While the statisticians are right to be cautious about clusters of deaths => serial killer, we also have to remember that a 9 month trial presented lots of evidence to a jury, they deliberated for over a week, and returned seven guilty verdicts. Unless you were also sitting at that trial or have read every line of court transcript, it would be very unwise to start claiming there's a miscarriage of justice.
Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
11–20 of 93 posts
Re: Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
#12While the statisticians are right to be cautious about clusters of deaths => serial killer, we also have to remember that a 9 month trial presented lots of evidence to a jury, they deliberated for over a week, and returned seven guilty verdicts. Unless you were also sitting at that trial or have read every line of court transcript, it would be very unwise to start claiming there's a miscarriage of justice.
edit: wrong, can't delete
Re: Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
#13While the statisticians are right to be cautious about clusters of deaths => serial killer, we also have to remember that a 9 month trial presented lots of evidence to a jury, they deliberated for over a week, and returned seven guilty verdicts. Unless you were also sitting at that trial or have read every line of court transcript, it would be very unwise to start claiming there's a miscarriage of justice.
Those arguments included that the suspicious deaths all lined up perfectly with Lucy Letby's shifts, that she was often caught interacting with those babies when she had been instructed not to, and that when she was taken off the ward the deaths instantly stopped. That is a level of causality checking far stronger than most Bayesian analyses.
Re: Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
#14While the statisticians are right to be cautious about clusters of deaths => serial killer, we also have to remember that a 9 month trial presented lots of evidence to a jury, they deliberated for over a week, and returned seven guilty verdicts. Unless you were also sitting at that trial or have read every line of court transcript, it would be very unwise to start claiming there's a miscarriage of justice.
edit: wrong, can't delete
[deleted]
Re: Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
#15> There are obvious parallels with the Lethby case. Statements in de Berk’s diary about ‘a very great secret’ and a ‘compulsion’ on a day that a patient had died were given a sinister interpretation. They didn't include any examples of the parallel. This goes over some of the notes: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/oct/13/lucy-letby-p... > On another, she wrote “I am a horrible evil person” and on another in…
[deletia, cuz I misread the article.]
Re: Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
#16> There are obvious parallels with the Lethby case. Statements in de Berk’s diary about ‘a very great secret’ and a ‘compulsion’ on a day that a patient had died were given a sinister interpretation. They didn't include any examples of the parallel. This goes over some of the notes: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/oct/13/lucy-letby-p... > On another, she wrote “I am a horrible evil person” and on another in…
On the afternoon of the conviction, there was an expert criminal psychiatrist on BBC radio who had been following the trial closely. Apparently those notes, though they made all the headlines, played little part in her conviction, and are typical for someone suffering stress &| depression.
The thing that did for her apparently were messages she had sent some of the parents, the times of which contradicted her testimony she had given the police and put her clearly in the frame when she had given them an alibi.
So I'm not sure the clusters of "unlikely" cases played much role either, other than alerting authorities to there potentially being foul play.
Re: Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
#17I think this is a great example of a justice system working as intended. The statistical evidence alone likely would not have convicted her, but it could have exonerated or cast doubt on her being the perpetrator. It did not, for reasons which were obvious to the jury.
Re: Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
#18> There are obvious parallels with the Lethby case. Statements in de Berk’s diary about ‘a very great secret’ and a ‘compulsion’ on a day that a patient had died were given a sinister interpretation. They didn't include any examples of the parallel. This goes over some of the notes: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/oct/13/lucy-letby-p... > On another, she wrote “I am a horrible evil person” and on another in…
[deletia, cuz I misread the article.]
No it wasn't. See my sibling comment in this thread. At worst, it alerted authorities to there potentially being foul play. Her actual conviction was based on other factors.
Re: Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
#19> There are obvious parallels with the Lethby case. Statements in de Berk’s diary about ‘a very great secret’ and a ‘compulsion’ on a day that a patient had died were given a sinister interpretation. They didn't include any examples of the parallel. This goes over some of the notes: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/oct/13/lucy-letby-p... > On another, she wrote “I am a horrible evil person” and on another in…
[deletia, cuz I misread the article.]
[deleted]
Re: Experts warn Letby inquiry of misreading stats to explain 'suspicious' deaths
#20While the statisticians are right to be cautious about clusters of deaths => serial killer, we also have to remember that a 9 month trial presented lots of evidence to a jury, they deliberated for over a week, and returned seven guilty verdicts. Unless you were also sitting at that trial or have read every line of court transcript, it would be very unwise to start claiming there's a miscarriage of justice.
Yeah, this is not a case of someone being convicted based on dodgy statistical data. Indeed she was found not guilty on a large number of other deaths.
There was corroborating evidence which lead to her conviction.