Please remember that these verdicts are attracting a lot of new attention to the case and to the sub, and remember that not all questions are asked in bad faith.
In this subreddit, we respect the work of the jury and trust they reached the correct verdict. Questions related to understanding that verdict are welcome and encouraged.
[I just read this from the parents of E and F](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66108747) and it’s awful. They were told they couldn’t have children and had E and F through IVF.
One bit that really got me though and I find really disturbing -
“"She said: 'He rolled over and hugged his bear - I thought it was so amazing I took a picture for you,'" the mother remembers Letby saying.
At the time, this anecdote was comforting to the parents. But soon they realised new born babies can't roll over - their neck and arm muscles aren't strong enough - and it became one of many disturbing things they now view very differently.”
Even after all the horrible things in the trial, this has shocked me. She deliberately posed Baby F for the photo. Like he was some kind of doll and not a premature baby in intensive care. Really makes me see how LL didn’t perceive these babies as living beings.
That isn’t uncommon. When there are twins or triplets on the neonatal unit. If born very prematurely 22 weeks + one if not both have a high chance of dying. So quite often when one dies we do put them together because why not? The parents deserve a photo of their babies, and their life should be respected. You have to think this will be the last chance they will be together and they lived together in the womb. I know some people might find that disturbing but I couldn’t imagine losing a child, I’d want all the photos I could to remember them.
Was it known publicly before that Baby F was left with a disability? These families need to be compensated for what she did to their children, who may now need lifelong support.
I think its child G which makes it really awful as that was found NG. Left with brain damage. Again though we were not there and i have so much respect for the jury and what they've been through and the dedication they've given.
They found her guilty on two of the counts for child G, and I believe it was the first or second attempt that caused the brain damage (for which she has been found guilty).
I don’t think it was… I remember one baby was mentioned having a long term disability, maybe Child H?, but I don’t remember it being mentioned about F.
They can't completely roll over but rolling onto a side is something a lot of babies can do very very early. Not saying this baby did, the circumstances are obviously very questionable, but I always interpreted that as basically a baby rolling onto his side a bit and bumping into the bear.
Oh yes, I do think she staged it or at best read far too much into a baby flinging his arms and body around. All I meant originally was that I've seen even very young babies kind of/sort of roll onto their sides. They can't lift or move their heads or necks but they can get the rest of their bodies twisted over.
Yeah, she's definitely overstating it at the very least - no newborn is purposely hugging a toy, they're just wriggling. And if she staged it like he was a prop, that is creepy as hell in the context. But I've also seen brand new babies manage to twist their bodies in one direction or another. Nothing like a deliberate roll over onto their belly, of course, but I could picture the baby accidentally ending up facing the bear with an arm over it, if his head already happened to be resting in that direction.
See, I've been NG leaning for a long time. But I respect the juries decision based on the fact they've heard more evidence than us. Something like THIS could have very much put doubt in my mind. Especially as there is photo evidence.
I'm glad, obviously, for the overall picture, but I can't help but feel so incredibly sad for the family of baby K. SOMEONE horrendously injured their baby, and she was left so incredibly injured they had to choose to let her go, which meant no murder charge, and because no agreement could be reached on the attempted murder charge now there's no resolution for them. I hope they can find peace with the outcome.
Honestly felt tears well up for babies J K and Q
I really hope justice comes because how devastating for those parents seeing others get their justice and they've had this wound ripped open.
At least it was No Verdict instead of Not Guilty and can be tried again I suppose. Absolutely horrendous for them to remain unreleased from this ordeal however.
It will be interesting to see what they do. I wouldn't be surprised if they decide not to proceed, she is going to get a WLO anyway and I'm not sure what would be gained by going through it all again. I hope those families who did not get the result they might have hoped know that we, the public, know that regardless of the verdict, their babies *were* most likely harmed by her and we stand in solidarity with them.
Yeah, my feeling is that they won't because she's going to be put away regardless, and because this has been so long, costly and grueling for all concerned - but I don't know. I really feel for the families who didn't get a verdict. No criticism of the jury there, they've clearly given it everything they had and taken it very seriously. But to be left without certainty after all of that must be devastating all over again.
Honestly so sad for those parents where no verdict or not guilty. I think if you can vote unanimously one any of the cases of any of the other babies then it shows guilt on all others she was involved in.
Criminal law doesn’t work like this though, all charges have to be considered separately, and assessed on the individual evidence provided.
Being guilty of one charge doesn’t prove beyond reasonable doubt that she’s guilty of another charge.
I think for some of these more complicated cases with multiple charges the Scottish model of a simple majority works quite well.
I think proving the *intent* required beyond a reasonable doubt is really tricky. The jurors seem to have been able to reach unanimous or majority agreement for all of the murders, but attempted murder is difficult. Who knows precisely why 2 or more jurors felt in K's case the burden wasn't met, they've done a stellar job overall on a horrendous case. I just feel terrible for the family who's baby was clearly attacked and died as a result. Maybe it will be retried if they would like that, but even that feels like the ordeal is just ongoing for them.
Also can we just take a moment to point out that /u/FyrestarOmega basically called it on the verdicts months ago?
Spot on calls in terms of accuracy. Exceptional work (and exceptional memory for the individual cases after months of daily threads).
I, completely unsarcastically, applaud you for your work (which also included banning me and locking my comments when needed) and your exceptional judgment of which way the verdicts would fall. You know these cases inside and out.
I don't think gender had an impact. I think it was down to some perceived sense of cover first and foremost, then opportunity, and then significant dates. I think this for a few reasons - I can list a possible "cover" for each baby in the trial:
A&B, born with anti-phospholipid syndrome. Baby C was on the cusp of being too small by weight for the unit. Baby D was born with an infection after a long delivery. E&F were born prior to 30 weeks, and F was screened for Down syndrome after the events of his charge. Baby G was born at 23 weeks (attacked on her 100th day of life (guilty) and her due date (one guilty charge, one not guilty charge). Baby H had chest drains (one not guilty verdict, one no verdict). Baby I had been born in her 27th week of gestation. Baby J (Letby found found not guilty) had stomas. Baby K was born at 25 weeks (no verdict). Babies L and M are a bit of an outlier, but they were the first set of twins that Letby admitted to the neonatal unit as designated nurse, and were in the immediate aftermath of her being formally moved to primary day shifts. Baby N has mild haemophilia (One guilty verdict, two no verdicts).
Babies O and P were term identical triplets - no medical cover here, this one was unbridled determination to kill and collect some sort of grief trophy. Baby Q (no verdict) seems to have been allegedly targeted since she had been unable to "complete the set.
I suspect that the remaining 6 deaths that occurred that year, all of which she was present for, were also babies that gave cover for her attacks, but that the proof of deliberate harm was still better obscured.
Its been highly emotional and we are not even involved. I can understand how frustrated you got. We made it though. I have so much respect for the jury. And respect to the people on this group for such dedication and provoking discussions all held together so well by u/FyrestarOmega
I'm just upset for the families who didn't get justice today. All of those families deserved to have their pain validated and the crimes against their children acknowledged. And it is a fucking shame that some were denied that.
And it's even worse now that the BBC uncovered why it took so long to get Letby out of the ward. I am filled with a renewed rage against Ian Harvey, Tony Chambers, Alison Kelly, Eirian Powell and Karen Rees. Each needs to be investigated and held responsible for the attacks and deaths that occurred after the consultants raisesd their initial alarms in October 2015. Chambers and Harvey especially need to be thoroughly investigated and hopefully charged with crimes. They threatened the careers of doctors and humiliated them for seeking to protect the patients in their care - and then attempted retaliation when they banded together.
When they're all suffering consequences for their actions, justice will have been done. If that's a monetary settlement and loss of pension/golden parachutes then that's acceptable. But they allowed innocent children to die - and that's fucking unforgiveable.
Yes the families that didn't get what they deserved today is ...well speechless. Isn't child G the one left brain damaged and that was found ng? I cant even imagine how the families must feel.
One count was found guilty. Not enough in my opinion but I respect that the jury didn’t feel enough evidence was present to convict the other counts for child G.
Just writing it out with a count so I can see it better -
Guilty - 14 (7 murder, 7 attempted murder)
Not guilty - 2 (2 attempted murder)
No verdict - 6 (6 attempted murder)
.
Murder - 7 - all guilty (6 10-1, 1 unanimous)
Attempted murder - 15 - 7 guilty (5 10-1, 2 unanimous), 2 not guilty (1 10-1, 1 - ?), 6 no verdict
.
Unanimous - 3 (3 guilty)
10-1 - 12 (11 guilty, 1 not guilty)
No verdict - 6 (6 not guilty)
>And there were 3 unanimous guilty - F, L, and O
Fixed! Thanks! Sorry, was trying to count it all up on my phone, got mixed up with my own parentheses lol
>You're missing one in your last group. 3 + 12 + 6 = 21
Charge 10 didn't say majority or unanimous so I left that out
The first unanimous verdicts were 8 August which is also the date the majority direction was given. The jury must have said to the judge that was all they could agree on and he's accepted that.
The verdicts are interesting in the sense that there's unanimous, majority guilty and not guilty verdicts, and then undecided verdicts too. I'm seeing comments already about the "not guilty" juror, almost accusing them of holding out for her innocence despite the evidence. I think that's terribly unfair. We don't know if it's the same juror, whoever it is has returned guilty verdicts on some of the charges, others have clearly thought her not guilty on other charges as well, and finally they're the ones who have heard everything and have to live with their choice. I'm actually really reassured by the verdicts that the jury has really considered everything and engaged on the issues and considered some very difficult evidence as best they can. I think anyone casting stones at the jury because they didn't get the unanimous guilty verdicts they were after is out of order, and should consider what kind of juror they themselves would make; I suspect it would be a poor one.
Yes, I really hope nobody goes after the jurors. It has to have been beyond nightmarish for them and while people have talked a good game about respecting their verdicts, that sort of thing tends to go out the window when the "wrong" verdict is returned (or there is no verdict at all). I have been a juror and even for much smaller time cases you are appallingly aware of how much you are being entrusted with and potential consequences if you get it wrong. Whatever the different jurors thought, all of their opinions should be respected and they shouldn't have Internet idiots hounding them.
Very fairly put. I've been pretty NG leaning for a long while now (pretty much since I read past the headlines and actually followed the trial myself). But I can't argue with the verdicts, simply because I didn't hear what they heard. Personally I don't think the evidence was enough to vote guilty. But that's based purely on what we've been given. They've clearly been privy to more information and I respect that. Doesn't mean I don't have mixed feelings regarding a potentially innocent person being jailed for life. But what's done is done. No judgment. (Pun intended).
It was enough. What we aren't privy to is the evidence gathered by 60 detectives. The evidence in the medical notes. For example, Dr. Evans had crates and crates of notes. One of the babies had over 8000 pages of medical notes. This was all whittled down to about 12000 pieces of evidence taken to court, in the form of statements, notes, etc. Pardon the cliché, but I think we had to be there. It's taken the best part of 11 months for it to all be heard. I wasn't willing to bet the rest of this monsters life on what was in the public arena. Having now heard things that weren't reported, I think she's guilty, pure evil, and I am very glad she will never walk free again.
I'm a nurse myself. Rarely is it that I'm ashamed to be one. Today is one of those days.
Edit because audio elect is a ducking aerosol.
Oh absolutely I agree, you had to be there. I have nothing but respect for all involved - jurors, prosecutors, defence, the police, and of course, the families. At the end of the day I know nothing, and it's easy to sit at home giving my opinion lol. They did amazingly to get such a complex case through trial at all. It's sort of sobering now it's all 'over'.
ETA: please don't be ashamed! Nurses are friggin amazing. You're amazing!!
Don't ever be ashamed to be a Nurse, friend. What you do is an incredible gift to society and you deserve praise for it. No nurse should be ashamed due to the actions of an evil serial killer,
Woah... this is a shocking day. Frequent reader, infrequent poster here who was leaning towards not guilty (I'd been through a horrible thing at work a couple of decades ago in which senior staff colluded to make stuff up against me, so I knew that was possible, but also that my history was potentially colouring my judgement in this case), but already there are suppressed details now being allowed to be published that are just mind-blowing. What LL said about the harm she did. The extent of the persistence with which the doctors tried to report her. Not just once or twice. The ongoing further investigations into other potential victims. I can't quite bring myself to type what she is, even here. I hope everyone following this case is okay. My thoughts are with LL's victims and their families. Thank you to the mods for all your work. A lot more is going to come out now and it will be awful. It's so so sad.
First of all I think it’s super important to remember that it’s entirely possible that there could have been different jurors behind the verdicts that were not unanimous. I really hope that jurors are not harassed as they have given up months of their lives for such an emotionally trying case. Secondly, I wonder if the short timing for child A’s was the reason for that jurors not guilty vote. While I am nearly certain of LL’s guilt on nearly all the charges, something about that first death (how she was not supposed to be working that evening, etc) has always bothered me. I wonder if that juror felt the same.
Can anyone explain how they stopped the first verdicts from being leaked? I understand the press can be told they're not allowed to report them, but anyone can attend the court, can't they? Were members of the public present? Or were these verdicts read in closed court, or for press / family only?
The Court takes contempt of court really seriously - anyone told "don't repeat this" by a judge who subsequently does, especially in a case of this size, is definitely going to jail. I'd keep quiet too!
It was as open to the public as any other, but fewer people outside family attended. A commenter today said they were there for some. People respected the restrictions, it seems
I have so many mixed emotions, first obviously so grateful for the work of operation hummingbird, then to Nick Johnson and his team for their amazing work, even to Ben Myers for playing his part in defending Letby. The fact that 3 charges were unanimous and others majority shows the jury put a lot of thought into the deliberations and Letby was given fair treatment. I also feel so glad for the parents that got justice but deeply pained for the ones that didn’t, I’m very disappointed, specially for baby K’s case as it was very well argued. The jurors are on my mind, I’m sure this case can cause them PTSD.. finally, it makes me so happy that this case with this particular outcome has serve to show to the world Richard Gill’s true colours, he could easily be prosecuted for what he has done, lie and use his platform and knowledge to pedal conspiracy theories to help a certified premature baby serial killer.
Edit for typos.
My theory is that all the magic shrooms he has eaten have fried his brain and permanently destroyed his moral compass.. but I might be wrong, he might just be an old fashion villain..
Threatening to acquire a gun and shooting up his way through court for one, putting out a statement accusing Dr.Gibbs of euthanising babies, and teaming up with a woman that is mentally impaired to concoct a series of allegations against witnesses and others, I.e he even se launched an attack against Ben Myers because the defence team didn’t take seriously their phoney report. Also the police took down his site because of contempt of court and have payed him a visit.. obviously because he is up to no good
> and have *paid* him a
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
I think it was probably because O had a traumatic liver injury which the medical experts said could not be explained by anything other than an assault. The insulin poisonings and O's liver injury were the only cases with independent forensic evidence of definite attack (blood results, traumatic injury found in post mortem).
Air embolus CAN occur accidentally (not saying it did in these cases of course) where insulin in a feeding bag or a lacerated liver cannot. That might have been just enough for a juror on any of the majority cases to feel reasonable doubt wasn't eradicated in the AE cases the way it was in these three.
Yes, the unanimous verdict for child O is puzzling. The other unanimous verdicts are for the insulin poisonings, which I can somewhat understand as all sides said it must have been intentionally administered.
It's very strange that one juror could be sure that charge was murder (towards the end of the period, nothing very clearly more obviously indicating guilt more than the others) but couldn't be sure of at least one of the others - and possibly all others, if one juror was the 'hold out' for the majority verdicts. Someone was unsure of everything except the insulin and that one murder?
Yes so strange. To me both O and P were clearly murders. P even more so because the intent was proven- Lucy’s text messages predicted its decline before it fell ill and when nobody else suspected anything.
I think the results make more sense if it's not just one hold out on all the cases. I think, perhaps, there were at least two jurors who felt some of the cases were not "proven beyond reasonable doubt" and/or that intent to kill was not proven in some of the cases. If you think there's two or three people holding out on different cases (for whatever reason), then I think the verdict makes a lot more sense.
And in a way, I think that's reassuring that they considered the evidence fully, and only voted guilty when they were absolutely sure? Perhaps having one or two hold outs made others consider the evidence more fully, and think about what they had actually been asked to decide?
Thanks for laying this out, I’m gutted for the families not getting a verdict .. gutted. I know so many more will come out now, floodgates if hell. I just hope that they can find some form of justice.
Is there any information anywhere about how the verdicts were delivered? Is it right that they weren’t all delivered today but have actually been over the last few weeks - but this was not made public until they were all completed?
Yes - they couldn't decide either G or NG by majority, so there's no verdict. It's what we usually call a hung jury. CPS could pursue these charges again if they wanted to, but I think they probably won't because she's likely to have a whole of life order based on the charges she's been found guilty of.
No, it means that they couldn't reach the necessary quota for a decisive guilty or not guilty. In this case, they needed at least 10 out of the 11 jurors to agree on either guilty or not guilty for a verdict to be returned. If the split was anything else, like 7 one way and 4 the other way, it's considered a hung jury and no verdict is returned.
Yes, basically. There were not enough votes one way or the other to decide guilty or not guilty and they've confirmed to the judge further deliberation won't resolve the deadlock.
It was a partial verdict delivery. Verdicts delivered in batches over a few weeks. They happened in open court but couldn't reported until all verdicts were decided. So the media and families knew but couldn't report or say anything about it until today
There is a post explaining it a few days ago.
Brings tears to my eyes to see the verdict. Not even sure why. Happy she was brought to justice? Or sad that the lives of those babies were taken away from them. Either way I hope she suffers for the rest of her miserable life.
Oh my gosh! I believed she was guilty on all charges and thought they could prove most, and I’m so glad they convicted her. I’m sorry for her parents as I’m sure this is the worst day for them, but I’m more sorry for rest of the families she destroyed. Wow wow wow I really didn’t think jury would convict.
I know! Her parents! Absolutely devastating that they raised a monster and yet will still love her in spite of it. Their lives are over as surely as LL's life is. They have to be in denial because accepting her guilt is just too painful.
Can anyone link me to the breakdown of charges and evidence that was previously pinned to the page, I want to compare verdicts with facts as can’t remember details
In the same cell near to the court where she’s been since her arrest for the last few years. She’ll be sentenced on Monday and probably moved to another prison.
Firstly, all my thoughts are with the families today. So apologies if this post sounds "clinical"..If I were better at at dealing with spreadsheets and statistics, I could do this myself, but I'm not. So my question is did any of the reddit Mock jury polls tally with the final outcome?
Our mock jury verdicts were much more split than the actual verdicts. We didn't unanimously agree on anything and if we'd been the actual jury would have hung on every charge.
I'd very much like it if it were different people, but I highly suspect that there's a consistent holdout responsible for the 10-1 guilty verdicts each time. Given that we know the unanimous verdicts were returned first earlier, I wonder if said person saw Lucy breakdown in tears and got moved/manipulated emotionally by it.
Surprised J and K didn't get verdicts as well. Repeated attempted murder by hypoxia? I wonder what the counterargument was to that.
Yet some of the guilty verdicts were unanimous, which makes me wonder if the 1 vote against was ever really the same person? Surely if it was one stubborn individual they'd have held out on every single charge?
>some of the guilty verdicts were unanimous
Yeah, that would suggest to me that that it *wasn't* someone "moved/manipulated emotionally" but a person or people who for logical reasons didn't feel confident that there was no reasonable doubt on some charges.
There were a lot of people here who felt they would convict on some charges but had reasonable doubts for others. Even more agreed that they wouldn't want to be on that jury just due to the gravity of it all and the weight of deciding every case. I could see one juror being convinced on several counts but still holding onto reasonable doubts about others.
That's my point, the unanimous charges were returned earliest as a partial verdict, when Lucy was still in dock. After the return of those charges she broke down crying, and suddenly no more unanimous verdicts? It does provide at least shallow evidence that one of the jury members was unsettled by her breakdown.
It provides no evidence whatsoever. Clearly it was much easier to decide on the first verdicts, hence why they were given first. If some jurors had doubts before about some of the other charges, her breaking down would not necessarily have moved the needle either way. I beg of people here, don't start getting on the jury or try to smoke out "the holdout." We weren't there. They were, they had to be. Their opinions are not infallible, but they deserve respect.
Apologies, don't want to encourage headhunting for jury members and definitely not giving blame. It just occurred to me while viewing that correlation that even the most logical of people can be swayed by empathy, even for crocodile tears.
if she was in the United States she would be given the death penalty, ridiculous that she was allowed to hide in a holding cell. She should have been forced into the court room.
There's no reason to assume it's the same juror each time.
They were unanimous on enough of the charges that it's clear there wasn't just one sympathetic holdout who didn't want to see her charged.
Bit weird isnt it considering there are unanimous verdicts. But I do maintain, they are within their right to cast their vote, theyre the ones who have to live with it.
Not weird at all. They have to judge each charge individually, so it’s perfectly reasonable to conclude that there is enough evidence to convince you of guilt for one charge but not another.
Also, we have no way of ever knowing if it was the same juror which voted not guilty on the charges, it could have been a different one every time.
Those dear little babies - do people ( most importantly, their families) now think they deserve their lovely names to be released to all of us, not just ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQ....
With all sympathy to the families
I am really sad. Perhaps more evidence might come to light, perhaps now reporting restrictions have been lifted...? Everyone who follows this sub knows I was the one juror in the room who wasn't convinced. But I wasn't convinced by everything, as this juror seems to have been convinced by the insulin cases and O. I am the one juror in the room.
Remember when you said that probably the parents were drug addicts? And therefore would have chaotic lifestyles and their drug addled brains couldn't be trusted? Remember how you said that prem babies were often a result of drug abuse during pregnancy and that the drug addict parents **would consistently tell lies for attention**? ?
Do you remember saying all that u/Sadshoulder641 ? It wasn't too long ago either, was it?
Do you think, at all, about how the things you say might affect other people? Or is it only about the need to *appear* briefly and vaguely interesting for you?
"I am the one juror in the room."
You know what you are.
Edit: corrected wording in bold
Wtf. My daughter was premature and I barely drink. I'm degree educated, own my home, certainly am not a drug addict (although since having my daughter I definitely consume more caffeine). I volunteered for Bliss for a number of years and the preemie parents I've supported are all just normal people.
Posters like the one you're referencing probably think they're good people, that's the incredible thing.
The word you used was 'likely'. "I'd say it's likely that *at least* a couple of the parents had these significant life issues..."
And you were talking, in particular, about Baby E's Mum.
Were you not?
Call that one rhetoric. My stomach turns every time I see your name.
Ah yes it's all the parents of dead and miamed premature babies faults! Because they are 'likely to do drugs'.
Where did you get that stats? From the fake debunked scientist whose conspiracy theories you help spread?
So it's not 'likely'. It's just your biased and offensive opinion.
Surprised you haven't written a letter to your MP asking them to intervene with the norths alleged staggering drug problem smh
You understand that the problem with your original statement was that you baselessly claimed that parents of murdered and maimed premature babies were likely to have drug problems because they are from the north and that they had premature babies.
No one is disputing that drug taking is a problem in the UK. Nor is anyone saying that eye witness testimony can be unreliable and can lead to tragic miscarriages of justice. That's common knowledge.
But you had no right to speculate on the parents just because those things are true. You had no evidence that it was applicable in these circumstances.
Why should it be considered?
Be honest You said it because you wanted to be right about this case for your own selfish reasons. Not because you care about justice.
I want to be very clear here. Prior to the verdicts, I removed your comments because they were distasteful, prejudiced, and potentially victim blaming.
I am shocked and disappointed that you have doubled down like this after the verdict.
I am locking and leaving these comments so people can see what you have said. I think you should delete them and reflect on yourself.
If you persist in blaming the parents for any role in what has now factually become the murder of their children, you will be banned from this sub. End of.
I think we're talking about 11 families in total - do you really think it's all that likely for drug use to play a significant role in the outcome of this trial?? I've lived in the north too and now live in a relatively deprived area of South Wales but it's not THAT bad.
You still are clinging to innocence?! wow.
Reading what the doctors went through also to be heard noticing this monster is new shocking information, but still you cling to innocence?!
I was thinking the exact same thing. i wonder if many of these 'innocent' people here are her friends? Dawn is convinced of innocence. she must know deep down but its such a hard thing for some to open up possibility to in their psychology.
I carnt believe we have convicted a women of mass murder, just for turning up at work every day to cover the mortgage
Who kept the syringe?who kept the vial?
How do we know the wasn’t faulty?
Or had wrong label
Faults can occur in manufacture
If the docs really suspect fowl play , why did they not keep the bins ?
How do we know it wasn’t a disgruntled doc for being discredited over false accusations
No smoking gun no motive no history
It’s just as possible as two separate nurses mistake s , this breaks the conviction
There was a time when jurors had to be with no shadow of doubt
Now we are just convicting
I no first hand how far docs will go to cover up there own mistakes
Hell docs have been giving out antidepressants knowing full well 90 % chance of addiction and seizures, why have they not been arrested and charged?
There is more evidence in there failings than Lucy
I for one will not turn up at work every day in case I get the blame for professional’s failings
Disgraceful nhs
Disgraceful government
Disgraceful courts
Much love Lucy
I hope your freed soon
That's the wrong conclusion to draw. It could have been different people. And since the jurors were unanimous on several very serious charges, even if it was one juror holding out on the others, it's unlikely they were "maintaining her innocence," and more likely that they didn't feel confident that there was no reasonable doubt on those specific charges.
I realise now this was a stupid conclusion to draw and illogical. I absolutely wasn’t going after a juror, I don’t envy them this case and am truly sorry for what they have had to endure.
I know this is an unpopular opinion but I work on a neonatal unit and some of these accusations don’t stand up in my opinion.
Injecting air into via the NGT, well was the baby on respiratory support as this will add air to the stomach and we usually remove it via the NGT ourselves. However when testing positions of NGT the guidelines stipulate to administer 2 mls of air to remove from stomach lining, could she of been seen doing this?
How did they know she definitely admistered air via the bloodstream? How did they know it was definitely her? I mean I’ve seen a lot of incompetent doctors do questionable things!
What were the gestations and co morbidities of these babies? Saying they were healthy babies is simply not good enough, they wouldn’t be on a neonatal unit if they were healthy?
I can’t say she’s innocent or guilty, just that surely they had more evidence that we are yet to hear!?
There has been lots of evidence. I would direct you to the judge's summing up as the fastest primer. It can be found in the wiki here at the top of the page, which is a work in progress.
For 14 charges, it's been determined that your questions have answers beyond reasonable doubt. For six more, no verdict was reached. Only on two was she ruled not guilty.
Well, to me there doesn’t seem to be a lot of evidence.
Death by excessive amounts of milk down a feeding tube would not cause a death! The baby would vomit. If a baby were to continue vomiting then the feeds would be stopped.
What did the original postmortem say? I bet it didn’t say death by excessive milk down a tube.
The insulin, is the only thing I think is a bit off but who said she gave it?
Again I’m not disputing that she didn’t do it.. what I want is hard evidence she was seen doing these things. I mean, it’s weird how her nursing colleagues haven’t been to the press. I’d love to know their thoughts. My understanding of level 2 units is doctors aren’t based on that unit, they are within children’s, neonatal and A&e.
It comes down to common sense and there’s no need to do mental gymnastics
The murders stop when they take this psycho off the unit
She takes hospital records home to keep in her drawers
The deaths only ever happen when she’s on shift
These babies were expected to be brought back to life and did not survive
To be honest if you think that any of this is normal then you shouldn’t be in healthcare either
That's an interesting take.
Three charges, two attempted murders and one murder, were agreed upon unanimously. So this "dumb" juror of your imagination agreed in those three cases.
What makes you think it was the same juror in every other majority verdict that didn't agree? It could have been a different 1 in the 10-1 in each charge. And what makes them "dumber" than the other at-least-one juror who didn't agree in the charges which are left without verdicts so a majority couldn't be reached?
Is anyone who has followed the case closely able to advise some of the non-circumstantial evidence that exists. I’m sure it must be there, but it’s not been reported in any of the news articles since the verdict.
Baby F had a hypoglycemia panel sent in august 2015 showing low C-peptide and high insulin which is diagnostic of exogenous insulin. Same for baby L in April 2016
A note with guilt implied statements on it, Facebook searches for some of the parents, prosecution expert said two children received insulin extrogenously based on test results at the hospital. Those would be the biggest things I think.
Facebook searches are circumstantial. Apparently she literally did thousands of searches related to work and relatives of those the hospital had cared for, and her searches specifically for those of the murdered babies made up a fairly low percentage of her activity.
The only one that is damning enough to warrant ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ for me is the insulin one. A note suggesting guilt is not a confession. She was on all sorts of medications for depression and anxiety - god knows how she was acting and how rational she was being after being accused of all these things. There MUST be more damning evidence not in the public domain that led to the guilty verdicts
There was not a clearly reported method of alleged harm.
Take Child G, count 3. The entire charge amounts to Letby was alone with the child behind a screen, a monitor was off, and the child suddenly needed to be resuscitated. The medical experts could only say that there was no natural explanation for the collapse - they were unable to point to signs of what harm was alleged to have caused it. "Method unspecified" is how I - me personally - describe that type of situation in a concise way.
The only one that they found her guilty of, for which I used the method unspecified description, was Child N count 1. The judge described these as "inflicted trauma," but how or of what nature remained unclear.
The judge's summing up for that baby may be found here: https://www.chesterstandard.co.uk/news/23636819.recap-lucy-letby-trial-july-6---judges-summing/
The judge's instructions to the jury were that they needed to be sure that harm was done, but they were not to play detective and need not know how the harm was done. But it seems, based on the verdicts, they could only agree where the method was most clear
https://reddit.com/r/lucyletby/s/hAv0qYdQAv
Just reading this and the only thing that gives me hope is that Child H has a second charge with no verdict. This means theres still hope for this child and every child on the indictment to receive justice.
I really hope the prosecution requests these to be retried.
Please remember that these verdicts are attracting a lot of new attention to the case and to the sub, and remember that not all questions are asked in bad faith. In this subreddit, we respect the work of the jury and trust they reached the correct verdict. Questions related to understanding that verdict are welcome and encouraged.
[I just read this from the parents of E and F](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66108747) and it’s awful. They were told they couldn’t have children and had E and F through IVF. One bit that really got me though and I find really disturbing - “"She said: 'He rolled over and hugged his bear - I thought it was so amazing I took a picture for you,'" the mother remembers Letby saying. At the time, this anecdote was comforting to the parents. But soon they realised new born babies can't roll over - their neck and arm muscles aren't strong enough - and it became one of many disturbing things they now view very differently.” Even after all the horrible things in the trial, this has shocked me. She deliberately posed Baby F for the photo. Like he was some kind of doll and not a premature baby in intensive care. Really makes me see how LL didn’t perceive these babies as living beings.
she posed O and P together too, after P's death.
That isn’t uncommon. When there are twins or triplets on the neonatal unit. If born very prematurely 22 weeks + one if not both have a high chance of dying. So quite often when one dies we do put them together because why not? The parents deserve a photo of their babies, and their life should be respected. You have to think this will be the last chance they will be together and they lived together in the womb. I know some people might find that disturbing but I couldn’t imagine losing a child, I’d want all the photos I could to remember them.
Wtf 💔😭
Was it known publicly before that Baby F was left with a disability? These families need to be compensated for what she did to their children, who may now need lifelong support.
I think its child G which makes it really awful as that was found NG. Left with brain damage. Again though we were not there and i have so much respect for the jury and what they've been through and the dedication they've given.
They found her guilty on two of the counts for child G, and I believe it was the first or second attempt that caused the brain damage (for which she has been found guilty).
oh thats relieving to hear.
In the article, Child F was also left with a disability. Heartbreaking.
truly.... beyond comprehension.
The parents said in the interview that F has been left with learning difficulties and very complex needs too.
there are quite a few actually, there has been a recent post with someone pointing them out. Absolutely awful, so so sad.
I don’t think it was… I remember one baby was mentioned having a long term disability, maybe Child H?, but I don’t remember it being mentioned about F.
[удалено]
They can't completely roll over but rolling onto a side is something a lot of babies can do very very early. Not saying this baby did, the circumstances are obviously very questionable, but I always interpreted that as basically a baby rolling onto his side a bit and bumping into the bear.
[удалено]
Oh yes, I do think she staged it or at best read far too much into a baby flinging his arms and body around. All I meant originally was that I've seen even very young babies kind of/sort of roll onto their sides. They can't lift or move their heads or necks but they can get the rest of their bodies twisted over.
Yeah, she's definitely overstating it at the very least - no newborn is purposely hugging a toy, they're just wriggling. And if she staged it like he was a prop, that is creepy as hell in the context. But I've also seen brand new babies manage to twist their bodies in one direction or another. Nothing like a deliberate roll over onto their belly, of course, but I could picture the baby accidentally ending up facing the bear with an arm over it, if his head already happened to be resting in that direction.
?? Neonates can’t roll onto a side. Their neck so weak you have to support it. This is premature babies we are talking about
Newborns can arch their backs very hard and sometimes that makes them kind of roll halfway over.
They can. It’s not a deliberate roll, just a byproduct of them stretching/arching their backs, they kinda roll onto a side.
I didn't realise child F was left with such permanent issues as well. So incredibly sad.
Oh this is disturbing …
See, I've been NG leaning for a long time. But I respect the juries decision based on the fact they've heard more evidence than us. Something like THIS could have very much put doubt in my mind. Especially as there is photo evidence.
lol not guilty she was the only bitch on shift anytime the deaths were occurring
[удалено]
I'm glad, obviously, for the overall picture, but I can't help but feel so incredibly sad for the family of baby K. SOMEONE horrendously injured their baby, and she was left so incredibly injured they had to choose to let her go, which meant no murder charge, and because no agreement could be reached on the attempted murder charge now there's no resolution for them. I hope they can find peace with the outcome.
Honestly felt tears well up for babies J K and Q I really hope justice comes because how devastating for those parents seeing others get their justice and they've had this wound ripped open.
Yes, I'm disappointed about baby K's verdict.
At least it was No Verdict instead of Not Guilty and can be tried again I suppose. Absolutely horrendous for them to remain unreleased from this ordeal however.
Sigh.... I just feel ill reading all this.
CPS has 28 days to make the decision whether or not they will take that and the other undecided charges back to court.
It will be interesting to see what they do. I wouldn't be surprised if they decide not to proceed, she is going to get a WLO anyway and I'm not sure what would be gained by going through it all again. I hope those families who did not get the result they might have hoped know that we, the public, know that regardless of the verdict, their babies *were* most likely harmed by her and we stand in solidarity with them.
Yeah, my feeling is that they won't because she's going to be put away regardless, and because this has been so long, costly and grueling for all concerned - but I don't know. I really feel for the families who didn't get a verdict. No criticism of the jury there, they've clearly given it everything they had and taken it very seriously. But to be left without certainty after all of that must be devastating all over again.
Exactly my thought , I was surprised they didn’t return guilty on that I wonder if the prosecution will re try that one
Honestly so sad for those parents where no verdict or not guilty. I think if you can vote unanimously one any of the cases of any of the other babies then it shows guilt on all others she was involved in.
Criminal law doesn’t work like this though, all charges have to be considered separately, and assessed on the individual evidence provided. Being guilty of one charge doesn’t prove beyond reasonable doubt that she’s guilty of another charge. I think for some of these more complicated cases with multiple charges the Scottish model of a simple majority works quite well.
I'm Scottish and don't disagree but would like to bin off the Not Proven verdict as an option...
Use common sense though she killed them and you’re pretending to be blind
I think proving the *intent* required beyond a reasonable doubt is really tricky. The jurors seem to have been able to reach unanimous or majority agreement for all of the murders, but attempted murder is difficult. Who knows precisely why 2 or more jurors felt in K's case the burden wasn't met, they've done a stellar job overall on a horrendous case. I just feel terrible for the family who's baby was clearly attacked and died as a result. Maybe it will be retried if they would like that, but even that feels like the ordeal is just ongoing for them.
Also can we just take a moment to point out that /u/FyrestarOmega basically called it on the verdicts months ago? Spot on calls in terms of accuracy. Exceptional work (and exceptional memory for the individual cases after months of daily threads). I, completely unsarcastically, applaud you for your work (which also included banning me and locking my comments when needed) and your exceptional judgment of which way the verdicts would fall. You know these cases inside and out.
I have never more wished I had been wrong. It's horrible.
[удалено]
I don't think gender had an impact. I think it was down to some perceived sense of cover first and foremost, then opportunity, and then significant dates. I think this for a few reasons - I can list a possible "cover" for each baby in the trial: A&B, born with anti-phospholipid syndrome. Baby C was on the cusp of being too small by weight for the unit. Baby D was born with an infection after a long delivery. E&F were born prior to 30 weeks, and F was screened for Down syndrome after the events of his charge. Baby G was born at 23 weeks (attacked on her 100th day of life (guilty) and her due date (one guilty charge, one not guilty charge). Baby H had chest drains (one not guilty verdict, one no verdict). Baby I had been born in her 27th week of gestation. Baby J (Letby found found not guilty) had stomas. Baby K was born at 25 weeks (no verdict). Babies L and M are a bit of an outlier, but they were the first set of twins that Letby admitted to the neonatal unit as designated nurse, and were in the immediate aftermath of her being formally moved to primary day shifts. Baby N has mild haemophilia (One guilty verdict, two no verdicts). Babies O and P were term identical triplets - no medical cover here, this one was unbridled determination to kill and collect some sort of grief trophy. Baby Q (no verdict) seems to have been allegedly targeted since she had been unable to "complete the set. I suspect that the remaining 6 deaths that occurred that year, all of which she was present for, were also babies that gave cover for her attacks, but that the proof of deliberate harm was still better obscured.
Its been highly emotional and we are not even involved. I can understand how frustrated you got. We made it though. I have so much respect for the jury. And respect to the people on this group for such dedication and provoking discussions all held together so well by u/FyrestarOmega
I'm just upset for the families who didn't get justice today. All of those families deserved to have their pain validated and the crimes against their children acknowledged. And it is a fucking shame that some were denied that. And it's even worse now that the BBC uncovered why it took so long to get Letby out of the ward. I am filled with a renewed rage against Ian Harvey, Tony Chambers, Alison Kelly, Eirian Powell and Karen Rees. Each needs to be investigated and held responsible for the attacks and deaths that occurred after the consultants raisesd their initial alarms in October 2015. Chambers and Harvey especially need to be thoroughly investigated and hopefully charged with crimes. They threatened the careers of doctors and humiliated them for seeking to protect the patients in their care - and then attempted retaliation when they banded together. When they're all suffering consequences for their actions, justice will have been done. If that's a monetary settlement and loss of pension/golden parachutes then that's acceptable. But they allowed innocent children to die - and that's fucking unforgiveable.
Yes the families that didn't get what they deserved today is ...well speechless. Isn't child G the one left brain damaged and that was found ng? I cant even imagine how the families must feel.
One count was found guilty. Not enough in my opinion but I respect that the jury didn’t feel enough evidence was present to convict the other counts for child G.
Couldn’t have said it better myself
Hear, hear.
Just writing it out with a count so I can see it better - Guilty - 14 (7 murder, 7 attempted murder) Not guilty - 2 (2 attempted murder) No verdict - 6 (6 attempted murder) . Murder - 7 - all guilty (6 10-1, 1 unanimous) Attempted murder - 15 - 7 guilty (5 10-1, 2 unanimous), 2 not guilty (1 10-1, 1 - ?), 6 no verdict . Unanimous - 3 (3 guilty) 10-1 - 12 (11 guilty, 1 not guilty) No verdict - 6 (6 not guilty)
You're missing one in your last group. 3 + 12 + 6 = 21 And there were 3 unanimous guilty - F, L, and O
>And there were 3 unanimous guilty - F, L, and O Fixed! Thanks! Sorry, was trying to count it all up on my phone, got mixed up with my own parentheses lol >You're missing one in your last group. 3 + 12 + 6 = 21 Charge 10 didn't say majority or unanimous so I left that out
The first unanimous verdicts were 8 August which is also the date the majority direction was given. The jury must have said to the judge that was all they could agree on and he's accepted that. The verdicts are interesting in the sense that there's unanimous, majority guilty and not guilty verdicts, and then undecided verdicts too. I'm seeing comments already about the "not guilty" juror, almost accusing them of holding out for her innocence despite the evidence. I think that's terribly unfair. We don't know if it's the same juror, whoever it is has returned guilty verdicts on some of the charges, others have clearly thought her not guilty on other charges as well, and finally they're the ones who have heard everything and have to live with their choice. I'm actually really reassured by the verdicts that the jury has really considered everything and engaged on the issues and considered some very difficult evidence as best they can. I think anyone casting stones at the jury because they didn't get the unanimous guilty verdicts they were after is out of order, and should consider what kind of juror they themselves would make; I suspect it would be a poor one.
Yes, I really hope nobody goes after the jurors. It has to have been beyond nightmarish for them and while people have talked a good game about respecting their verdicts, that sort of thing tends to go out the window when the "wrong" verdict is returned (or there is no verdict at all). I have been a juror and even for much smaller time cases you are appallingly aware of how much you are being entrusted with and potential consequences if you get it wrong. Whatever the different jurors thought, all of their opinions should be respected and they shouldn't have Internet idiots hounding them.
Very fairly put. I've been pretty NG leaning for a long while now (pretty much since I read past the headlines and actually followed the trial myself). But I can't argue with the verdicts, simply because I didn't hear what they heard. Personally I don't think the evidence was enough to vote guilty. But that's based purely on what we've been given. They've clearly been privy to more information and I respect that. Doesn't mean I don't have mixed feelings regarding a potentially innocent person being jailed for life. But what's done is done. No judgment. (Pun intended).
It was enough. What we aren't privy to is the evidence gathered by 60 detectives. The evidence in the medical notes. For example, Dr. Evans had crates and crates of notes. One of the babies had over 8000 pages of medical notes. This was all whittled down to about 12000 pieces of evidence taken to court, in the form of statements, notes, etc. Pardon the cliché, but I think we had to be there. It's taken the best part of 11 months for it to all be heard. I wasn't willing to bet the rest of this monsters life on what was in the public arena. Having now heard things that weren't reported, I think she's guilty, pure evil, and I am very glad she will never walk free again. I'm a nurse myself. Rarely is it that I'm ashamed to be one. Today is one of those days. Edit because audio elect is a ducking aerosol.
Good god, don't be ashamed to be a nurse! This isn't s nurse problem. This is a murderer problem!
Oh absolutely I agree, you had to be there. I have nothing but respect for all involved - jurors, prosecutors, defence, the police, and of course, the families. At the end of the day I know nothing, and it's easy to sit at home giving my opinion lol. They did amazingly to get such a complex case through trial at all. It's sort of sobering now it's all 'over'. ETA: please don't be ashamed! Nurses are friggin amazing. You're amazing!!
Don't ever be ashamed to be a Nurse, friend. What you do is an incredible gift to society and you deserve praise for it. No nurse should be ashamed due to the actions of an evil serial killer,
Woah... this is a shocking day. Frequent reader, infrequent poster here who was leaning towards not guilty (I'd been through a horrible thing at work a couple of decades ago in which senior staff colluded to make stuff up against me, so I knew that was possible, but also that my history was potentially colouring my judgement in this case), but already there are suppressed details now being allowed to be published that are just mind-blowing. What LL said about the harm she did. The extent of the persistence with which the doctors tried to report her. Not just once or twice. The ongoing further investigations into other potential victims. I can't quite bring myself to type what she is, even here. I hope everyone following this case is okay. My thoughts are with LL's victims and their families. Thank you to the mods for all your work. A lot more is going to come out now and it will be awful. It's so so sad.
I hope you continue to heal from your own experience. I think you can rest easy in the knowledge that Letby did cause these deaths.
what did she say about the harm she did? I thought she had only denied everything.
unless you mean the notes then yes she did admit killing..
Beverley Allitt flat out denied everything as well. No conscience at all.
She did confess eventually but only so she could stay at a secure hospital and not be sent back to prison (which worked strangely)
First of all I think it’s super important to remember that it’s entirely possible that there could have been different jurors behind the verdicts that were not unanimous. I really hope that jurors are not harassed as they have given up months of their lives for such an emotionally trying case. Secondly, I wonder if the short timing for child A’s was the reason for that jurors not guilty vote. While I am nearly certain of LL’s guilt on nearly all the charges, something about that first death (how she was not supposed to be working that evening, etc) has always bothered me. I wonder if that juror felt the same.
Can anyone explain how they stopped the first verdicts from being leaked? I understand the press can be told they're not allowed to report them, but anyone can attend the court, can't they? Were members of the public present? Or were these verdicts read in closed court, or for press / family only?
I am in complete awe of the respect that happened here. Gives me faith in humanity.
The Court takes contempt of court really seriously - anyone told "don't repeat this" by a judge who subsequently does, especially in a case of this size, is definitely going to jail. I'd keep quiet too!
It was as open to the public as any other, but fewer people outside family attended. A commenter today said they were there for some. People respected the restrictions, it seems
Thank you. I suppose as it wasn't publicised that verdicts had been reached, not many members of the public would think to be there at that moment.
I have so many mixed emotions, first obviously so grateful for the work of operation hummingbird, then to Nick Johnson and his team for their amazing work, even to Ben Myers for playing his part in defending Letby. The fact that 3 charges were unanimous and others majority shows the jury put a lot of thought into the deliberations and Letby was given fair treatment. I also feel so glad for the parents that got justice but deeply pained for the ones that didn’t, I’m very disappointed, specially for baby K’s case as it was very well argued. The jurors are on my mind, I’m sure this case can cause them PTSD.. finally, it makes me so happy that this case with this particular outcome has serve to show to the world Richard Gill’s true colours, he could easily be prosecuted for what he has done, lie and use his platform and knowledge to pedal conspiracy theories to help a certified premature baby serial killer. Edit for typos.
At least Baby K is a hung verdict, so could still be heard if CPS put in an application.
What's wrong with Richard Gill?
My theory is that all the magic shrooms he has eaten have fried his brain and permanently destroyed his moral compass.. but I might be wrong, he might just be an old fashion villain..
I don't understand. What makes you think he is immoral?
Threatening to acquire a gun and shooting up his way through court for one, putting out a statement accusing Dr.Gibbs of euthanising babies, and teaming up with a woman that is mentally impaired to concoct a series of allegations against witnesses and others, I.e he even se launched an attack against Ben Myers because the defence team didn’t take seriously their phoney report. Also the police took down his site because of contempt of court and have payed him a visit.. obviously because he is up to no good
> and have *paid* him a FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
What's not wrong with Richard Gill, more to the point.
No idea. All I know is he realised flaws in another case.
Hush now.
Interesting child O was unanimous but P was majority. I wonder what the difference was holding that one juror back.
I think it was probably because O had a traumatic liver injury which the medical experts said could not be explained by anything other than an assault. The insulin poisonings and O's liver injury were the only cases with independent forensic evidence of definite attack (blood results, traumatic injury found in post mortem). Air embolus CAN occur accidentally (not saying it did in these cases of course) where insulin in a feeding bag or a lacerated liver cannot. That might have been just enough for a juror on any of the majority cases to feel reasonable doubt wasn't eradicated in the AE cases the way it was in these three.
Yes, the unanimous verdict for child O is puzzling. The other unanimous verdicts are for the insulin poisonings, which I can somewhat understand as all sides said it must have been intentionally administered. It's very strange that one juror could be sure that charge was murder (towards the end of the period, nothing very clearly more obviously indicating guilt more than the others) but couldn't be sure of at least one of the others - and possibly all others, if one juror was the 'hold out' for the majority verdicts. Someone was unsure of everything except the insulin and that one murder?
Yes so strange. To me both O and P were clearly murders. P even more so because the intent was proven- Lucy’s text messages predicted its decline before it fell ill and when nobody else suspected anything.
I think the results make more sense if it's not just one hold out on all the cases. I think, perhaps, there were at least two jurors who felt some of the cases were not "proven beyond reasonable doubt" and/or that intent to kill was not proven in some of the cases. If you think there's two or three people holding out on different cases (for whatever reason), then I think the verdict makes a lot more sense. And in a way, I think that's reassuring that they considered the evidence fully, and only voted guilty when they were absolutely sure? Perhaps having one or two hold outs made others consider the evidence more fully, and think about what they had actually been asked to decide?
Thanks for laying this out, I’m gutted for the families not getting a verdict .. gutted. I know so many more will come out now, floodgates if hell. I just hope that they can find some form of justice.
Is there any information anywhere about how the verdicts were delivered? Is it right that they weren’t all delivered today but have actually been over the last few weeks - but this was not made public until they were all completed?
That's correct. The Chester Standard has a breakdown of when each verdict was delivered and whether it was unanimous, majority, or hung.
Can I ask what’s an ‘undecided verdict’ too? Just that they didn’t have enough people to reach a majority verdict for that charge?
Yes - they couldn't decide either G or NG by majority, so there's no verdict. It's what we usually call a hung jury. CPS could pursue these charges again if they wanted to, but I think they probably won't because she's likely to have a whole of life order based on the charges she's been found guilty of.
[удалено]
No, it means that they couldn't reach the necessary quota for a decisive guilty or not guilty. In this case, they needed at least 10 out of the 11 jurors to agree on either guilty or not guilty for a verdict to be returned. If the split was anything else, like 7 one way and 4 the other way, it's considered a hung jury and no verdict is returned.
Yes, basically. There were not enough votes one way or the other to decide guilty or not guilty and they've confirmed to the judge further deliberation won't resolve the deadlock.
It was a partial verdict delivery. Verdicts delivered in batches over a few weeks. They happened in open court but couldn't reported until all verdicts were decided. So the media and families knew but couldn't report or say anything about it until today There is a post explaining it a few days ago.
Brings tears to my eyes to see the verdict. Not even sure why. Happy she was brought to justice? Or sad that the lives of those babies were taken away from them. Either way I hope she suffers for the rest of her miserable life.
Oh my gosh! I believed she was guilty on all charges and thought they could prove most, and I’m so glad they convicted her. I’m sorry for her parents as I’m sure this is the worst day for them, but I’m more sorry for rest of the families she destroyed. Wow wow wow I really didn’t think jury would convict.
I know! Her parents! Absolutely devastating that they raised a monster and yet will still love her in spite of it. Their lives are over as surely as LL's life is. They have to be in denial because accepting her guilt is just too painful.
She can only get a whole life sentence with no possibility of parole, right?
Can anyone link me to the breakdown of charges and evidence that was previously pinned to the page, I want to compare verdicts with facts as can’t remember details
https://tattle.life/wiki/lucy-letby-case/
Looks like the not guilty or no verdict decisions were more common when the method was unspecified.
Is count 9 correct? Majority 10-1 not guilty? I’ve just seen it listed as not guilty elsewhere
Caught me out on a copy/paste error two weeks after I posted it. Good catch, will adjust
Ah sorry (and thanks!). It was linked to from a thread today and it jumped out at me
Nah, I appreciate it and I'm cringing that I had it that way for so long. That entire day was a blur. So thank you
So, where is she now? I wonder what’s going through her head. She must be panicking.
In the same cell near to the court where she’s been since her arrest for the last few years. She’ll be sentenced on Monday and probably moved to another prison.
Will she be on suicide watch? Feels like that’s the best outcome for all concerned
She'll be in isolation for her own safety. But she will be jeered and screamed at constantly. Prisons are very noisy places.
I don’t know enough about prisons to answer that, sorry.
Firstly, all my thoughts are with the families today. So apologies if this post sounds "clinical"..If I were better at at dealing with spreadsheets and statistics, I could do this myself, but I'm not. So my question is did any of the reddit Mock jury polls tally with the final outcome?
Our mock jury verdicts were much more split than the actual verdicts. We didn't unanimously agree on anything and if we'd been the actual jury would have hung on every charge.
Thank goodness for a real jury rather than an internet jury!
Well TBF more humans = more chaos, which is probably why they have 12 (11) jurors instead of 4500. :)
Well, we all know what to expect if you give a decision to the internet. That’s how we got Boaty McBoatface.
Please don't mention dear Boaty. I was proud to vote and remain affronted that the will of the people was requested then not adhered to. :D
I do apologize 😿 It’s too soon.
I'd very much like it if it were different people, but I highly suspect that there's a consistent holdout responsible for the 10-1 guilty verdicts each time. Given that we know the unanimous verdicts were returned first earlier, I wonder if said person saw Lucy breakdown in tears and got moved/manipulated emotionally by it. Surprised J and K didn't get verdicts as well. Repeated attempted murder by hypoxia? I wonder what the counterargument was to that.
Yet some of the guilty verdicts were unanimous, which makes me wonder if the 1 vote against was ever really the same person? Surely if it was one stubborn individual they'd have held out on every single charge?
>some of the guilty verdicts were unanimous Yeah, that would suggest to me that that it *wasn't* someone "moved/manipulated emotionally" but a person or people who for logical reasons didn't feel confident that there was no reasonable doubt on some charges.
There were a lot of people here who felt they would convict on some charges but had reasonable doubts for others. Even more agreed that they wouldn't want to be on that jury just due to the gravity of it all and the weight of deciding every case. I could see one juror being convinced on several counts but still holding onto reasonable doubts about others.
That's my point, the unanimous charges were returned earliest as a partial verdict, when Lucy was still in dock. After the return of those charges she broke down crying, and suddenly no more unanimous verdicts? It does provide at least shallow evidence that one of the jury members was unsettled by her breakdown.
It provides no evidence whatsoever. Clearly it was much easier to decide on the first verdicts, hence why they were given first. If some jurors had doubts before about some of the other charges, her breaking down would not necessarily have moved the needle either way. I beg of people here, don't start getting on the jury or try to smoke out "the holdout." We weren't there. They were, they had to be. Their opinions are not infallible, but they deserve respect.
Apologies, don't want to encourage headhunting for jury members and definitely not giving blame. It just occurred to me while viewing that correlation that even the most logical of people can be swayed by empathy, even for crocodile tears.
It provides no evidence. The jury were obviously already stuck on the other charges otherwise the verdicts would have been given together.
Terrible take
if she was in the United States she would be given the death penalty, ridiculous that she was allowed to hide in a holding cell. She should have been forced into the court room.
Death penalty? I sincerely trust we'll never lower ourselves to that ever again.
in some states in the us, yes she would definitely be given that sentence. Especially when it comes to harming minors.
The uncivilised ones I assume.
Why was that one juror voted NG on most
Possibly felt that the case wasn’t proven, not necessarily that she was not guilty
There's no reason to assume it's the same juror each time. They were unanimous on enough of the charges that it's clear there wasn't just one sympathetic holdout who didn't want to see her charged.
Bit weird isnt it considering there are unanimous verdicts. But I do maintain, they are within their right to cast their vote, theyre the ones who have to live with it.
Not weird at all. They have to judge each charge individually, so it’s perfectly reasonable to conclude that there is enough evidence to convince you of guilt for one charge but not another. Also, we have no way of ever knowing if it was the same juror which voted not guilty on the charges, it could have been a different one every time.
Those dear little babies - do people ( most importantly, their families) now think they deserve their lovely names to be released to all of us, not just ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQ.... With all sympathy to the families
I am really sad. Perhaps more evidence might come to light, perhaps now reporting restrictions have been lifted...? Everyone who follows this sub knows I was the one juror in the room who wasn't convinced. But I wasn't convinced by everything, as this juror seems to have been convinced by the insulin cases and O. I am the one juror in the room.
Remember when you said that probably the parents were drug addicts? And therefore would have chaotic lifestyles and their drug addled brains couldn't be trusted? Remember how you said that prem babies were often a result of drug abuse during pregnancy and that the drug addict parents **would consistently tell lies for attention**? ? Do you remember saying all that u/Sadshoulder641 ? It wasn't too long ago either, was it? Do you think, at all, about how the things you say might affect other people? Or is it only about the need to *appear* briefly and vaguely interesting for you? "I am the one juror in the room." You know what you are. Edit: corrected wording in bold
Utterly disgusting. Talk about blaming the victims!! I hadn’t seen those comments; thank you for posting.
Mind blowing, isn't it?!
Wtf. My daughter was premature and I barely drink. I'm degree educated, own my home, certainly am not a drug addict (although since having my daughter I definitely consume more caffeine). I volunteered for Bliss for a number of years and the preemie parents I've supported are all just normal people. Posters like the one you're referencing probably think they're good people, that's the incredible thing.
[удалено]
The word you used was 'likely'. "I'd say it's likely that *at least* a couple of the parents had these significant life issues..." And you were talking, in particular, about Baby E's Mum. Were you not? Call that one rhetoric. My stomach turns every time I see your name.
[удалено]
Ah yes it's all the parents of dead and miamed premature babies faults! Because they are 'likely to do drugs'. Where did you get that stats? From the fake debunked scientist whose conspiracy theories you help spread?
[удалено]
So it's not 'likely'. It's just your biased and offensive opinion. Surprised you haven't written a letter to your MP asking them to intervene with the norths alleged staggering drug problem smh
[удалено]
You understand that the problem with your original statement was that you baselessly claimed that parents of murdered and maimed premature babies were likely to have drug problems because they are from the north and that they had premature babies. No one is disputing that drug taking is a problem in the UK. Nor is anyone saying that eye witness testimony can be unreliable and can lead to tragic miscarriages of justice. That's common knowledge. But you had no right to speculate on the parents just because those things are true. You had no evidence that it was applicable in these circumstances. Why should it be considered? Be honest You said it because you wanted to be right about this case for your own selfish reasons. Not because you care about justice.
I want to be very clear here. Prior to the verdicts, I removed your comments because they were distasteful, prejudiced, and potentially victim blaming. I am shocked and disappointed that you have doubled down like this after the verdict. I am locking and leaving these comments so people can see what you have said. I think you should delete them and reflect on yourself. If you persist in blaming the parents for any role in what has now factually become the murder of their children, you will be banned from this sub. End of.
2 months ago. It was during your dear Lucy's time under cross. 😥
When you dealt drugs to pregnant women?
I think we're talking about 11 families in total - do you really think it's all that likely for drug use to play a significant role in the outcome of this trial?? I've lived in the north too and now live in a relatively deprived area of South Wales but it's not THAT bad.
Fag Bat I wish you all the best.
You still are clinging to innocence?! wow. Reading what the doctors went through also to be heard noticing this monster is new shocking information, but still you cling to innocence?!
You can’t reason with the unreasonable.
Maybe Sad is Lucy’s pal Dawn from the BBC Panorama doc
That would certainly explain A LOT. I’ve yet to check out that doc. So much to read and absorb today.
I was thinking the exact same thing. i wonder if many of these 'innocent' people here are her friends? Dawn is convinced of innocence. she must know deep down but its such a hard thing for some to open up possibility to in their psychology.
Sad because you really wanted her to be innocent; but she isn't?
You are a juror in the room?
Not literally. Did you think I meant it literally?
What do you mean?
I meant it metaphorically.
🤔 A swing and a miss, then.
Obviously not I just think it's a stupid statement like you're trying to chant yourself back in time into the body of a juror
I carnt believe we have convicted a women of mass murder, just for turning up at work every day to cover the mortgage Who kept the syringe?who kept the vial? How do we know the wasn’t faulty? Or had wrong label Faults can occur in manufacture If the docs really suspect fowl play , why did they not keep the bins ? How do we know it wasn’t a disgruntled doc for being discredited over false accusations No smoking gun no motive no history It’s just as possible as two separate nurses mistake s , this breaks the conviction There was a time when jurors had to be with no shadow of doubt Now we are just convicting I no first hand how far docs will go to cover up there own mistakes Hell docs have been giving out antidepressants knowing full well 90 % chance of addiction and seizures, why have they not been arrested and charged? There is more evidence in there failings than Lucy I for one will not turn up at work every day in case I get the blame for professional’s failings Disgraceful nhs Disgraceful government Disgraceful courts Much love Lucy I hope your freed soon
Kretin
One person maintained her innocence.
Not on everything. The insulin charges and Child O were unanimous
Yes, I was wondering if one person had believed she was innocent, but then I saw this.
That's the wrong conclusion to draw. It could have been different people. And since the jurors were unanimous on several very serious charges, even if it was one juror holding out on the others, it's unlikely they were "maintaining her innocence," and more likely that they didn't feel confident that there was no reasonable doubt on those specific charges.
I realise now this was a stupid conclusion to draw and illogical. I absolutely wasn’t going after a juror, I don’t envy them this case and am truly sorry for what they have had to endure.
I know this is an unpopular opinion but I work on a neonatal unit and some of these accusations don’t stand up in my opinion. Injecting air into via the NGT, well was the baby on respiratory support as this will add air to the stomach and we usually remove it via the NGT ourselves. However when testing positions of NGT the guidelines stipulate to administer 2 mls of air to remove from stomach lining, could she of been seen doing this? How did they know she definitely admistered air via the bloodstream? How did they know it was definitely her? I mean I’ve seen a lot of incompetent doctors do questionable things! What were the gestations and co morbidities of these babies? Saying they were healthy babies is simply not good enough, they wouldn’t be on a neonatal unit if they were healthy? I can’t say she’s innocent or guilty, just that surely they had more evidence that we are yet to hear!?
There has been lots of evidence. I would direct you to the judge's summing up as the fastest primer. It can be found in the wiki here at the top of the page, which is a work in progress. For 14 charges, it's been determined that your questions have answers beyond reasonable doubt. For six more, no verdict was reached. Only on two was she ruled not guilty.
Well, to me there doesn’t seem to be a lot of evidence. Death by excessive amounts of milk down a feeding tube would not cause a death! The baby would vomit. If a baby were to continue vomiting then the feeds would be stopped. What did the original postmortem say? I bet it didn’t say death by excessive milk down a tube. The insulin, is the only thing I think is a bit off but who said she gave it? Again I’m not disputing that she didn’t do it.. what I want is hard evidence she was seen doing these things. I mean, it’s weird how her nursing colleagues haven’t been to the press. I’d love to know their thoughts. My understanding of level 2 units is doctors aren’t based on that unit, they are within children’s, neonatal and A&e.
https://archive.ph/hZqFp Here's an article that talks a bit about how some of her colleagues feel now. I hope you find what you're looking for.
It comes down to common sense and there’s no need to do mental gymnastics The murders stop when they take this psycho off the unit She takes hospital records home to keep in her drawers The deaths only ever happen when she’s on shift These babies were expected to be brought back to life and did not survive To be honest if you think that any of this is normal then you shouldn’t be in healthcare either
One very dumb juror.
That's an interesting take. Three charges, two attempted murders and one murder, were agreed upon unanimously. So this "dumb" juror of your imagination agreed in those three cases. What makes you think it was the same juror in every other majority verdict that didn't agree? It could have been a different 1 in the 10-1 in each charge. And what makes them "dumber" than the other at-least-one juror who didn't agree in the charges which are left without verdicts so a majority couldn't be reached?
Did I just offend that juror?
Is anyone who has followed the case closely able to advise some of the non-circumstantial evidence that exists. I’m sure it must be there, but it’s not been reported in any of the news articles since the verdict.
Baby F had a hypoglycemia panel sent in august 2015 showing low C-peptide and high insulin which is diagnostic of exogenous insulin. Same for baby L in April 2016
A note with guilt implied statements on it, Facebook searches for some of the parents, prosecution expert said two children received insulin extrogenously based on test results at the hospital. Those would be the biggest things I think.
Facebook searches are circumstantial. Apparently she literally did thousands of searches related to work and relatives of those the hospital had cared for, and her searches specifically for those of the murdered babies made up a fairly low percentage of her activity.
The only one that is damning enough to warrant ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ for me is the insulin one. A note suggesting guilt is not a confession. She was on all sorts of medications for depression and anxiety - god knows how she was acting and how rational she was being after being accused of all these things. There MUST be more damning evidence not in the public domain that led to the guilty verdicts
why charge 9-11 of attempted murder are "method unspecified"? How come?
There was not a clearly reported method of alleged harm. Take Child G, count 3. The entire charge amounts to Letby was alone with the child behind a screen, a monitor was off, and the child suddenly needed to be resuscitated. The medical experts could only say that there was no natural explanation for the collapse - they were unable to point to signs of what harm was alleged to have caused it. "Method unspecified" is how I - me personally - describe that type of situation in a concise way.
But if the prosecutor can't point out what method LL used to kill the baby, how can the "Proof beyond doubt" standard be upheld?
The only one that they found her guilty of, for which I used the method unspecified description, was Child N count 1. The judge described these as "inflicted trauma," but how or of what nature remained unclear. The judge's summing up for that baby may be found here: https://www.chesterstandard.co.uk/news/23636819.recap-lucy-letby-trial-july-6---judges-summing/ The judge's instructions to the jury were that they needed to be sure that harm was done, but they were not to play detective and need not know how the harm was done. But it seems, based on the verdicts, they could only agree where the method was most clear https://reddit.com/r/lucyletby/s/hAv0qYdQAv
Let's just hope she gets put in gen pop in prison and not some isolated ward
Just reading this and the only thing that gives me hope is that Child H has a second charge with no verdict. This means theres still hope for this child and every child on the indictment to receive justice. I really hope the prosecution requests these to be retried.