51–60 of 93 posts
It’s statistically improbably to get 7 sons, but I’m certain that throughout history that’s happened at least once.
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.
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.
She should be in prison if guilty of these horrific crimes. However, sending an innocent person to prison for them is substantially worse than no one going to prison for them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I went down the rabbit hole on this a couple of months ago. Some of the details are a bit hazy in my memory now as it was about 2 months ago, but in the interest of playing devil's advocate... > the suspicious deaths all lined up perfectly with Lucy Letby's shifts Once a nurse has been around the ward for long enough to have seen several deaths, you can produce a table showing a set of baby deaths correlating to any…
The C-peptide level in Child F's discharge letter have been called "the golden thread" of the case by the leading Detective Sergeant of the investigation Paul Hughes.
The deputy senior investigating officer DCI Nicola Evans called it a "real milestone" in the investigation.
The Guardian called it "a smoking gun in this medically complex case".
Dr Stephen Breary, the hospital's neonatal unit head consultant, said about its discovery: "If there was a iota of doubt, it was removed then."
I think it is fair to say that if this letter would not have been found, after already a year of rather fruitless investigation, there would quite likely not have been a case.
Yet, the very same Dr Breary, who was also under pressure because of the apparent rise of deaths in his department, came up with this document more than two and a half years after the child was released and just a couple of days before Letby was about to return to his department against his will.
I'm not saying Dr Breary is under suspicion or Letby is innocent, but think the discharge letter should have seen more scrutiny.
My point is that I don't think there is anything in this case that really holds water if you seriously probe it and if you pile up flawed arguments - no matter how many - it will not bring you any closer to the truth. If I can wagger a prediction, and I already said this when Letby was convicted: I see a successful appeal and this verdict be shredded. Not because I think Letby is innocent, but because a working legal system should not put anyone behind bars for life with such a weak case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Your second attempted point is nonsense in a working hospital setting in general, or in a courtroom as far as evidence is concerned. Your bookend points are the definition of particularly weak circumstantial evidence. Also known as statistical illusion. She should be in prison if guilty of these horrific crimes. However, sending an innocent person to prison for them is substantially worse than no one going to prison…
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.
To a large extent they didn't have to involve statistics. There was plenty of better evidence in the Letby case. However, the public perception around the time of the trial was substantially different. Especially early on, the media focused strongly on the fact that it "could not possibly be a coincidence". Reading the trial coverage I got a very strong feeling of déjà vu, seeing the coverage pretty much mirroring th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went down the rabbit hole on this a couple of months ago. Some of the details are a bit hazy in my memory now as it was about 2 months ago, but in the interest of playing devil's advocate... > the suspicious deaths all lined up perfectly with Lucy Letby's shifts Once a nurse has been around the ward for long enough to have seen several deaths, you can produce a table showing a set of baby deaths correlating to any…
I'd like to add another point that struck me as odd when going down the same rabbit hole: The C-peptide level in Child F's discharge letter have been called "the golden thread" of the case by the leading Detective Sergeant of the investigation Paul Hughes. The deputy senior investigating officer DCI Nicola Evans called it a "real milestone" in the investigation. The Guardian called it "a smoking gun in this medically…
The "smoking gun" turned up inconveniently late, in February of the following year, when he'd been asked to go through the records of the kids who survived.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And she took home documents from several of those patients, which she'd have no ordinary reason to have fished out of the trash.
And the little old thing that she wrote "I killed them on purpose" on a post-it-note at her house.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd like to add another point that struck me as odd when going down the same rabbit hole: The C-peptide level in Child F's discharge letter have been called "the golden thread" of the case by the leading Detective Sergeant of the investigation Paul Hughes. The deputy senior investigating officer DCI Nicola Evans called it a "real milestone" in the investigation. The Guardian called it "a smoking gun in this medically…
Apart from the general ridiculousness of insinuating that of all records someone might adulterate or invent, he would pick a digital copy of a discharge letter sent to an third party whose other baby had died , your timelines are all wrong. Breary got the police involved in April 2017. Nobody thinks it's a coincidence that it was a few days before Letby was due to return to the ward; stopping her from returning to th…
That's what you say. I neither said nor insinuated any of that.
The case is supported by two main pillars. One is the idea that the stats support suspicions clusters of deaths. I expected that to be challenged back in August and we see it happen now.
The second pillar is the "smoking gun" of Child F's raised peptide levels. In my opinion this pillar is far from being strong enough to support this case alone. If we don't see any additional props appear, I expect it to crumble in the appeal.
"your timelines are all wrong."
- August 2015: Child F blood sample [2]
- February 2017: Police investigation launched
"On the night before Valentine’s Day in February 2018, nearly a year after police launched their investigation" [1]
- July 2016: Letby removed from frontline care [1]
- February 2018: Smoking gun found [1]
- May 2017: Letby scheduled to return [1]
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/aug/19/trust-me-im-...
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2023/aug/...