lucy is purely innocent? I can’t imagine the pain she is going through, if she’s innocent.
Yeah but anger towards the hospital doesn't result in a witch hunt
I only became aware of this tragic case since the verdict - but on first glance my BS detector nudged off zero. This has it swinging wildly. In my experience these very difficult cases where many rational people have authentic trouble deciding for guilt or innocence, the root cause lies in some hidden failure of process, suppression of evidence - or the defense has been hamstrung for some reason.
Compare and contrast it to the hysterical media where she's 100% guilty no question. If these two can sit down and be sensible why can't they?
@@CraigLearnsKorean The primary role of legacy media is to instill fear, panic, anger or other negative emotional responses in the viewing public. These emotional reactions are used to control people. By making people afraid, you can get them to do things they otherwise wouldn't. By making them angry, you can get them to attack "the enemy" whoever that is. It's about control, whenever they are using negative emotion. Sometimes, that is justified, such as when there is an actual threat that needs to be taken notice off, but often it is used where there is no actual threat.
@@Gumbatron01great summary
@@BS-ge4ne Yes good summary.
Yeah she’s not guilty
God bless these men! So babies are still dying in this hospital. I know an innocent woman serving life. Criminal trials are not what people think they are. Evidence that can prove innocence, is left out. Justice is rare
I'm so pleased you've done this. I have no trust in the NHS and have been gas lit myself by them over my own birth. They will twist things to cover stuff up, and I can't help but think that she's a scapegoat. Something seems so off about this, as it feels like everything has been skewed towards a particular outcome. The department wasn't running properly and the deaths went up and they needed to blame someone. They might genuinely believe its her. But normally, serial killers want to admit it.
These 2 men are gaslighting you
"The department wasn't running properly and the deaths went up and they needed to blame someone."
I get so angry at people like you.
Watch the dam interviews with three of the several doctors who raised alarm (Ravi Jayaram, Stephen Breary and John Gibbs), then come back and say that they come off as weak minded people who try to blame their own mistakes or structural problems on an innocent nurse.
I agree with the "no trust in NHS" part though. Just like with the Rotherham grooming scandals, the UK is in a rotten and bad place, with an increasingly corrupt system.
Had the NHS worked better, and the alarms by the seven(!) doctors been taken seriously by the leadership, it would have prevented the murder of several babies.
@@gulanhem9495 Factually correct what they stated. Why are you covering up for hospital negligences & failures? Are you one of those staffs there!?
@@SoldUrSoul24982
No, didn't you read what I wrote?
I'm not covering up, I'm actually saying that the negligence by the hospital was a scandal. 7 doctors were oncerned and wanted Lucy removed, but the higher ups didn't care.
Also not to forget that the media around the world were against her so it was difficult for her legal team to handle her case
I can’t believe people believe a thing the media says anymore.
None of the babies died from an infection so the plumber evidence was not relevant and wasn't fleshed out in court as this man does.Why was this man called for the defence? He is struggling to come up with a cogent explanation. Lucy by her own admission is guilty .
@@johnhoulihan2322 When did she admit she was guilty? You’re making up lies now.
She never admitted that she was guilty
@@johnhoulihan2322She didn't admit she was guilty. Why are you lying!? (And don't ignore thd two people that I see asked you questions about your lies)
Dr. Scott Lucy Letby wrote the post it in the first person singular which reflect the training she had received at the University. Trainee is constantly encouraged to use "Reflective Practice" in the first person. Obviously, Lucy Letby is also seeking an answer. It's a shame after qualification, there is no mentor to follow up this individual reflection. How can the police and the Court ecploit the post it notes to incriminte Lucy?
Something is wrong from our training, or what?
I believe those babies died with Pseudomonas from the sewage drain pipes. This mortal pathgens do cause lungs and resporatory problems, speciaally in neonates without immunisation.
I believe the plumber's evidence.
Pseudomonas live on hard surfaces for 6 weeks. Those drains running up the ceiling may have caused the massive deaths.
A lot of objective scientists, statisticians and health professionals who can see through the data believe she is innocent or at the very least not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
And a lot more think she is guilty
The thing is I can empathize with that view, I certainly think there are grey areas. Having said that I dare say that a much smaller percentage of people that doubt this verdict would be happy enough to have Lucy Letby as a healthcare worker in a place where you or a loved one relied on her care. I think that's the real barometer.
@@Ligerpride Silly argument. No one would ever want any loved one to be in the care of anyone who'd even been accused of murder, no matter how innocent they were.
@@jackholloway1 When the media led hysterical witch hunt against poor Lucy calms down a lot more people will realise she did not have a fair trial and the verdict is unsafe.
@@Ligerpride Well of course people would not want Lucy Letby as a healthcare worker, she's just been found guilty of murdering babies. The fact that she is innocent doesn't come into it at this stage.
I wonder if the other babies who died as well at the same hospital have ever been investigated by the police and the hospital or not? Also I wonder if the judge or Lucy’s legal team thought about there maybe someone who felt overwhelmed by Lucy’s high skills and experience so they decided to set her up ? Everything is possible trust me. I am a mental health professional and have been working in the NHS for so many years and I know exactly how professionals they set up someone who is a new qualified to make him/ either being sacked or moved to another trust or department
Hi Chaps, I am so glad to see that you are looking hard at this case. I've been reading a substack called 'Law, Health & Technology' that was talking about anomalies in the case. I've smelled a rat here. I distrust all the hype in the media. Also I heard a barrister discussing some issues in the case, on Talk TV. Can't remember his name but apparently other not dissimilar cases (here and abroad) were initially jailed but later freed on appeal. An awful lot appears to hang on Lucy Letby's notes in her home about being evil. Was she questioned about the meaning of these notes? They do seem very odd, but clearly need to be examined, context etc.
Another thought I have is that hospitals are very unsafe places, and doctors are unsafe people to entrust one's newborn babe too. Essentially, most babies if born even 2 months early, will survive just fine. They might, of course, have very particular conditions that require some sort of focused attention, but a two month old baby with no other issues other than prematurity will most likely be able to survive with simply maternal attention, at home. Suckling might be weak, but will get stronger, with practice (!) Remember, Isaac Newton was very premature, 11 - 15 weeks early, and apparently weighed 3lb. He survived! Ok, he was a bit special but just wanted to make that point. Not sure how he was fed, but it wasn't by nasogastric tube!
Hospitals kill a lot of people. They also harm a lot of people but not so severely that they die, and they always have a good excuse, which is "Well they were ill, weren't they!"
Likewise, schools are really bad places for children, but I won't go there at the moment.
I happen to be closely associated with a case of a woman who was wrong accused of murdering another woman in 1988. The actual evidence shows clearly that she didn't do it, but in 1991 she was jailed for life. She has always protested her innocence, and of course, that means that she could not get parole, as you have to admit your guilt to get parole (which HAS to change, as it is too absurd). This year, at last, she has been given the right to appeal! Amazing. 32 years in jail before she can try to clear her name. Now that really is injustice! And all this so soon after the Andrew Malkinson case! He spent 17 years in jail for a rape he didn't commit. These miscarriages of justice are sickening.
In future I will only ever refer to anyone convicted of a crime as just that. I will not claim that they ARE guilty, just that they have been convicted, rightly or wrongly of a crime. Innocence or guilt as found by a jury are not necessarily true.
Thanks for this excellent discussion. Scott's elaboration of Lucy Letby's notes was very helpful. Seems that defence lawyers can really fail in their attempts to serve their clients.
I agree wholeheartedly with everything you have said.
Spot on.
The Talk TV barrister was MarkMcDonald
I can’t believe he is telling nurses to take home confidential handover sheets.
In some cases where there is clear evidence you could say they are guilty like mass witnesses and multiple video evidence. Especially if you were one of the witnesses
I feel I need to point out that taking patient handover sheets home is commonplace amongst nurses. As a senior clinical nurse (retired now) I always kept my handover sheet in my uniform pocket - like all the other nurses I would refer to it frequently during my shift, adding my written comments to it (things that needed to be documented formally in the patients notes/records before the end of the shift and other things to handover to the next shift). The handover sheet would stay in my uniform pocket and be emptied out with the rest of my pocket contents when I reached home before putting my uniform into the washing machine. There was nothing sinister about this behaviour. Yes, I see the need to consider patient confidentiality - and I always did. I would never bin these without first tearing them up into tiny pieces - a chore, so they could mount up. On occasion at home I would refer to the handover sheets if a colleague at work phoned me at home with a query about a patient's care. Normal stuff. Never was a fuss made about handover sheets. It was just a memory aide, a tool to help you. Attaching some sinister label to taking handover sheets home is just fanciful in the extreme - and it shows ignorance of normal practice. It shows how everything that Lucy Letby ever did had to be considered as perverse and sinister behaviour. Nurses DO take handover sheets home and she was no exception. Ignorance was the reason for a shambolic investigation and unfair trial. Hope I have managed to throw some light on one small point that has received a lot of attention.
Incredible insight here. Thank you.
Thank you for yet again bringing a cool & data based approach, to this awful situation.
All are systems are broken, & at minimal, there was no oversite😔
Wikipedia says " As soon as Letby was removed from duties in June 2016, the suspicious incidents stopped. " that seems to be different from what you describe. It does sound like theres a suspicious lack of any 'smoking gun' or caught red handed in this case, and I think the culture and intellectual capacity of the average British citizen has dropped so much in the past few decades that the accuracy of a jury trial system becomes questionable...
ha ha so lets go back to pre magna carta then where the king or his designated Lord decides what justice to dole out
Imagine a person being convicted of murdering seven babies with no evidence of her killing any one of them, no motive and no confession.
Just because you don’t know the motive doesn’t mean there isn’t one. She will be moved to a mental health institution soon, mark my words.
ALso maybe she didnt do it as there is noi hard evidence and a lot of things that do not add up and can explain the circumstancial evidence too @@DARKOvibrations
Fredneecher
Very well said and no names of the the alleged babies or their parents and no published Post Mortems either, so how do we know there were victims?
We only have the lying Media and Government's word for it and that Judge looked like a Crisis Actor.
LL=33
33 years old
There's more numbers like this all adding to 33, the number of Freemasonry, all a pysop to get people to accept a US type Justice system with the reintroduction of the Death Penalty for the NWO.
@@DARKOvibrationsHow do you know she will be moved to a mental health institution soon!? State your source. Or are you an employee at that hospital or the NHS somewhere!?
Well said. The troll in your thread, needs to clean her ears out & listen to the video.
Pleased to see someone willing to talk about this case, I don't trust anything on TV, Makes me sick watching it, guy in Jo Cox case was setup so nothing surprises me
This is interesting but it doesn't explain the insulin poisoning which is indisputable. Also the deaths/crashes that were investigated and were matched to LL's rota were those that were both unexpected and inexplicable. It was not simply looking at who was working when all deaths occurred.
But the original post mortems didn't consider them to be inexplicable
See Scott's latest articles on substack lawhealthandtech.substack.com/ that address these isues
It's not indisputable. Moron
Science on trial rex vs Lucy explains the insulin. It is definitely not indisputable, as there are many alternative medical solutions that could have been established if more tests were run, perhaps suggesting a lack of experience from the doctor? My question is, why they wouldn't ask for another opinion on the possible reasons for the insulin, and instead went straight to the conclusion of malicious harm?
@@DancingAmayaRichard Gill states that a legal ruling prevented Lucy's defence team from informing her that plausible alternative explanations existed for the insulin. Astounding, don't you think? That's why they were forced to accept in court that two of the babies were deliberately injected with it.
And all this time this poor girl is being subjected to a side of life she should never have to endure, so sad and good luck with the funding.
Thank you for this video. There are many things that don't add up, especially the notes found which infers she killed them. If you were a murderer, is that something you would do, leaving inferential evidence insinuating your guilt? Very strange. We have not heard the last of this case and I think there will be more uncovered going forward.
She was mentally disturbed. Some kind of narcissism or psychopathy probably.
She wasn't a super villain who expertly covered all tracks.
@@gulanhem9495I can see you spouting false allegations. What's your reasons for that & your source?
@@gulanhem9495I can see you spouting false allegations. What's your reasons for that & your source?
@@SoldUrSoul24982
The doctors described that it was strange that she was so happy and unconcerned after two babies died. And apparently she didn't show much emotions or signs of empathy in court either.
@@gulanhem9495 I asked your sources! Answer that question. Lucy was not the only one there. Stop lying & covering up for other staffs negligences & hospital failures. You are a doctor. One at that hospital❓
I was never convinced by the notes and frankly don't think that they should have been admitted in court as evidence as they are not the same as a confession obtained under PACE regulations. A problem for me, though, is that afaik Lucy Letby has not denied carrying out the acts of which she was accused. You would expect vehement protests and rebuttals.
Surely she did deny the accusations?
She pled not guilty, and testified. So yes she has denied it.
@@onezerooneseven well, exactly.
Thanks to all who replied. What I really meant was that she didn't speak up with the vehemence you would expect from a totally innocent person but maybe she was too much in awe.
@@Moutley33367 Would angrily protesting her innocence have done any good?
Andrew Malkinson protested his innocence, he spent 17 years in prison for rape as a result, he could have been out sooner if he had admitted his guilt. Last week his conviction was overturned by the high court on DNA evidence that the cops had in their possession the whole time. Initially the CPS, under Keir Starmer (useless prat), refused him a retrial because they didn't think it was a good use of public money. They were probably more interested in bumping up conviction quotas for rape than actually pursuing justice.
The justice system is far from infallible.
Is Letby guilty? According to the jury, yes. But then so was Malkinson, so were many other people who weren't actually guilty, such as those wrongfully convicted in the Post Office accounting scandal or the families destroyed by the now disgraced expert witness Roy Meadow.
Let's hope this goes to appeal and that LL doesn't 'commit suicide' in the meantime.
Yes, this is what I worry about. I hope the girl knows many are uncomfortable with her convictions. She needs better lawyers.
@@deedee7733 You seem just as disturbed as Letby.
@@djimitraore5176 look up Lucia de Berk
Leaking sewage pipes dripping from the ceiling of an infant IC unit. Good god!
As another commenter noted, I too want to know if a guilty verdict for Letby lets the hospital off the hook legally.
No infectious disease expert was asked how dangerous this could be to premature babies.
Does the spike in mortality correspond to the unit upgrading to a level two unit? Taking sicker patients which staff, including the medical team, didn’t have the experience/expertise to manage?
Also, I've just read in a comment above in this thread that the Countess of Chester was using many agency nurses for night shifts, who were not as knowledgeable or experienced...
I must say I was an RGN then an RM for years. We do take notes and they can often go home. I for one would destroy them when my uniform was washed! They were NEVER saved.
Why?
What kind of bad things did you write about?
@@Draxindustries1I thinks she means she destroyed the notes because of privacy issues for the patients. I'm a nurse and never keep anything like that.
Exactly it happens - I’d take them back the next shift and whack them in the confi waste.
No way would I of kept 100’s of them under my bed, that just seems dodgy to me.
@@hayleighcrossan3627it’s a massive red flag
Am I right in stating that autopsies were carried out on six of the babies who died, with death being concluded as undetermined in one and natural causes in the remaining five? If that is the case, does anyone find it significant given what's transpired since that the pathologist seemingly did not have cause to suspect foul play at that time? In saying this, I take on board that 'undetermined' leaves room for speculation.
Were these premature babies given adequate timely supplemental Pulmonary Surfactants or not? This vital question needs to be looked at as it absolutely THE crucial medication for premature babies to have a reasonable chance of survival. Tragically there are many incidences in UK of very poor Neonatal care. e.g. Nottingham. As I understand it there is now a corporate manslaughter case against Chester Hospital as an institution itself. The question I ask here should be addressed by the prosecution of Chester Hospital for corporate manslaughter. The evidence of plumber also of crucial importance and I agree her legal defence was not great.
Very informative , thank you Norman .
This video has excellent factual notes that could be very promising to hear in her appeal case. Tbh I felt the was innocent from the start.... I watched the media circus enjoying all the disgusting character slurs about Lucy. The hospital and those junior doctors will never sleep at night for this rediculous miscarriage of justice. I hope she makes them pay when she eventually is vindicated.... Poor girl only 33 year old 😔😔😔
Woman!
There were no character slurs on lucy in court..you been following??
The doc put a very convincing argument together here. He says that the other babies that had died in the ward were not considered. However, this is not the case. It’s been well publicised that the police asked a team of neonatal experts to review all of the baby deaths and the ones which were unexplained deaths were passed on for further investigation. It just so happens that Lucy was then linked to all of these unexplained deaths. They didn’t whittle down the list until Lucy started to look bad. Not the case. The Daily Mail podcast on the trial recently had an interview with the lead detective on the case and he outlines how the investigation was conducted. I would recommend folks listen to this. Thank you.
Thanks I came here to say the same. It’s ridiculous these supposedly well educated men have decided to pay the absolute minimum attention to a case and just declare that they know better than anyone deeply involved in it whilst failing to even get very basic facts right.
Why would neonatal experts be asked to review the deaths, it would be the job of forensic pathologists or scientists? 6 of the babies were autopsied and 5 were found to have died from natural causes, the 6th death was unexplained. How could neonatal experts override the findings of the pathologists who performed the autopsies?
@@ruthbashford3176 this tedious talking point has been repeated so many times. Do you think maybe neonatal medical experts are quite well positioned to make judgements on whether the deaths were natural? And if the individuals carrying out autopsies weren't informed of suspicious circumstances then do you not think they weren't going to look for anything other than the immediate medical cause of death? Also in most cases sadly autopsies not performed. And please stop with the only scientists can testify as experts stuff, you guys have seen that on one dodgy pro Letby link and keep repeating it until I'm bored to tears. Medical doctors testify as experts all the time here and in the states - Dr. Martin Tobin's testimony was decisive in convicting Derek Chauvin for the brutal murder of George Floyd.
@@1986Dams George Floyd killed himself with fentanyl; poor cop caught the blame to pacify the demographic that loves riot and destruction
I'm not sure I'd be too trusting of a Daily Mail podcast, it has one of the worst reputations for accuracy. And they weren't really unexplained deaths - weren't all considered to be natural causes by the coroner at the time of death? Of course a lead detective is likely to be framing the case in a certain way. But yes it would be interesting to know if they looked at these cases blindly without knowledge of what nurses had be linked to them.
LISTEN to the plumber's evidence!! There's your answer. Lucy is a scapegoat for the NHS Chester trust!!
How? Where?
Ah yes maybe that’s what caused the insulin poisoning. Idiot
i'd like to know more about the insulin findings during second autopsy and what degree of screening is done, if any, on the donor milk before it's fed to the neonates.
also RE injury to the liver of one baby being likened to damage seen only after a car crash, especially after hearing that LL had reported a Dr. for having abandoned a neonate on a trolley behind a screen unattended ; a very unsafe practise.
furthermore, what did the lucky Dr.A have to say about Lucy while he was on the stand? and had any of the other Drs. tried Lucy on for size and perhaps been knocked back? 🤔
I know it sounds awful, but I even wondered if a doctors ego was hurt. Having been a single woman in a working environment I know that scorned men try to get you sacked, and if they are your boss, they sack you. If they are your landlord they evict you. A man scorned will stop at nothing….until he gets revenge for his hurt ego…..
@@marinka424 absolutely. tho YOU don't sound terrible, it's the practice of it happening in reality that's abhorrent, AND IT DOES happen more than naive folk in their own little worlds would be aware of, or even care to realise.
i'm thankful to have someone acknowledge my train of thought at last
One word..... scapegoat.
Fair and just trial my arse.
Listen to this guy he is spot on. As a retired nurse i certainly did keep my handovers for the simple reason of recall if needed to clarify information passed over in handover was in deed correct....to suggest this is random is a joke ...thousands of nurses take handovers home.
The chart is laughable and totally inadmissable evidence.
Insuline can be produced in high levels not necessarily injected.
Pathogens in the water can cause air to be found within cavities in the body.
We all do reflective diaries and write all kinds down as we question our actions and inactions ...we beat ourselves up on a daily basis for decisions made.
Retrial needed
Next time include the drs being investigated.
This is a mess and at the very centre of this could be a nurse who is totally innocent of these charges.
Where was this girls defence team ....why did they not investigate this as scott has seemingly done.
This girl needs a retrial ...guilty or innocent she did not received a fair trial.
Most people who believe Letby's guilt have issues with the alleged poisoning of the TPN (feeder)bags, which experts pointed to as the only plausible explanation for Baby F's hypoglycemia.
I haven't yet heard an alternative theory that might vindicate Letby.
These hospitals, whether billion dollar corporations here in the US or the NHS in the UK..are ALWAYS looking for convenient fall guys to cover-up their own incompetence and negligence. I’ve, unfortunately, seen these instances increase exponentially since the 1980’s here in the US. When you have multimillionaire administration, more concerned about profits over patient care..it’s usually the nurses paying dearly or being put into impossible situations.
Last Christmas a full psych unit at my daughter’s hospital went viral. They had 2 RN’s and a small handful of aides, scheduled for 2 weeks, with a patient census of 73 PATIENTS. They filmed marching to admin begging for help. Admin was “out of the country on vacation”.
The ER my daughter worked in wasn’t much better with sometimes 7-8 critical patients/nurse.
If we don’t get back to putting PATIENTS OVER PROFITS; MANY more patients WILL DIE.
PS WE CAN get BACK to PATIENTS/Human lives FIRST. I UNDERSTAND THIS is controversial, but myself and others literally watched and personally experienced the change in the 1980’s. What changed? Both the US AND UK had leaders who were brainwashing the public about how privatizing everything and getting rid of pesky regulations (which may well save lives; but they also make big dents on the bottom line and bring profit margins down), were the answers to improving healthcare systems that were already regarded as the best in the world. Last I checked, with all factors considered, the US Healthcare system had dropped to not even in the top 50. Our maternal-infant mortality rates have skyrocketed. (Obviously there’s another reason for that, but they were rising even before Roe was overturned. One of my journals last month, reported maternity centers closing down in certain states and OB’s leaving en masse)
For the first time in almost 100 years; life expectancy in the US has DROPPED 3yrs in a row. (The decline began BEFORE the virus)
Neither myself nor my daughter went into medicine to “get rich”. Yet some polls done at both medical schools and nursing schools in the Northeast US about 4 years ago, cited “wealth” as the primary reason that 86% of the students were there.
I wish I knew a viable solution. With Big Pharma, Insurance and healthcare corporations (hospitals, HMO’s, etc) being our politicians top donors; unfortunately, I highly doubt anything will change in our lifetimes.😊
1000% correct!
Brilliant video , I now think Lucy is innocent.
After just this yoi think she's innocent?
@@rainbows9060 Sort your eyesight out. What's caused your eyesight & reading problems!? You had the experimental convid injections!?
Trial should have been televised to avoid scott gaslighting us
All trials should be televised. What are the judges trying to hide?
Extremely alarming. Please tell me this evidence will be reviewed and presented to an appeal?
It won't because it's nonsense
Look up MARK MAYES. aka green note
Oh my goodness, I know all about NEC… my daughter was born with a bowel disease and had this many times… she was born at Countess, thank goodness she was transferred to Alderhey and treated there. She had that rash! I remember it very well!
I truly believe that Lucy is innocent based on all of the information that I’ve listened to…
If babies are dying around you and it’s your unit I’m better you would feel responsible, and you would likely worry people would try and make it look like it was your fault.
For sure strikes me as a hospital cover up of a myriad of other failings. They closed ranks and needed a patsy is my feeling.
Definitely and they found one. Very evil
People to do that to a young woman.
My belief from day one was Lucy was innocent, the hospital where looking to make her a scapegoat. I do hope her appeal is successful so she can then Sue those who tarnished her good name.
So are you saying the babies that died when she wasn’t there died in the same ways?! Air injected, insulin and milk?! Why bring this up if you can’t provide further information?
The trial of Lucy Letby adds a new meaning to the term "hung jury". Based on the evidence presented at the trial the jury should be hung for returning a guilty verdict.
Seriously though this case highlights the fact that we do not have a correct view of reality and of what we are. Lucy Letby has no image of herself doing any harm to any baby ever as she cannot see herself doing anything even if she was looking in a mirror as she did it - even the image of her in the mirror is not what she looks like it's inside out. And nobody else saw her do harm to any of these poor infants. It's the same for you. You have no images of you doing anything. The image of you is left to the rest of us.
This is Soooo interesting. I made up my mind she was guilty. But has guilt been given because her Defense was useless? It seems that much has been put onto the ''spreadsheet'' showing where she was and when. The fact this is incorrect re other babies deaths is actually scary.
She confessed in a journal
@@macairhead5137
She repeated the accusation against her.
In the same way a person who has been accused of cheating on an exam might say "I must have cheated because I'm too stupid to have got that score."
It's not necessarily an admission of guilt, it could be sulking about the accusation.
I haven't made my mind up but I do feel there may have been a miscarriage of justice.
"The fact this is incorrect re other babies deaths.... " One would entirely expect such to be incorrect for other baby deaths i.e. for the ones she didn't kill! Nobody has suggested that she was responsible for ALL the babies that died at that particular hospital ward over that specific time period. And one would expect some baby deaths to occur, sadly, whether she was present or not. Get it now? 🙄
I feel the defense was USELESS. She has been found guilty but I can see her wanting a re-trial.@@richardgullick1867
@sunnyjim1355 the point being made in the interview, though, was that the death rate was much higher than normal, and the 7 Lucy was convicted of in no way account for the excess - we can hope that all the deaths have been thoroughly investigated and only those 7 were in any way suspicious, but if there was no mention of it in the trial we can't know. It's an interest point, and leaves room for doubt. We just don't know one way or the other.
At the end of a trial like this we are always told in no uncertain terms by the judges summary (and the media) what happened and this decides the character and actions of the condemned person. As a member of the public we have to take this on trust, and I have done so because I am simply not equipped to make a determination of my own. If what Steve is telling us has credibility and it becomes the basis of a successful appeal it would be absolutely incendiary. It would highlight the incompetence of the legal system as well as the NHS, and identify deliberate and calculated complicity of the authorities to arrive at a desired outcome. I know the legal system has failed defendants and acquired the guilty in the past, but the implications of this one are quite scary. Thank you for this insightful discussion.
I presume her legal team were not expert enough to look for more evidence to argue the evidences that the judge used
Why the defence failed is one of the mysteries in the case in my opinion.
So UVC drips poorly inserted, fecal matter in the environment, and junior doctors keen to not be blamed at the start of their career, then an over-eager, dedicated nurse who stands out... and one who complains to management when picked on by some doctors, causing them problems. There's your fall guy. You're taking the fall, Lucy.
Excellent summary
The fact that management defended her is never being interpreted as maybe Lucy isn't the problem here.
Management are scumbags who only think of cash, and they were nasty to the doctors, is about all we get in the way of discussion. I think the doctors are the problem here. Not that they are murdering babies, simply they haven't got a clue what the reason for the spikes in deaths was and needed someone to blame.
I must be honest and admit i am biased against doctors, because so many talk crap, invent any old nonsense and deform reality to avoid admitting they don't know.
And then there's the media, and even the prime minister of the country blindly and frantically indulging in the demonisation of Lucy.