Lucy Letby infant murders trial

west didsblue said:
It’s bizarre that it’s up to the defendant whether she has to face the judge for sentencing. A new law is required to make it mandatory.
Click to expand...

A new law isn’t needed. The current law gives a judge the power to order a defendant to be dragged into court in handcuffs against their will for sentencing.

It’s very rarely used though. And I can see why. Yes, the victim’s family have the right to see them sentenced. But Is there really anything to be gained by having someone disrupting proceedings?
 
There will have been hundreds of courses and thousands of hours spent by the Hospital Trust on preaching to the medical staff about the Trusts Health and Safety policies, and on Child safeguarding in particular.

There would have been mandatory annual revision and e-learning courses for everyone below the Executives. All done to ensure the policies laid down by them were adhered to.

Yet it was only ever lip service and complete fucking waste of time because the people at the top wanted to protect their cushy number rather than really wanting to protect patients.

These executives should be in the dock alongside her. You can't legislate for a nutter in your midst, but she would have been stopped after just a few deaths if these executives had any real interest in safeguarding. If they had then they would have paid any attention to the SEVEN Senior Consultants who wanted her removed.

They sacrificed children's lives to carry on feathering their own nests. They are as guilty as she is for any deaths after the 3rd one.
 
Eebo said:
100% this, but we know they wont. It is criminal what they did.

No-one has gone to prison for Grenfell and these Teflon coated corporate bastards will once again get away without any accountability and probably with their vast pensions that we pay for arising from completely intact.

They are supposedly premunerated so highly because they have such "responsible" positions, but when the shit really hits the fan as a direct result of their actions (or lack of) they are never actually found to be responsible or accountable.

This really makes me angry, it is a tragedy that would never have been allowed to get anywhere near the scale it did if hadn't been for the corporate cover up they participated in. And none of them have apologised publicly as far as I can see for their part in it.
Click to expand...
The difference between this and Grenfell was that Grenfell was an accident waiting to happen where a combination of factors from multiple agencies created a situation where an accident could have catastrophic consequences, and that’s what happened when a fridge caught fire in one of the lower flats. There are probably multiple examples of this around the country that did not result in a catastrophe. With the Letby case, seven senior consultants provided sufficient evidence to senior management that it was very likely that serious crimes had been and still were happening and senior management deliberately chose to ignore that. In this case it wasn’t a possible accident waiting to happen where they were taking a risk, it was an unforgivable lapse of judgment where senior management gave the benefit of the doubt to a single nurse over the combined opinion of multiple senior consultants. So whilst the actions of those responsible for fire safety at Grenfell were shameful, this was on another level.
The consultants aren’t blameless either in that they put their careers ahead of their concerns for patient safety and they all need to have a good look at themselves. I strongly suspect the Chief Exec and Medical Director will be deservedly excoriated by the inquiry for their unforgivable lapse of judgment in prioritising trust reputation over dealing with patients possibly being murdered.
 
Stephen230 said:
A new law isn’t needed. The current law gives a judge the power to order a defendant to be dragged into court in handcuffs against their will for sentencing.

It’s very rarely used though. And I can see why. Yes, the victim’s family have the right to see them sentenced. But Is there really anything to be gained by having someone disrupting proceedings?
Click to expand...
If she needed to be gagged and in a straitjacket then so be it.
 
GornikDaze said:
Just seen an interview with one of her ‘closest friends’ on BBC News at 6. She said she was the nicest person she’d ever known and that unless she heard from Letby herself, she would never believe she actually was guilty!
She has just opened herself up for whole load of abuse I would imagine. What a bizarre thing to admit to on national television
Click to expand...
To be honest when I first saw a photo of her I thought they have to be wrong about her she looks like butter wouldn't melt. My sister on the other hand when I said the butter wouldn't melt thing turned around and said she did it I can see it in her eyes "Evil bitch". She was right, woman's intuition maybe?
 
west didsblue said:
Doubt it. Very similar case to Beverley Allitt. She’s still banged up 30 years on and Letby will be the same probably.
Click to expand...
I remembered her when I heard the verdict.
Looked her up and she is eligible for parole as she’s done 30 years.
She is in Rampton and is unlikely to ever be released.
The difference here though is that Allitt claimed Munchausen as a defence this creature is pure evil and an out and out murderer.
FWIW Beverley Allitt‘s defence found a loophole IMHO she’s locked up forever though in hospital - granted secure - Letby will be in the prison system.
Hope every moment is hell for her.
 
GornikDaze said:
Just seen an interview with one of her ‘closest friends’ on BBC News at 6. She said she was the nicest person she’d ever known and that unless she heard from Letby herself, she would never believe she actually was guilty!
She has just opened herself up for whole load of abuse I would imagine. What a bizarre thing to admit to on national television
Click to expand...


No one thinks people they know are capable of evil but they're happy to dismiss people they don't know as being capable of anything.
 
GornikDaze said:
Just seen an interview with one of her ‘closest friends’ on BBC News at 6. She said she was the nicest person she’d ever known and that unless she heard from Letby herself, she would never believe she actually was guilty!
She has just opened herself up for whole load of abuse I would imagine. What a bizarre thing to admit to on national television
Click to expand...
It's not that bizarre, imagine if she said 'Who? Oh lunatic Lucy? It was clear to me the moment I met her she was batshit mental, she was always going on and on about killing babies, I just knew something like this would happen'
 
If you reported that someone was killing babies at work and you were sure of it would you allow your boss to fob you off?

A lot of covering backs going on here.

The horror of what the babies and families are going through must be unfathomable.
 
m7mcfc said:
To be honest when I first saw a photo of her I thought they have to be wrong about her she looks like butter wouldn't melt. My sister on the other hand when I said the butter wouldn't melt thing turned around and said she did it I can see it in her eyes "Evil bitch". She was right, woman's intuition maybe?
Click to expand...

Dont know mate but my first thought with her photo was the same as yours. Which is scary as hell.
 
Fucking hell, the biggest child serial killer in modern British history. The grim ****.

I hope she tops herself while inside.
 
west didsblue said:
The senior trust management who ignored consultants’ concerns and actively tried to cover it up should be investigated and prosecuted. How many died that didn’t have to if there was proper management and safeguarding processes in place and actually used?
Click to expand...

Exactly. You might not be able to stop an evil individual gaining access to a responsible job but you can create systems and most importantly culture that picks them up before they can do too much damage.

Good governance boils down to the alignment of authority and consequence. Power without accountability is a recipe for disaster.
 
threespires said:
Exactly. You might not be able to stop an evil individual gaining access to a responsible job but you can create systems and most importantly culture that picks them up before they can do too much damage.

Good governance boils down to the alignment of authority and consequence. Power without accountability is a recipe for disaster.
Click to expand...
One of the people in the management team at the time is now a director of Nursing in Salford.
 
Eebo said:
There will have been hundreds of courses and thousands of hours spent by the Hospital Trust on preaching to the medical staff about the Trusts Health and Safety policies, and on Child safeguarding in particular.

There would have been mandatory annual revision and e-learning courses for everyone below the Executives. All done to ensure the policies laid down by them were adhered to.

Yet it was only ever lip service and complete fucking waste of time because the people at the top wanted to protect their cushy number rather than really wanting to protect patients.

These executives should be in the dock alongside her. You can't legislate for a nutter in your midst, but she would have been stopped after just a few deaths if these executives had any real interest in safeguarding. If they had then they would have paid any attention to the SEVEN Senior Consultants who wanted her removed.

They sacrificed children's lives to carry on feathering their own nests. They are as guilty as she is for any deaths after the 3rd one.
Click to expand...

I've got a startup that uses multiplayer games like scenarios for training to replace traditional e-learning. One of the areas we started to push was real effectiveness for compliance training compared to traditional e-learning because it creates real discussion (and conflict) around the ethical dilemmas and norms etc. However we pulled back from this because if I had a penny for every time I got told in coded language by a senior exec that they didn't really want true compliance (because with that came a bag load of other issues as the business model didn't actually work if the rules were followed to the spirit rather than letter of the law) but instead were really after plausible deniability for lowest unit cost. I even once got told this completely explicitly by an SRO in a major bank, off the record of course. I've also had the HR director of a major UK retailer that sells itself on ethical values tell me after a successful pilot that was supposed to help create 'a culture of challenge' that they wouldn't be going forward because the people in the pilot had started to (legitimately) challenge across a variety of unexpected areas and what they really wanted was employees to challenge but for management to have the ability to control the level of challenge :-(

There are plenty of big employers in this country where the management culture leaves something to be desired.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top