https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-65960514
The 33-year-old is convicted of killing babies at the hospital neonatal unit where she worked.
This whole story is the most insane, fucked up thing I have read in years.
Especially the companion story, Hospital bosses ignored months of doctors' warnings about Lucy Letby. The hospital execs seem almost as callous as the murderer. Holy shit. You have to have some sort of psychological or empathetic disorder as manager or director to fail to act when babies are dying like flies, there is one common factor, and your response isn't to immediately investigate and take that common factor out of the equation as a safety measure.
They just refused to act for 3 years (where 17 babies died mysteriously or had near-fatal unexplained events in one year) - except silence, threaten and bully the doctor and seven (!) pediatric consultants who repeatedly raised the alarm and called for outside investigation. Since the murderer was removed from the neonatal ward in 2016, there has apparently been 1 baby death. In total, in 7 years.
I don't know how you would live with yourself knowing that you actively aided a serial killer by refusing to listen to multiple people warning you about them and pleading with you to act.
This is a huge point. They knew. They shushed it up. They need to be all brought to account as well.
Letby put in a formal complaint saying that she was being bullied by the doctors who were complaining about her. A panel upheld her complaint and the doctors had to apologise.
Gah
Yes, it's impossible that they didn't at least entertain the idea that she was guilty with so many incidents and so many people speaking out. And the execs immediate response to that is to... silence the whistleblowers, to maintain the reputation of the hospital. Absolutely repulsive. They come very close to being accessories to the murders, in my opinion.
It has to be Criminal negligence at the very least.
The reviews they themselves commissioned (when they should have gone to the police) said at least 4 deaths should be forensically investigated and they ignored it.
Well in capitalist society daddy business man can do no wrong.
But yeah they should be held criminally respossible and there are laws to prosecute this under, it just won't happen.
The people running this "public" enteprise appear to be acting just vanilla business men 101 tho
Having seen the top end of an NHS trust some of it is similar to leadership at a big business in terms of attitudes. They care much more about reputational damage than dealing with problems sometimes.
They just refused to act for 3 years (where 17 babies died mysteriously or had near-fatal unexplained events in one year) - except silence, threaten and bully the doctor and seven (!) pediatric consultants who repeatedly raised the alarm and called for outside investigation. Since the murderer was removed from the neonatal ward in 2016, there has apparently been 1 baby death. In total, in 7 years.
They also made them write and sign a written apology to her.
And try to force them to attend a mediation session with the murderer, actively discourage them from going to the police... Fail to report the baby deaths appropriately to the NHS, fail to do the initial investigation about the first three deaths the executive team had decided on. Fail to present to the board of trustees that the conclusion of two external reviews were that some of the baby deaths should be forensically investigated. Fail to do any investigation. Refuse to reassign the murderer for months while more murders and attempted murders happen, then reassign them into a position where they have access to manipulate the narrative. And additionally order the whistleblowers to cease email communications about the issue...
I think I missed a few things as well, there's just too many things wrong in this picture.
Some of these chief execs may be corporate psychopaths themselves, and they'd be more interested in arse covering and making sure they're protected than having external powerful strangers poking thru everything they do.
I think what makes me even sadder is that Ian Chambers (one of the directors at the hospital where Letby committed her crimes) left his job shortly after Letby was charged… only now to be interim director of nursing at a Salford NHS trust.
He spent years enabling Letby and covering up her crimes, gaslighting and silencing numerous senior doctors… only to go somewhere else and continue managing at a high level the moment that there was a risk of facing consequences for his failures.
I don’t know what’s more disturbing- the fact that Chambers moved on once he realised the jig was up, or that another trust ACTUALLY HIRED HIM. Disgusting.
You’d probably deny, deflect, and accuse everyone else of 20/20 hindsight, while taking the one piece of your soul that’s shouting no! I failed those kids! and packing it away in a closet with no door where no one can hear it scream.
This story is horrendous, most killers seem to gain something from it. But this woman just kills babies for no reason then hates herself for it afterwards. The whole story is just awful, what a terrible person.
Is there any attempt of a transcription of the note? It's almost impossible to read anything. She's very obviously unwell, to put it lightly. Still makes me wonder what is going through the heads of people like her in those moments.
Some of them I can't make out but the green one is readable if you read the left side first (it's in two columns).
It starts off saying the police think she did it but that's slander and discrimination, but then turns into admitting she did it and a lot about how she's a bad person and doesn't deserve her parents and will never have a family of her own.
Closest she comes to a motive in it is "I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them, I am a horrible evil person."
I'm genuinely curious, on the medical level does this count as mental illness? There must be a stronger word there is no curing this woman.
She's mentally unwell (to say the least) and she was put in charge of taking care of the most annoying creatures on earth. Not trying to justify her actions or shift the blame somewhere else, but maybe someone should have tested her; just in case she's a fucking psycho.
the most annoying creatures on earth
Tiny little premature babies annoy you???
Those tiny little 2 pound babies in their incubators being fed through feeding tubes?
I don't get it, they seem to me like one of the most harmless things on earth.
If you don't have much of a maternal instinct, crying babies are pretty annoying.
But for the majority of us who don't like kids, we just ignore it or if in charge of said infant, try to settle them rather than murder them.
I'm no psychologist but from what she's doing she seems to have a need for power and control, and surrounds herself with infants who are pretty easy to control. I would not be surprised if the killings occured after the victim began to cry (like any baby does) and she was unable to get them to stop, undermining her fragile self worth and sense of control and leading to a period of aggression, during which she kills the infant. Once it's done and the object of her aggression is gone her mind clears up and she realises what she's done, and enters a state of remorse. I doubt she does it because she wants to, I'm sure she's a very disturbed person, and her mental health issues are what prevented her from seeking help and from stopping. Of course some of the blame lies with the people who were aware and let it happen. It's like letting a hungry wolf into a daycare and doing nothing to stop it.
I can't say that I've followed this case closely, but I have never heard a reason why. Obviously, she's sick, but how do you do something like this "just because"?
Everyone has these intrusive negative thoughts like
"What if I drop this baby down the stairs?" "What if I punch this person in the mouth?" "What if I touch this woman's butt?" "Should I jump over this ledge?"
We never act upon them but still the majority of us have them. Any way that doesn't explain the why, I have no idea why she did this.
I guess sort of like Harold Shipman, they were both in a position to get away with their fucked up impulses without any negative repercussions.
The only thing I can even think is some super fucked up case of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. That or just pure evil.
Munchausen by proxy usually involves wanting attention from the resulting illness. Aka “look at me, I’m taking care of this sick child, poor me.” They usually don’t want to kill the victim because keeping them alive but sick is their goal.
This person did seem to pull the "woe is me" threads in her text messages to other colleagues, apparently seeking out sympathy.
Also, if they've got nothing but sick kids, then a death or near death is the next step up to garner sympathy because the status quo is sick kids.
This may be a good guess to why she might have done it.
Her scrawled note thing looks like the kind of insane ramblings you'd see in a horror game. There is something deeply, disturbingly wrong with that woman and I hope they get a shrink in there to see what the hell it is. Those families deserve to know why someone would do this kind of nightmare shit
Exactly right. We need to root out how this happened if we want to stop it happening again. That would probably include an honest long look at the NHS in general and whatever went on in her mind in particular. It's never going to be as simple as "this woman's a monster". We need to know what impulses she felt and what justifications she told herself, knowing it was the worst kind of wrong. And how did she get into a position where it was possible. The families deserve answers and we all need to know it can't happen again.
I wonder if she had sought out psychiatric help years ago but found a dead end.
Recently had a case in Denmark with a mass murderer who had been in loads of contact with psychiatric institutions but he apparently felt even more alone as a result.
I always wonder, how many single-time murderers are there for every serial killer? Like how many nurses, doctors or other people with an opportunity just took and murdered once. How many people might get away with that?
Every serial killer has his first kill ... but how many people have a first kill and then think ... nah, I'd rather not do that but don't get caught.
It also makes me wonder, if someone kills let's say 10 people, by let's say using lethal gas that remotely releases in all their apartments at the same time.
Does that make them a parallel killer?
What if you killed people, one at a time, all over the universe, travelling from crime scene to crime scene in a space bus? Would you be a universal serial bus killer?
Just to be clear, I mean "steal" the idea of "parallel killer" as joke. I'm a pirate, I steal IP. I'm not going to murder anyone. FBI you can retreat, confirm retreat.
Oh... haha yeah that's what I meant too. I gave my blessing for you to steal the joke, yeah that's the ticket!
You do mean the The Motion Picture Association, right? I do know them because they fought South Park, but eventually the approved the movie title "bigger, longer and uncut" .... because it wasn't as offensive as the word "Hell". (true story and I seriously think they didn't get it).
Is that the organisation you are threating me with?
Yes siree Bob, and if that don't do the trick, well... Let me introduce you to a little something called the RIAA. Ya toast now!
This is stupid (not in a you’re a jerk way or anything though). But there is a word for that: “spree killer”
Honestly? I'd bet there are a lot more who get caught after their first then there are who get away with one and then decide never to do it again. Almost every serial killer I've ever read about has described the urge to kill as something that increases over time, and that is temporarily relieved by killing but comes back faster and harder after each kill. I suppose there's natural selection bias against it, but I've never heard of anyone who killed once and then was satisfied.
Besides, anyone capable of thinking "I'd rather not get caught" after their first kill was capable of thinking that before their first kill too. I'm not saying it's impossible as defined, but by it's nature would be vanishingly rare.
WTF does that have to do with this article? You went out with some people from two countries and your opinion instantly makes everyone from those countries "sick in the head"? I'm Irish and can happily tell you that you're talking shit.
Dude, just fuck off. I usually play up how violent or crazy I am while online but I cant with you cause apparently youre going around schizo posting about entire nations being crazy while claiming to be normal.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Nurse Lucy Letby has been found guilty of murdering seven babies on a neonatal unit, making her the UK's most prolific child serial killer in modern times.
She was convicted following a two-year investigation by Cheshire Police into the alarming and unexplained rise in deaths and near-fatal collapses of premature babies at the hospital.
Her defence team argued the deaths and collapses were the result of "serial failures in care" in the unit and she was the victim of a "system that wanted to apportion blame when it failed".
Senior Crown Prosecutor Pascale Jones said the nurse "did her utmost to conceal her crimes, by varying the ways in which she repeatedly harmed babies in her care".
The lead consultant at the neonatal unit where Letby worked has told the BBC that hospital bosses failed to investigate allegations against the nurse and tried to silence doctors.
Prior to the government's announcement, Dr Nigel Scawn, executive medical director from the Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, said he was "deeply saddened and appalled" at Letby's crimes.
The original article contains 1,505 words, the summary contains 176 words. Saved 88%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Her defence team argued the deaths and collapses were the result of "serial failures in care" in the unit and she was the victim of a "system that wanted to apportion blame when it failed".
What
There are so much anger to the nurse on this thread, which is justified. Where are the pitchfork for the executives and managements? Looks like there was concerns early on, multiple discussion of foul play but no actions was taken. Imagine a PE teacher, another teacher has concern of foul play, then more teachers has concern that he/she shouldn't be around kids, an expert recommended an outside investigation, appointing the PE teacher to child abuse and safety committee, more kids came forward of foul play, the teacher was moves to a different school to teach.. There should be a process that stops her from having access to newborn after Baby A died and foul play was a concern! Not after baby 6! The management should have criminal charges of negligence on these deaths and assaults. It should be seen as a whole system failure and not just one who is at fault.
I suspect there will now be a criminal investigation into manslaughter charges against the management. There was a lot of concerning evidence around your point during the trial but it is a process. The innaction that facilitated these murders sound like an absolute shambles.
What a sorry state Canada is in when people are hired out of desperation without proper vetting to ensure they are suited to their jobs, even if there is a nurse shortage.
EDIT: Ah thought I was in a Canada community, my mistake. But I guess there are worldwide problems in healthcare these days.
This was in the UK, but yes we have similar problems here. A half-privatised health system.
There's a podcast that has been following the trial
Seven? Those are amateur numbers…
Edit: linked the wrong Japanese Serial Killing Nurse… Miyuki Ishikawa was investigated for neglecting 84 neonates, indicted for 27 and found guilting of killing 5.
Er, it's really not a competition.
Also, those were just the first batch of beyond-reasonable-doubt from the one hospital. She likely killed a lot more.
And then there are the babies who she damaged so badly they are now special needs children.
Same with Harold Shipman. Potentially murdered 400+ patients but was only tried for 15, because there wasn't much to gain by going beyond that.
Burn, cunt.
Edit: Bizarre that this is downvoted - this cunt should fucking burn. She killed children. What the fuck is wrong with people?
I get the sentiment, it just doesn't help anyone, you know? We obviously aren't going to throw gasoline on her despite how fucked up she is.
I get your emotion, but I also understand the downvotes, because you don't want to live in a society that responds to this kind of shit with more horrific deaths.
I'm the maker of the bot, and I'm sorry you feel that way. The reason many news communities have these kinds of rules, is because mods don't have time to check if the title is a good representation of the article. If you disagree with the rule, you might want to contact the mods, they can alter the rules and the bot to not enforce such a rule. Let me know if you have any questions.
I did edit the title a bit. But the bot itself ain't bad since some auto generated titles from URL's aren't correct.
If it’s a rule, what purpose is served by a bot publiclly nagging the poster instead of actually enforcing the rule?
If it’s not a rule, it shouldn’t be trashing up the comment section with automated pedantry.
The purpose of the bot is to make the poster aware of the rule, so they can edit the post. I don't personally see how one comment "trashes up the comment section". Another reason for not deleting the posts it detects, is because it's a bot, and bots make mistakes.
Let me know if you have any more feedback (:
DM the poster if you want to make suggestions privately.
Doing it the comment section is pedantic bot spam.
The bot is also being used by mods to monitor any posts flagged by the bot. I am working on a discord version of that system, so that's still a work in progress.
I can understand why you made the bot text so genial, but maybe it needs to be something a bit less so, because it reads as flippant underneath a story like this.
Stories like these are why I'm not against the death penalty. Yes, I'm aware this wasn't in the states.
You should be. We might still be wrong about her. Just a few weeks ago it was found that a guy in the UK was convicted and sentenced and served 20 years for a horrific crime he did not commit.
If we had the death sentence here, he would be dead now.
We might still be wrong about her.
Honestly this looks like one of those statistical murder convictions. Random chance means that every few years, somewhere in the world, some medical professional will be present at a series of unusual deaths. They end up in prison even though there's no other evidence.
I'm trying to find out what the actual evidence against Letby was, but so far I can only find one scribbled post it note written during a mental breakdown after being arrested. Which, she could have just been writing down things people were saying about her.
She was the only person that was present at every single incident, over 20 of them. The next most present staff were only at about 10 of the incidents. The Guardian has some articles on it all of you want to read more about the evidence and the trial.
Random chance means that every few years, somewhere in the world, some medical professional will be present at a series of unusual deaths. They end up in prison even though there's no other evidence.
This seems totally plausible, but I've never heard of it happening I don't think. Do you have any cases you can point out? I'm having trouble finding a decent search term.
I'm trying to find out what the actual evidence against Letby was.
So am I, now, after reading your comment. I found this which gives the list:
So far, I'm not convinced. None of that evidence seems solid enough. Its worrying, not just because an innocent person may have just lost everything, but also because if there's a systemic failure then creating a scapegoat is a surefire way to ensure it continues to happen.
That said, I know only what's been reported, I wasn't there and I don't know everything. I want to believe the justice system is working properly and the people in full possession of the facts (judge, jury, barristers) made the right decision. I'm a little bit less inclined that way at the moment after hearing about the recent exoneration of Andrew Malkinson.
Do you have any cases you can point out?
I can't find it now either, but I've read about a German doctor convicted as a serial killer solely because she was present at the deaths of too many patients. In that case she was present at the death of every patient for like 3 months, which sounds like strong evidence against her. Until you think about it and realize that if she murdered them, that means no one died of natural causes for 3 months. Also in that case the number of deaths on the ward actually went up after she was arrested.
Similar but not to do with doctors, Sally Clarke was wrongly convicted of killing her children, purely because both of them had died of SIDS. The prosecution said SIDS is rare and so it happening twice was impossible. What's worrying about that case is, everyone now says the miscarriage of justice was that the prosecutor incorrectly calculated the chances of two children dying of SIDS, when the actual fallacy was using the statistics as evidence at all. 1 in 73 million is the chance that one specific child will die of SIDS. The chance that any child will die of SIDS is 100%! 200 die in the UK every year! You can't just go around arresting every parent on the basis that they were unlucky!
What's really missing in everything I've seen is an actual statistical analysis. Everything I've seen is just "She was present at 20 deaths, when her colleagues were only present at 10". Yeah, but how unlikely is that? How many nurses per year will be in exactly the same situation in the UK, or in the world? How unusual was the number of deaths in that hospital while there was supposedly a serial killer operating, versus a normal year?
Its frustrating that most people seem to just see that she was present at 20 cases and terminate their thinking at that. To me, that's not enough proof to convict. I wonder, for example, how many infants died at places she worked, where she wasn't present? An analysis by someone with all the numbers, of the probability of this happening, would be really crucial, I think. Are there any other nurses in the UK who have been on shift for a similar number of infant deaths in a similar timespan? Should we try them for murder too?
I'm not sure about this because I'm too busy to dig into it properly and the information isn't available readily, but I think the injection of insulin is provable, i.e. you can tell post mortem that an insulin injection was given, which is murder
I get where you're coming from, for me the most damning evidence was looking at the number of deaths while she was working vs background rate, as well as how that rate changed after she was moved away from a ward or eventually suspended.
She'd have to be almost impossibly unlucky to fall victim to stats like this.
Sure, the chances of her specifically being that unlucky are astronomical. But the chances that somebody out of the 9 billion people on earth will be that unlucky are pretty good.
I'm sorry I gave you the impression that I gave a shit what you thought of my opinion on the death penalty. Let me be more clear: I Do Not Give A Shit About What You Think.
Am I clear enough?
I'm sorry I have you the impression that I gave a shit what you thought of my opinion on the death penalty. Let me be more clear: I Do Not Give A Shit About What You Think.
Am I clear enough?
Ok...Then why are you posting your opinion on a public forum?
What I think isn't that important. Do you have anything of any substance to say about what I have written?
Your support for the death penalty is wrong morally, and incorrect rationally. That's not my opinion, it's just counting.
I care about my opinion, I just don't care what you think of it.
Find the block button if it hurts you that badly.
No. Fix your spelling and grammar. Then try again.
Edit: he fixed his comment. Good job ⭐️
Oooh, I misspelled a word.
In 2007 Steven Hayes (now Linda Hayes) and Joshua Komisarjevsky invaded a home in Connecticut, ultimately raping and murdering almost the entire family, including an 11 year old girl. When their death penalty sentences were vacated, they ultimately got away with their crime. The original punishment was appropriate for that level of evil, and the means should have been gasoline and matches. But if the life of an 11 year old girl is just another statistic to you, then I'm sorry that you think that I am the one with poor morals instead of finding a mirror.
Don't get it twisted, I agree with you that the death penalty should be continued.
In fact I think they should allow regular people to volunteer to kill people on death row as a way to satiate a primal desire to take a life (but still be able to enjoy a normal place in a peaceful society).
I would not mind using my own guns and volunteer my own time on a weekend to visit a state prison with my own ammo and shoot a convicted pedophile or serial rapist to death, and would feel zero remorse and go back to my normal job the next week.
My point is you are too fucking stupid to proof read your comment or spell correctly, as well as carry a sane conversation online, to justify your opinion here.
You don't like me, find the block button. There is evil in this world that needs to be excised, but you prefer not to see it.
I never said I didn't like you, I said you are not smart enough to hold a conversation that is worth the time to read or your effort to bother typing out. You know how to fix this issue, it's very simple.
I'm of the mind that death is too good for anyone that should be sentenced to it. They should be made to suffer in an inhumane prison instead. The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment should be lifted against monsters.
My personal design is would be a 3m stainless steel cube with a waste hole, food dispenser, and a rodent-cage water dispenser. That's it. No medical treatment, luxuries, sunlight, exercise, distractions, diversions, bedding, or even clothing - not even human interactions. Just leave them in there to rot, and when they die, just hose it out and throw in another monster.
Torture is so so great!!!!! I love how you're putting your sickness out there. You're really leaning into it.
Honestly I will go far enough to openly agree with u/@Etterra
So, there it is. What are you going to to about it?
I'm going to disagree with you. What else would you expect? I could also challenge you to think carefully about the consequences that this kind of policy would have, but I have only a smidgen of hope that you actually would.
Please, by all means I welcome you to challenge my opinion by refuting it here. My mind is not made up, I'm a self-admitted humble idiot who deserves the benefit of the doubt.
What opinion exactly? You've only stated that you agree with someone else's.
If you think that subjecting prisoners of certain crimes to inhumane conditions is a good idea, then it's a simple refutation: the justice system is not perfect and people who are innocent WILL be subjected to that treatment on occasion, which is unacceptable - a similar argument to the one against capital punishment.
If you want to get into a debate on rehabilitation vs. punishment then that's another matter.
I am not being sarcastic when I say this, but you have convinced me to change my mind with a single simple refutation.