Why are our police forces still getting away with this crap?

[GboroRam]

20 hours ago, DerbysLane said:

There are a few sites questioning the evidence that was presented at trial.  It is quite convincing, albeit many of the people making the claims seem to be the conspiracy theory, climate change denying, Trump supporting type.  I have such little faith in the police or NHS hospital consultants that I'm more inclined to believe these random internet people.

For example, https://www.chimpinvestor.com/post/more-remarkable-statistics-in-the-lucy-letby-case or there is a whole series of posts at https://lawhealthandtech.substack.com/p/scepticism-in-action .  These https://www.scienceontrial.com/ are even raising money for a re-trial.

 

 

 

I think you answered your own question. If you read biased reports, and it sounds like these are, you will be potentially listening to a warped perspective. 

[DerbysLane]

6 hours ago, SSD said:

I'm puzzled why people seem to think why Lucy Letby is an innocent person.

I'm similarly amazed that there are people who don't have doubts.  I think I'm right when I say the murder convictions weren't unanimous decisions.

Quote

Unless all the whistleblowing and planting of fake diaries was a big conspiracy against her, which I highly doubt. 

Literally nobody is suggesting they are fake diaries or notes.  What people are questioning is the cherry picking of sentences from the post it notes and suggesting these are undeniably a confession.  Take the 'green post it note' described in the Sky article linked above.  The article highlights the "I AM EVIL I DID THIS" and "I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough.".  What the article doesn't describe is the note also says "I haven't done anything wrong".  In fact the article crops out this bit of the note from the picture.  So much for unbiased reporting?

It's very hard to decipher the note as sentences are overlaid on top of each other and the hand writing is not the clearest.  Above the "I killed them on" is what appears to be "They wen't" i.e. the complete sentence might be "They wen't I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them and I'm a horrible evil person".  So it could be she is just recounting the words of her accusers. The note was written after she had been arrested/suspended from the neonatal ward.

I can't find any reliable information on the secret diary codes.  If you do a search all you get is a load of articles from the 24th of Aug.  These clearly all copy each other as they all go on about an 'LO' code.  The basis for this is a screenshot from an hour long documentary that Cheshire police released on YouTube.  Now I'm rubbish at reading other people's handwriting, but even I can see that it is not LO, but is LD.  This is apparently a common code for Long Day.  Surely there is more to this secret code than that?  The journalists writing these articles have obviously not been present during court proceedings, or it would appear even spoken to the police about it before writing these articles.

A diary is for recording significant events, I don't see it as that unusual that she might write the names of babies that died.  What I do find concerning is the police have said they used the diary to find her victims.  That is just bonkers as you just have circular confirmation.

Quote

The key for me is the lack of emotion. If you'd been innocent of this crime, you'd be horrified and sobbing throughout the trial.

I don't get this.  Maybe I'm a serial killer too?

Quote

She showed no emotion, lacked cooperation and to top it off didn't even appear for her sentencing.

As far as I know she answered every question asked of her.  Not once did she say "No comment".  

If you are innocent and are about to have the key thrown away then I can understand not turning up in disgust.

 

 

[DerbysLane]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

I think you answered your own question. If you read biased reports, and it sounds like these are, you will be potentially listening to a warped perspective. 

Please point me to these unbiased reports.  

[Ram-Alf]

26 minutes ago, DerbysLane said:

  I think I'm right when I say the murder convictions weren't unanimous decisions.

 

 

 

12 Jurors...one was given permission to leave with the Judge saying you can not speak to anyone or any other Jurors for the rest of your life about this case, They carried on with 11 Jurors, Judge told them he'd accept a majority verdict for guilty, One charge was Not Guilty.

Edited September 1, 2023 by The Last Post

[Ram-Alf]

Re the Jurors

This was a 10 month case with enough evidence to re float the Titanic, There was I believe eventually 7 Women and 4 Men left, I do not know how much scientific evidence was shown or if they had any scientific witnesses, But to get 11 people over a 10 month period and listen to things that you wouldn't hear in normal life must have been a very hard job indeed.

[Rev]

Tbh @DerbysLane, it doesn't matter if the press have interpreted the evidence correctly, or if they have presented facts fairly, they weren't the jury. 

 

[Archied]

11 hours ago, DerbysLane said:

I'm similarly amazed that there are people who don't have doubts.  I think I'm right when I say the murder convictions weren't unanimous decisions.

Literally nobody is suggesting they are fake diaries or notes.  What people are questioning is the cherry picking of sentences from the post it notes and suggesting these are undeniably a confession.  Take the 'green post it note' described in the Sky article linked above.  The article highlights the "I AM EVIL I DID THIS" and "I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough.".  What the article doesn't describe is the note also says "I haven't done anything wrong".  In fact the article crops out this bit of the note from the picture.  So much for unbiased reporting?

It's very hard to decipher the note as sentences are overlaid on top of each other and the hand writing is not the clearest.  Above the "I killed them on" is what appears to be "They wen't" i.e. the complete sentence might be "They wen't I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them and I'm a horrible evil person".  So it could be she is just recounting the words of her accusers. The note was written after she had been arrested/suspended from the neonatal ward.

I can't find any reliable information on the secret diary codes.  If you do a search all you get is a load of articles from the 24th of Aug.  These clearly all copy each other as they all go on about an 'LO' code.  The basis for this is a screenshot from an hour long documentary that Cheshire police released on YouTube.  Now I'm rubbish at reading other people's handwriting, but even I can see that it is not LO, but is LD.  This is apparently a common code for Long Day.  Surely there is more to this secret code than that?  The journalists writing these articles have obviously not been present during court proceedings, or it would appear even spoken to the police about it before writing these articles.

A diary is for recording significant events, I don't see it as that unusual that she might write the names of babies that died.  What I do find concerning is the police have said they used the diary to find her victims.  That is just bonkers as you just have circular confirmation.

I don't get this.  Maybe I'm a serial killer too?

As far as I know she answered every question asked of her.  Not once did she say "No comment".  

If you are innocent and are about to have the key thrown away then I can understand not turning up in disgust.

 

 

I’ve personally not put too much importance on how she comes across as what is described as cold psychopathic detachment could very easily be the reaction of someone with mental / emotional issues feeling stunned / overwhelmed and traumatised with the situation they find themselves in , not saying this IS the case here but it’s happened before , for me it comes down to hard evidence, the jury decide , I’ve not seen enough to properly make a decision but I can say my gut tells me it one of those cases that confirms I’m not in favour of the death penalty 

[DerbysLane]

22 hours ago, Rev said:

Tbh @DerbysLane, it doesn't matter if the press have interpreted the evidence correctly, or if they have presented facts fairly, they weren't the jury. 

 

It is relevant though for the thread title "Why are police forces still getting away with this crap?".  Firstly it is for the defence to stop them, but after that the only ones who can realistically hold them to account are the press?

Yet it seems in this case the police are briefing exaggerated sensational stuff and the press are lapping it up. Let's face it a serial killer on a children's ward sells a lot more papers than another story of yet another failing NHS maternity unit.

It seems like the diary entries only played a minor role in this case, but you wouldn't think it from the headlines "Lucy Letby used secret code written in her diary to keep a catalogue of her horrific crimes, police reveal".  Having looked into it a bit more, the 'LD' really is the 'secret code' they are talking about.  Except it is not a secret code to probably every nurse in the country.  It is written on days when she isn't accused of anything, so neither is it a marker of crimes. 

The various news articles go on "a code of coloured asterisks among the documents, marking 'significant events' in the police investigation, detectives said".  I cannot find any further details about asterisks, but her diary is obviously colour coded: work stuff in blue and social events in pink.  This seems entirely normal, I bet a huge percentage of women in the 20-30 age bracket do the same.  Not the sinister stuff it is made out to be is it?

The so called trophies she kept also generated lots of headlines, with the obvious implication that she must be guilty because of it.  The reality is the police found hundreds of handover notes and other documents relating to the 'suspected cases' as well as non suspect cases.  There was no difference as far as I can tell.  Easily explained by not emptying your pockets when you go home.  I bet lots of nurses have a similar bag full of this stuff, you can't put it out with the recycling.  Unfortunately the judge has accepted the spin the prosecution/police have put on it and referred to trophies in his summing up.

Take away this sensationalised stuff and the case is all medical interpretation.  The 'hero' z-list TV doctor now vividly remembers unusual purple marks on the skin that he repeatedly failed to make a clinical note of at the time.  This allows new theories to be made, injected air etc, overturning the autopsies that showed nothing suspicious.  Just how do you inject air into a baby without being noticed by the four other people in the small room?

I'm sorry, but this case screams unsafe conviction.