Heart of darkness: Lucy Letby

Where goats go to escape
dpedin
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:35 am

C69 wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 6:55 pm
dpedin wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 6:44 pm
Blackmac wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 12:13 pm

My wife and a number of her nursing colleagues are currently involved in a complaint against a consultant anaesthetist in their hospital who they have seen being physically abusive to anaesthetised patients and also bullying and abusive to nursing staff. They are up against an absolute brick wall, no one at the hospital is interested and the nursing unions are beyond pathetic.
I think when folk talk about NHS management they forget/don't realise that many are or have been senior clinicians of one sort or another. In the Letby case it looked like the Medical and Nurse Directors were the ones who blocked any action. Any CEO or legal rep worth their salt would look to them to provide expert advice about taking action against a clinician as it is part of their professional responsibilities to provide this advice to managers. I wouldn't think any CEO would ignore the professional advice of their senior Clinical Directors, that would be suicide.

It is often very difficult to get issues raised about doctors, as the profession they close rank and prefer to deal with the individuals themselves through their professional routes. When I had to go in for a knee op my GP, who was a friend, asked me who I wanted to be referred to (in the days when this was an option) I asked does it matter and he raised his eyebrows and told me to ask my doctor mates who they would allow to operate on them. I did and got a list of good guys/bad guys! I know one surgeon who when a trainee would often tell his consultant he would close up after surgery but then often had to redo the surgery to correct their mistakes. Poor surgeons might find they are given simpler case mix on their lists, are given senior trainees to 'assist', are asked to assist other surgeons in surgery rather than operate alone, are asked to do more non-clinical work, etc rather than be confronted with their poor performance. Quite often early retirement is offered rather than being asked to stop clinical work. Whist the vast majority of doctors are hard working and dedicated professionals there are like in every walk of life a few fucked up bastards!
On the whole I agree and know a few Medical Directors who are or have been great Clinicians and have respect from their Peers
This is very different for Nursing staff in Chief Nurse positions.
I know of no Nursing staff in this situation who have any series clinical kudos or reputation.
The Chief Nurse of an organisation usually surrounds themselves with yes men and often the surround themselves with people they have history with and being in their friends and colleagues from previous organisations.
The culture in the NHS is getting no better and I am glad I decided to not go down the Senior Manager route about 10 years ago
The NHS is a behemothan organisation that has been run into the ground systematically and deliberately.
I can't wait to retire, hopefully next year I will start slowly decreasing my hours.
Dont disagree. In days gone by consultants were more akin to teams of barristers operating as individual specialist professional practitioners working as individuals but within a chambers style organisation providing admin support with trainees supporting on an individual 1-to-1 basis and dependant upon their patronage. Nursing on the other hand was more like a military model with rank, determined by different coloured uniforms, being all important and this rigidly defined role, responsibilities, etc. However times have changed dramatically since professional management structures, systems, accountabilities, etc were introduced into the NHS. The problem is that we have had this clash of cultures and apart from specialist functional areas like procurement, finance, HR, IT, etc we have invested very little in developing clinicians to become senior managers within the NHS and as a result we have this mismatch of the old and the new cultures. In cases like Letby the old style of 'lets us manage this ourselves within the professions' failed drastically and it seems the professional managers ie the CEO, failed to see and address this. It is often easier for CEO to let the Medical Director of Clinical Team to manage poor performance of consultants given it is a minefield, unfortunately in this case doing nothing and not listening to the guys on the ground was an unmitigated disaster!

However I am not sure other models work better - the US with their processes and litigious environment creates many more problems and also fails to identify and deal with dodgy clinicians.
Joost
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:35 am

Really been finding it difficult to wrap my head around this case; what kind of mind is capable of repeatedly attacking newborn babies, especially ones so helpless as prem babies.

Was reading that one of the lines of questioning/theories the prosecution had was that she was doing it because it got her attention/sympathy when children died or got into difficulties on her watch and there was one doctor in particular (who was married with kids) who she had a thing for and messaged a lot for support around these cases - she apparently broke down when he came to give evidence in the case.
dpedin
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:35 am

Joost wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 7:28 pm Really been finding it difficult to wrap my head around this case; what kind of mind is capable of repeatedly attacking newborn babies, especially ones so helpless as prem babies.

Was reading that one of the lines of questioning/theories the prosecution had was that she was doing it because it got her attention/sympathy when children died or got into difficulties on her watch and there was one doctor in particular (who was married with kids) who she had a thing for and messaged a lot for support around these cases - she apparently broke down when he came to give evidence in the case.
I agree - my non clinical and poorly informed opinion is Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. There was a very similar case in the NHS years ago - the Beverely Allitt case which is worth reading up on if you are interested.
I like neeps
Posts: 3789
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am

Joost wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 7:28 pm Really been finding it difficult to wrap my head around this case; what kind of mind is capable of repeatedly attacking newborn babies, especially ones so helpless as prem babies.

Was reading that one of the lines of questioning/theories the prosecution had was that she was doing it because it got her attention/sympathy when children died or got into difficulties on her watch and there was one doctor in particular (who was married with kids) who she had a thing for and messaged a lot for support around these cases - she apparently broke down when he came to give evidence in the case.
I'd be surprised, the Dr was clearly interested and you don't need to kill a baby to get his attention as (a) she already had it and (b) just send a nude. I wonder how the Dr got legal anonymity though.

I think it'll be because she got off on it. The stuff about searching for the kids parents on Facebook on significant milestones etc and giving them baby boxes and taking pictures of them etc. They say there was some evidence she felt stifled by her clingy parents so presumably was enjoying seeing parents powerless and suffering to get back at her own parents. It's always the parents when someone goes as cuckoo as this witch has gone.
I like neeps
Posts: 3789
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am

Paddington Bear wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 9:17 am
SaintK wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 8:28 am
Paddington Bear wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 7:53 am The story coming out about how this wasn’t investigated by NHS management is exceptionally hard to read.
They made doctors raising (correct) concerns about Letby apologise to her and attend mediation! They could have called in the police so much earlier but decided to cover it up. And those people walk free and will enjoy public sector pensions. But let’s talk about how she wasn’t in the dock for sentencing instead
The two medical directors of the trust at thge time both refused to be interviewed and put out lame apologies yesterday
The sentencing is on Monday, she should be dragged screaming to the dock so that the vistims parents can look her in the eye as she is sent down for the rest of her nastural born life
The truth seems to be they were happy enough to run the risk of more babies dying so long as it meant their department wasn’t investigated/in the public eye. And their careers roll on.

The dock issue I go back and forward on, and totally get the anguish of the families being denied their moment of justice. I see the law very very differently to people like the Secret Barrister, but I think he has a point about the fact that someone aiming to disrupt a trial will always find a way. She’ll have the rest of her life to think about whether she might have enjoyed one last look at something that isn’t a prison.
I think that a smart way of punishing the cowards who won't go into a sentencing hearing is that if you don't you can never get off basic regime in prison. The rest of your life in jail without a TV/without books etc.

Or just force them, on Monday you easily could have 5 officers go into her cell, lift her into a van, lift her into the dock. Then yes she could disrupt the trial as much as she wants to but it seems these killers have enough shame to want to avoid the sentencing they'd probably not kick off too much once in the dock anyway.

Wonder how safe a woman's prison is for someone like her. Baby killers aren't very welcome in a men's jail.
Joost
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:35 am

Seriously doubt she’s going to be anywhere near the general prison population any time soon!

From the terrorgraph:
Letby will be kept in the hospital wing of the prison – to assess her mental and physical health, as well as her safety from other prisoners – before being moved to a cell on her own.

“Her life for much of the next few years is going to be a lonely one. She’ll associate mostly with prison officers, her key worker in the prison and one or two cleaners – but much of that interaction will be through the hatch in her cell door.

“She won’t be able to do much, other than read newspapers or books and watch TV. She’ll get one hour of exercise by herself each day. She will be able to phone her family and receive visits from them, but the police will have to vet them first.”
Seems likely she’ll get a full life order, although very rare for women to get them (only Rose West and Myra Hindley that I can think of).
User avatar
Ymx
Posts: 8557
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:03 pm

Sounds like there is pressure to charge those nhs bosses with corporate manslaughter

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... plnews_d-5
Lucy Letby: Police urged to investigate hospital bosses for corporate manslaughter

Key prosecution witness in the trial of the serial killer nurse calls for inquiry into ‘grossly negligent’ executives

Josh Halliday, North of England correspondent
Sat 19 Aug 2023 18.16 BST

Hospital bosses who failed to act on concerns about the killer nurse Lucy Letby should be investigated by police for corporate manslaughter, says the prosecution’s key medical expert.

Speaking to the Observer, Dr Dewi Evans, whose evidence was central to the case against Letby, said executives were “grossly negligent” for not acting on fears about the nurse as she murdered seven babies and attempted to kill another six.

The Observer can also reveal that managers blamed other NHS services for many of the unexplained deaths and declared in a two-page review in May 2016 that there was “no evidence whatsoever against [Letby] other than coincidence”.

By that time, senior doctors had been raising the alarm for months after the nurse had murdered five newborns and attempted to kill another five. She went on to kill two triplet brothers and tried to kill an eighth baby the month after this document was produced.

Letby, who was in her mid-20s when she carried out the attacks, is expected to become only the third woman alive to be handed a whole-life term, meaning she will never be released from prison, when she is sentenced on Monday.

She was found guilty of murdering seven babies and attempting to kill another six at the Countess of Chester hospital in north-west England, making her the worst child serial killer in modern Britain.

The nurse, now 33, was cleared of two counts of attempted murder, and jurors were unable to reach verdicts on a further six charges after a 10-month trial at Manchester crown court.

Senior doctors first reported Letby’s link to unusual deaths and collapses to executives on 2 July 2015, after three babies died and another suffered a near-fatal deterioration in just two weeks the previous month.

Dr Dewi Evans, a consultant paediatrician, arriving at Manchester crown court.
Dr Dewi Evans, a consultant paediatrician, arriving at Manchester crown court. Photograph: Peter Byrne/PA
Several consultant paediatricians raised the alarm on a number of occasions over the following year as the number of suspicious incidents grew and Letby was found to be present at all of them. However, executives failed to launch a formal investigation until July 2016, more than a year after Letby’s link had first been raised. She was removed from the unit that month, but the police were not contacted until May 2017.

Evans, a consultant paediatrician who gave evidence in court about each of Letby’s 13 victims, said that three murders could have been prevented if hospital bosses had acted more urgently on concerns.

He said more should have been done when Letby’s first three victims died within 14 days in June 2015 and again when twins were attacked in August, one fatally and the other injected with insulin.

Evans, 74, a National Crime Agency-accredited expert who has given medical evidence in hundreds of cases since 1988, said he would ask Cheshire constabulary to investigate the hospital management’s “grossly irresponsible” failure to act.

He said: “They were grossly negligent. I shall write to Cheshire police and ask them, from what I have heard following the end of the trial, that I believe that we should now investigate a number of managerial people in relation to issues of corporate manslaughter.

“I think this is a matter that demands an investigation into corporate manslaughter. The police should also investigate the [hospital] in relation to criminal negligence.” He added: “Failing to act was grossly irresponsible – let’s make it as clear as that. We are talking about a serious emergency. It’s grossly irresponsible and, quite frankly, unbelievable [that they failed to act sooner].”

Evans called for the police investigation after being told about a review produced by the manager of the unit where Letby worked in May 2016 that stated: “There is no evidence whatsoever against LL [Lucy Letby] other than coincidence.”

skip past newsletter promotion
Sign up to First Edition
Free daily newsletter
Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you through the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning


Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion
By this point, senior doctors had been asking for “urgent” meetings with executives for months to discuss their concerns after five murders and the attempted murder of another five babies.

But nothing appears to have happened until this two-page document was produced in May 2016, effectively clearing Letby of any wrongdoing and blaming other NHS services for the deaths. Letby went on to murder two newborn triplet brothers and attempt to kill a sixth child the following month.

The review, which is being made public for the first time, states: “LL works full time and has the qualification in speciality. She is therefore more likely to be looking after the sickest infant on the unit. LL also avails herself to work overtime when the acuity or unit is over capacity.

“There are no performance management issues, and there are no members of staff that have complained to me or others regarding her performance. I have found LL to be diligent and have excellent standards within the clinical area.”

It goes on to state that there had been a higher death rate on the unit in the year to May 2016 but blamed other NHS services for a number of the mortalities: “The Cheshire and Mersey transport service have been involved in a few of these mortalities and they may have survived if the service was running adequately.

The Countess of Chester Hospital, where Lucy Letby murdered seven babies.
The Countess of Chester Hospital, where Lucy Letby murdered seven babies. Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images
“Alder Hey children’s hospital’s failure in facilitating a cot also added to the complexities of these mortalities. If there had been a bed sooner the infant may not have died.” Several of the executives involved, who have now left the Countess of Chester hospital, said they would cooperate fully with the independent inquiry announced by the health secretary, Steve Barclay, on Friday.

The Countess of Cheshire hospital NHS foundation trust has declined to answer questions about its handling of the case but its executive medical director, Dr Nigel Scawn, said in a statement on Friday: “I speak for the whole Trust when I say how deeply saddened and appalled we are at Lucy Letby’s crimes.

“We are extremely sorry that these crimes were committed at our hospital and our thoughts continue to be with all the families and loved ones of the babies who came to harm or died. We cannot begin to understand what they have been through.”
User avatar
Uncle fester
Posts: 4919
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:42 pm

I wonder if there are more deaths that they can't specifically pin on her?
tc27
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:18 pm

Uncle fester wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 9:12 pm I wonder if there are more deaths that they can't specifically pin on her?
From the sound of it probably quite a few more.

I caveat this by saying I think she is guilty - but from what I have read about prosecution case the actual link between her and even the deaths she was found guilty of is circumstantial.

I can see why the jury had to deliberate for so long and where unable to reach a verdict or went not guilty on a few of the deaths.
dpedin
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:35 am

Ymx wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 8:45 pm Sounds like there is pressure to charge those nhs bosses with corporate manslaughter

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... plnews_d-5
Lucy Letby: Police urged to investigate hospital bosses for corporate manslaughter

Key prosecution witness in the trial of the serial killer nurse calls for inquiry into ‘grossly negligent’ executives

Josh Halliday, North of England correspondent
Sat 19 Aug 2023 18.16 BST

Hospital bosses who failed to act on concerns about the killer nurse Lucy Letby should be investigated by police for corporate manslaughter, says the prosecution’s key medical expert.

Speaking to the Observer, Dr Dewi Evans, whose evidence was central to the case against Letby, said executives were “grossly negligent” for not acting on fears about the nurse as she murdered seven babies and attempted to kill another six.

The Observer can also reveal that managers blamed other NHS services for many of the unexplained deaths and declared in a two-page review in May 2016 that there was “no evidence whatsoever against [Letby] other than coincidence”.

By that time, senior doctors had been raising the alarm for months after the nurse had murdered five newborns and attempted to kill another five. She went on to kill two triplet brothers and tried to kill an eighth baby the month after this document was produced.

Letby, who was in her mid-20s when she carried out the attacks, is expected to become only the third woman alive to be handed a whole-life term, meaning she will never be released from prison, when she is sentenced on Monday.

She was found guilty of murdering seven babies and attempting to kill another six at the Countess of Chester hospital in north-west England, making her the worst child serial killer in modern Britain.

The nurse, now 33, was cleared of two counts of attempted murder, and jurors were unable to reach verdicts on a further six charges after a 10-month trial at Manchester crown court.

Senior doctors first reported Letby’s link to unusual deaths and collapses to executives on 2 July 2015, after three babies died and another suffered a near-fatal deterioration in just two weeks the previous month.

Dr Dewi Evans, a consultant paediatrician, arriving at Manchester crown court.
Dr Dewi Evans, a consultant paediatrician, arriving at Manchester crown court. Photograph: Peter Byrne/PA
Several consultant paediatricians raised the alarm on a number of occasions over the following year as the number of suspicious incidents grew and Letby was found to be present at all of them. However, executives failed to launch a formal investigation until July 2016, more than a year after Letby’s link had first been raised. She was removed from the unit that month, but the police were not contacted until May 2017.

Evans, a consultant paediatrician who gave evidence in court about each of Letby’s 13 victims, said that three murders could have been prevented if hospital bosses had acted more urgently on concerns.

He said more should have been done when Letby’s first three victims died within 14 days in June 2015 and again when twins were attacked in August, one fatally and the other injected with insulin.

Evans, 74, a National Crime Agency-accredited expert who has given medical evidence in hundreds of cases since 1988, said he would ask Cheshire constabulary to investigate the hospital management’s “grossly irresponsible” failure to act.

He said: “They were grossly negligent. I shall write to Cheshire police and ask them, from what I have heard following the end of the trial, that I believe that we should now investigate a number of managerial people in relation to issues of corporate manslaughter.

“I think this is a matter that demands an investigation into corporate manslaughter. The police should also investigate the [hospital] in relation to criminal negligence.” He added: “Failing to act was grossly irresponsible – let’s make it as clear as that. We are talking about a serious emergency. It’s grossly irresponsible and, quite frankly, unbelievable [that they failed to act sooner].”

Evans called for the police investigation after being told about a review produced by the manager of the unit where Letby worked in May 2016 that stated: “There is no evidence whatsoever against LL [Lucy Letby] other than coincidence.”

skip past newsletter promotion
Sign up to First Edition
Free daily newsletter
Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you through the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning


Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion
By this point, senior doctors had been asking for “urgent” meetings with executives for months to discuss their concerns after five murders and the attempted murder of another five babies.

But nothing appears to have happened until this two-page document was produced in May 2016, effectively clearing Letby of any wrongdoing and blaming other NHS services for the deaths. Letby went on to murder two newborn triplet brothers and attempt to kill a sixth child the following month.

The review, which is being made public for the first time, states: “LL works full time and has the qualification in speciality. She is therefore more likely to be looking after the sickest infant on the unit. LL also avails herself to work overtime when the acuity or unit is over capacity.

“There are no performance management issues, and there are no members of staff that have complained to me or others regarding her performance. I have found LL to be diligent and have excellent standards within the clinical area.”

It goes on to state that there had been a higher death rate on the unit in the year to May 2016 but blamed other NHS services for a number of the mortalities: “The Cheshire and Mersey transport service have been involved in a few of these mortalities and they may have survived if the service was running adequately.

The Countess of Chester Hospital, where Lucy Letby murdered seven babies.
The Countess of Chester Hospital, where Lucy Letby murdered seven babies. Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images
“Alder Hey children’s hospital’s failure in facilitating a cot also added to the complexities of these mortalities. If there had been a bed sooner the infant may not have died.” Several of the executives involved, who have now left the Countess of Chester hospital, said they would cooperate fully with the independent inquiry announced by the health secretary, Steve Barclay, on Friday.

The Countess of Cheshire hospital NHS foundation trust has declined to answer questions about its handling of the case but its executive medical director, Dr Nigel Scawn, said in a statement on Friday: “I speak for the whole Trust when I say how deeply saddened and appalled we are at Lucy Letby’s crimes.

“We are extremely sorry that these crimes were committed at our hospital and our thoughts continue to be with all the families and loved ones of the babies who came to harm or died. We cannot begin to understand what they have been through.”
I see Alison Kelly, Nursing Director involved at the time and who now works elsewhere has been suspended by NHS England.

It is important to remember that many of the NHS Bosses/Managers involved in this case were in fact senior doctors and nurses who were in leadership roles such as Medical Director or Nurse Director. To do these jobs they will have had to have full current GMC or NMC registration and it may well be that their professional bodies will review their fitness to practice and revoke their registrations in light of this case.It is the minimum I would expect.

Both these folk/roles would advise the CEO and other non clinical managers on professional issues involving clinical staff and recommend required actions. I would find it unbelievable if the CEO had been told by either/both of these folk that Letby was a clinical risk but the CEO decided not to act on this, it would be career suicide. However I suspect that there would have been discussion but that the MD and ND had told the CEO, or asked by the CEO, to 'manage' the situation via their professional roles and responsibilities. If this had been done with the knowledge that there had been a higher number than expected of unexplained deaths in the unit then this is a serious and possibly criminal act!
User avatar
assfly
Posts: 4626
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:30 am

This is just mind-blowing. How can anybody do this sort of thing? Just sick, sick, sick.
User avatar
Torquemada 1420
Posts: 11925
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
Location: Hut 8

Ymx wrote: Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:38 pm Burning on a stake would be appropriate for this sick bitch.
Did you think before you wrote that?

I'd be more inclined to burn those who ignored all the signs of the nutter. Criminal negligence doesn't seem the half of it.
User avatar
Torquemada 1420
Posts: 11925
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
Location: Hut 8

assfly wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 9:40 am This is just mind-blowing. How can anybody do this sort of thing? Just sick, sick, sick.
Quite. As per Sandy etc's post, she's clearly unhinged and a massive danger to society. There will always be instances of disturbed people in society but it beggars belief that in a supposedly highly regulated system where patient welfare is the principle reason for its existence, that this could have gone on for so long.
tc27
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:18 pm

13 whole life sentences.
User avatar
Sandstorm
Posts: 11668
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:05 pm
Location: England

tc27 wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:06 pm 13 whole life sentences.
Prison is too good for a misery-guts like her. Rather send her to 100 Creamfields raves where everyone is off their tits on disco biscuits.
User avatar
Hal Jordan
Posts: 4583
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:48 pm
Location: Sector 2814

To no one's surprise, the Populist Party (formerly the Conservative and Unionist Party) has leapt upon her non appearance to clamour for a law forcing defendants to be required to be present during the victim impact statements, and that the use of force should be specifically authorised to drag them into court, if necessary chained up Hannibal Lecter style, should they refuse. 
User avatar
assfly
Posts: 4626
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 6:30 am

I'd imagine any parent who lost their baby at any hospital in the UK over the last 20-odd years must be asking themselves questions.
tc27
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:18 pm

Hal Jordan wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:10 pm To no one's surprise, the Populist Party (formerly the Conservative and Unionist Party) has leapt upon her non appearance to clamour for a law forcing defendants to be required to be present during the victim impact statements, and that the use of force should be specifically authorised to drag them into court, if necessary chained up Hannibal Lecter style, should they refuse. 
In principal I think its a reasonable idea. I think a one way video link would be an easy solution.
inactionman
Posts: 3398
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:37 am

assfly wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:13 pm I'd imagine any parent who lost their baby at any hospital in the UK over the last 20-odd years must be asking themselves questions.
I can't imagine what is going through parents' heads. Everything about this is awful, but it's just such an horrific abuse of trust.
dpedin
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:35 am

Hal Jordan wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:10 pm To no one's surprise, the Populist Party (formerly the Conservative and Unionist Party) has leapt upon her non appearance to clamour for a law forcing defendants to be required to be present during the victim impact statements, and that the use of force should be specifically authorised to drag them into court, if necessary chained up Hannibal Lecter style, should they refuse. 
It is a good deflection from the real issues that this case presents. Tie them up, hang them, throw away the keys, let them rot, we want to see them suffer, etc is perfect red meat for their supporters. I imagine most of the poor parents don't really want to see the obviously mentally ill Letby again they just want answers to the more difficult but more important questions about how did this happen, who failed to act on the clear and obvious clinical audit data, which professionals didn't do their jobs, why were senior clinicians and managers more concerned about repetitional loss then child deaths, why were warnings from senior paediatricians ignored, etc - Who let us down in allowing a killer to work in a neonatal unit and how will they be held to account?

I honestly don't give a shit if these ill, sad, sickos are in court to hear their sentences or not, they will find out anyway and have many, many years to ponder on it. I don't want to risk the prison and court staff in bringing often violent and dangerous people into court under duress (granted not relevant in this case but is often an issue) nor do I want these sickos to have a platform in front of their victims relatives to kick off, to laugh and smirk or make their sad points. The sooner they are sentenced and locked up the better.
tc27
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:18 pm

dpedin wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:27 pm
Hal Jordan wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:10 pm To no one's surprise, the Populist Party (formerly the Conservative and Unionist Party) has leapt upon her non appearance to clamour for a law forcing defendants to be required to be present during the victim impact statements, and that the use of force should be specifically authorised to drag them into court, if necessary chained up Hannibal Lecter style, should they refuse. 
It is a good deflection from the real issues that this case presents. Tie them up, hang them, throw away the keys, let them rot, we want to see them suffer, etc is perfect red meat for their supporters. I imagine most of the poor parents don't really want to see the obviously mentally ill Letby again they just want answers to the more difficult but more important questions about how did this happen, who failed to act on the clear and obvious clinical audit data, which professionals didn't do their jobs, why were senior clinicians and managers more concerned about repetitional loss then child deaths, why were warnings from senior paediatricians ignored, etc - Who let us down in allowing a killer to work in a neonatal unit and how will they be held to account?

I honestly don't give a shit if these ill, sad, sickos are in court to hear their sentences or not, they will find out anyway and have many, many years to ponder on it. I don't want to risk the prison and court staff in bringing often violent and dangerous people into court under duress (granted not relevant in this case but is often an issue) nor do I want these sickos to have a platform in front of their victims relatives to kick off, to laugh and smirk or make their sad points. The sooner they are sentenced and locked up the better.


Presumably those parents who came in person to deliver their impact statements were quite prepared and expected to have Letby in the dock to hear what they said.

Sure there's the second part of this to follow but the trial and sentencing of the actual killer is distinct from that and as important in its own right.
Glaston
Posts: 484
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:35 am

Hal Jordan wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:10 pm To no one's surprise, the Populist Party (formerly the Conservative and Unionist Party) has leapt upon her non appearance to clamour for a law forcing defendants to be required to be present during the victim impact statements, and that the use of force should be specifically authorised to drag them into court, if necessary chained up Hannibal Lecter style, should they refuse. 

FFS you prick
User avatar
Calculon
Posts: 1820
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:25 pm

tc27 wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 1:06 pm
dpedin wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:27 pm
Hal Jordan wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:10 pm To no one's surprise, the Populist Party (formerly the Conservative and Unionist Party) has leapt upon her non appearance to clamour for a law forcing defendants to be required to be present during the victim impact statements, and that the use of force should be specifically authorised to drag them into court, if necessary chained up Hannibal Lecter style, should they refuse. 
It is a good deflection from the real issues that this case presents. Tie them up, hang them, throw away the keys, let them rot, we want to see them suffer, etc is perfect red meat for their supporters. I imagine most of the poor parents don't really want to see the obviously mentally ill Letby again they just want answers to the more difficult but more important questions about how did this happen, who failed to act on the clear and obvious clinical audit data, which professionals didn't do their jobs, why were senior clinicians and managers more concerned about repetitional loss then child deaths, why were warnings from senior paediatricians ignored, etc - Who let us down in allowing a killer to work in a neonatal unit and how will they be held to account?

I honestly don't give a shit if these ill, sad, sickos are in court to hear their sentences or not, they will find out anyway and have many, many years to ponder on it. I don't want to risk the prison and court staff in bringing often violent and dangerous people into court under duress (granted not relevant in this case but is often an issue) nor do I want these sickos to have a platform in front of their victims relatives to kick off, to laugh and smirk or make their sad points. The sooner they are sentenced and locked up the better.


Presumably those parents who came in person to deliver their impact statements were quite prepared and expected to have Letby in the dock o hear what they said.

Sure there's the second part of this to follow but the trial and sentencing of the actual killer is distinct from that and as important in its own right.
So how does that work on a practical level, psychopath gets dragged into dock, victims statement starts, psychopath starts behaving badly - smirking, laughy, screaming pulling faces. There is a lengthy recess while psychopath is removed strapped down, gagged and injected with a seditive. Psychopath gets wheeled back in and victims statement continues. Doesn't seem very practical. There was also a point made on radio that the reason victims of crime don't decide on this is because prosecution is brought in the name of the state, not in the name of victims. For the good reasons of impartiality and to demonstrate justice is not just about retribution.
User avatar
Torquemada 1420
Posts: 11925
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
Location: Hut 8

assfly wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:13 pm I'd imagine any parent who lost their baby at any hospital in the UK over the last 20-odd years must be asking themselves questions.
Negligence will have accounted for massive amounts more than vanilla murder.
tc27
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:18 pm

Calculon wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 2:12 pm
tc27 wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 1:06 pm
dpedin wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:27 pm

It is a good deflection from the real issues that this case presents. Tie them up, hang them, throw away the keys, let them rot, we want to see them suffer, etc is perfect red meat for their supporters. I imagine most of the poor parents don't really want to see the obviously mentally ill Letby again they just want answers to the more difficult but more important questions about how did this happen, who failed to act on the clear and obvious clinical audit data, which professionals didn't do their jobs, why were senior clinicians and managers more concerned about repetitional loss then child deaths, why were warnings from senior paediatricians ignored, etc - Who let us down in allowing a killer to work in a neonatal unit and how will they be held to account?

I honestly don't give a shit if these ill, sad, sickos are in court to hear their sentences or not, they will find out anyway and have many, many years to ponder on it. I don't want to risk the prison and court staff in bringing often violent and dangerous people into court under duress (granted not relevant in this case but is often an issue) nor do I want these sickos to have a platform in front of their victims relatives to kick off, to laugh and smirk or make their sad points. The sooner they are sentenced and locked up the better.


Presumably those parents who came in person to deliver their impact statements were quite prepared and expected to have Letby in the dock o hear what they said.

Sure there's the second part of this to follow but the trial and sentencing of the actual killer is distinct from that and as important in its own right.
So how does that work on a practical level, psychopath gets dragged into dock, victims statement starts, psychopath starts behaving badly - smirking, laughy, screaming pulling faces. There is a lengthy recess while psychopath is removed strapped down, gagged and injected with a seditive. Psychopath gets wheeled back in and victims statement continues. Doesn't seem very practical. There was also a point made on radio that the reason victims of crime don't decide on this is because prosecution is brought in the name of the state, not in the name of victims. For the good reasons of impartiality and to demonstrate justice is not just about retribution.
Prisoner who could be disruptive sits between two prison officers in an adjacent room (or remand center which already have these facilities) watching everything via one way video link.

Expecting a convicted prisoner to hear the sentence (and impact statements) does not objectively compromise the impartiality of the justice system - stop being silly.
Slick
Posts: 13217
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:58 pm

tc27 wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 9:26 am
Uncle fester wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 9:12 pm I wonder if there are more deaths that they can't specifically pin on her?
From the sound of it probably quite a few more.

I caveat this by saying I think she is guilty - but from what I have read about prosecution case the actual link between her and even the deaths she was found guilty of is circumstantial.

I can see why the jury had to deliberate for so long and where unable to reach a verdict or went not guilty on a few of the deaths.
Not for a second suggesting you are going down that way, but already an annoying number of people on social media concocting some kind of conspiracy theory.
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
Line6 HXFX
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2020 9:31 am

In the words of Richard Burton, about his distrust of Doctors...."only 3% of those who graduate Theatre and acting school, get jobs and are considered competent enough to make a living acting. 100% of Dr's and Nurses that graduate med school are".
I like neeps
Posts: 3789
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am

Line6 HXFX wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 3:43 pm In the words of Richard Burton, about his distrust of Doctors...."only 3% of those who graduate Theatre and acting school, get jobs and are considered competent enough to make a living acting. 100% of Dr's and Nurses that graduate med school are".
With that type of reasoning no wonder Richard Burton is so good at making fantasy films. What a bananas thing to say.
tc27
Posts: 2559
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:18 pm

Slick wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 3:26 pm
tc27 wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 9:26 am
Uncle fester wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 9:12 pm I wonder if there are more deaths that they can't specifically pin on her?
From the sound of it probably quite a few more.

I caveat this by saying I think she is guilty - but from what I have read about prosecution case the actual link between her and even the deaths she was found guilty of is circumstantial.

I can see why the jury had to deliberate for so long and where unable to reach a verdict or went not guilty on a few of the deaths.
Not for a second suggesting you are going down that way, but already an annoying number of people on social media concocting some kind of conspiracy theory.
No not for a second.

She had a well regarded KC leading her defense team and the two expert witnesses were paid for (but not called w). And it sounded like the jury considered every charge carefully.
Blackmac
Posts: 3726
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 4:04 pm

Calculon wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 2:12 pm
tc27 wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 1:06 pm
dpedin wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:27 pm

It is a good deflection from the real issues that this case presents. Tie them up, hang them, throw away the keys, let them rot, we want to see them suffer, etc is perfect red meat for their supporters. I imagine most of the poor parents don't really want to see the obviously mentally ill Letby again they just want answers to the more difficult but more important questions about how did this happen, who failed to act on the clear and obvious clinical audit data, which professionals didn't do their jobs, why were senior clinicians and managers more concerned about repetitional loss then child deaths, why were warnings from senior paediatricians ignored, etc - Who let us down in allowing a killer to work in a neonatal unit and how will they be held to account?

I honestly don't give a shit if these ill, sad, sickos are in court to hear their sentences or not, they will find out anyway and have many, many years to ponder on it. I don't want to risk the prison and court staff in bringing often violent and dangerous people into court under duress (granted not relevant in this case but is often an issue) nor do I want these sickos to have a platform in front of their victims relatives to kick off, to laugh and smirk or make their sad points. The sooner they are sentenced and locked up the better.


Presumably those parents who came in person to deliver their impact statements were quite prepared and expected to have Letby in the dock o hear what they said.

Sure there's the second part of this to follow but the trial and sentencing of the actual killer is distinct from that and as important in its own right.
So how does that work on a practical level, psychopath gets dragged into dock, victims statement starts, psychopath starts behaving badly - smirking, laughy, screaming pulling faces. There is a lengthy recess while psychopath is removed strapped down, gagged and injected with a seditive. Psychopath gets wheeled back in and victims statement continues. Doesn't seem very practical. There was also a point made on radio that the reason victims of crime don't decide on this is because prosecution is brought in the name of the state, not in the name of victims. For the good reasons of impartiality and to demonstrate justice is not just about retribution.
Yeah, people should be careful what they wish for. There have been various laws for years so that the police can remove criminals from jail for interview and other legal processes. These allow force if necessary. In practice who is really interested risking injury and the huge disruption to the jail system to do that, especially with the obvious negative outcomes it is going to produce.
User avatar
Uncle fester
Posts: 4919
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:42 pm

tc27 wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 9:26 am
Uncle fester wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 9:12 pm I wonder if there are more deaths that they can't specifically pin on her?
From the sound of it probably quite a few more.

I caveat this by saying I think she is guilty - but from what I have read about prosecution case the actual link between her and even the deaths she was found guilty of is circumstantial.

I can see why the jury had to deliberate for so long and where unable to reach a verdict or went not guilty on a few of the deaths.
I have a policy of avoiding coverage of trials until a verdict is reached. Started it with PJ and it served well so kept it going.

So sat down on Friday to read about the trial and my starting position was a little like you describe above. As in "how could they establish a clear link" but once you did into it, it's really clear she did it. She's on every shift where it happened and was caught messing with the feeding tube of one baby. Then you have the diary found in her house.
User avatar
Uncle fester
Posts: 4919
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:42 pm

Also that married doc who was probably borking her... :wtf
User avatar
Sandstorm
Posts: 11668
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:05 pm
Location: England

Uncle fester wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:16 pm Also that married doc who was probably borking her... :wtf
Doctors fuck hot nurses all the time. Crazy women are great in bed.
User avatar
Uncle fester
Posts: 4919
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:42 pm

Sandstorm wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:34 pm
Uncle fester wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:16 pm Also that married doc who was probably borking her... :wtf
Doctors fuck hot nurses all the time. Crazy women are great in bed.
Does she qualify on the first bit?

Can imagine a few awkward conversations at home.
User avatar
Calculon
Posts: 1820
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:25 pm

tc27 wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 2:29 pm

Expecting a convicted prisoner to hear the sentence (and impact statements) does not objectively compromise the impartiality of the justice system - stop being silly.
This former barrister's point was that the decision on wether the convicted prisoner should be in the dock to hear their sentence and impact statements should reside with the Judge , not the victim ot the victim's family.
Joost
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:35 am

Uncle fester wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:37 pm
Sandstorm wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:34 pm
Uncle fester wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:16 pm Also that married doc who was probably borking her... :wtf
Doctors fuck hot nurses all the time. Crazy women are great in bed.
Does she qualify on the first bit?

Can imagine a few awkward conversations at home.
He (and the other hospital stuff who appeared as witnesses) managed to get anonymity orders when giving evidence, gave their evidence behind screens etc - quite controversial, as that usually only happens where there’s a threat to life or similar.

Though the press did mention that he had two children, one of whom was doing A-levels and the other doing GCSEs during the trial, so likely his missus has cottoned-on - awkward!
inactionman
Posts: 3398
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:37 am

To no-one's great surprise, the police are launching a corporate manslaughter investigation.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... y-hospital

I'd say there's a few senior managers who are further regretting asking Consultants to apologise to her.
User avatar
Ymx
Posts: 8557
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:03 pm

inactionman wrote: Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:57 pm To no-one's great surprise, the police are launching a corporate manslaughter investigation.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... y-hospital

I'd say there's a few senior managers who are further regretting asking Consultants to apologise to her.
I mean, how dreadful would you feel if you were one of the ones pouring cold water on the whistle blowing. Well, they bloody deserve to. You can measure it in subsequent babies dying.

On another note, how fvcking sick is it that that horrible Shola race baiter, used the whole thing as set for her to launch a white privilege rhetoric. Despicable behaviour.
User avatar
C69
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:42 pm

Ymx wrote: Wed Oct 04, 2023 1:05 pm
inactionman wrote: Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:57 pm To no-one's great surprise, the police are launching a corporate manslaughter investigation.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... y-hospital

I'd say there's a few senior managers who are further regretting asking Consultants to apologise to her.
I mean, how dreadful would you feel if you were one of the ones pouring cold water on the whistle blowing. Well, they bloody deserve to. You can measure it in subsequent babies dying.

On another note, how fvcking sick is it that that horrible Shola race baiter, used the whole thing as set for her to launch a white privilege rhetoric. Despicable behaviour.
I have absolutely no doubt that this will happen again. The NHS is not fit for purpose in many areas at present outside of the Major cities and its getting worse.
User avatar
Ymx
Posts: 8557
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 7:03 pm

That’s horrifying to hear. What’s exactly going wrong?

I just had a quick look at ONS and it’s not like it’s lack of spending. Ever increasing % of GDP

Image

Is it more a rotting culture in it/terrible mismanagement??
Post Reply