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.
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:
Her ‘presence’ around the time of each collapse (how many infant deaths happened during her employment for which she was NOT present?)
she stole documents from the hospital, including a small number of documents with the names of babies she killed (probably a crime in itself, but fewer than 9% of the documents she had taken related to the babies in any way, so this could well be a bad habit)
The post-it note (written after arrest, could well be nothing more than the frantic thoughts of someone in terror)
The fact that it’s extremely difficult to prove she injected air (seems to work both ways)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Well that is the very pinnacle of discourse my friend. Thank you very much for being intelligent enough to do it and brave enough to say it. I like to think I do the same when I encounter a sound argument. Are you a scientist by any chance?
Edit to add:
the elderly professor took the American by the hand and said — with passion — ‘My dear fellow, I wish to thank you. I have been wrong these fifteen years.
We clapped our hands red.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
Hah! You clearly care enough to have posted, and to then tell us you didn’t care.
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.
Wow you’re a massive cunt
No. Fix your spelling and grammar. Then try again.
Edit: he fixed his comment. Good job ⭐️
I mean…the spelling error is gone, but the comment is still FAR from fixed.
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.
Go away, little troll .
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.
Well that is the very pinnacle of discourse my friend. Thank you very much for being intelligent enough to do it and brave enough to say it. I like to think I do the same when I encounter a sound argument. Are you a scientist by any chance?
Edit to add:
~Richard Dawkins