5 Reasons Lucy Letby’s Conviction May Be Overturned

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
How is this.

Speaker 2 (00:03):
Or death hold Lucy let Be around the UK's worst
child killer.

Speaker 1 (00:07):
Did she?

Speaker 2 (00:08):
Oh? Didn't she? Troubling questions?

Speaker 3 (00:12):
This was so about a child serial killer's conviction?

Speaker 2 (00:16):
I think she will be exonerated. Thank you.

Speaker 1 (00:21):
Lucy Letbee was found guilty of murdering seven babies and
attempting to murder seven more after two trials.

Speaker 2 (00:29):
Little did those working alongside her know that there was
a murderer in their midst.

Speaker 3 (00:36):
Two applications to appeal have since been refused.

Speaker 1 (00:39):
Letby was convicted back in twenty twenty three. I was
sure she was a baby killer. I now believe that
she's an innocent woman. My name's Oliver Harvey. I'm chief
feature writer for the Sun newspaper and I've worked in
Fleet Street for nearly thirty years.

Speaker 3 (00:56):
Thirty five year old killer nurse Lucy Lidby is currently
sing fifteen life sentences. Lucy let Be is Britain's third
worst female serial killer. She was convicted in August twenty
twenty three of murdering seven infants and then seven attempts
to murder seven additional infants in her care. Now, two

(01:17):
years later, efforts are in full swing to cast reasonable
doubt on the findings of the original trial.

Speaker 2 (01:26):
I I feel pass third, I.

Speaker 3 (01:39):
Got hello, and welcome to True Crime Rocket Science, the
most authentic and independent voice in true crime. If you've
been watching the Coburger Case, you might want to pay
attention to what's happening here as a possible sign for
what could happen in the future of the Coburger Case.

(02:03):
I mean, one minute, a suspect is safely convicted and sentenced,
put behind bars and key thrown away. The next the
justice system that did so is on trial. So far,
Lucy has lost two attempts to appear to conviction, but
it seems steps are a foot to prepare a third
by trying to find what may qualify as new evidence.

(02:28):
In this analysis, we're going to look at five new
issues in the let Be case. But before we get
to that, if you haven't subscribed to the channel, please do.
Later today, we'll be continuing the timeline review of the
Chris Watts case, so look out for that. If you're
finding this analysis worthwhile, please do hit the thanks button
and let's get started, all right. Five new issues in

(02:51):
the Let Be Case. Number one, How Dodgy was Lucy's
married doctor boyfriend. Both let Be and the doctor have
denied having a romantic relationship ship, but one way for
the defense to potentially deal with the case against Lucy
is to deflect attention away from her and onto him.
According to the son, Lucy, let Be's doctor boyfriend is

(03:13):
being investigated over alleged information he gave her about a
baby she tried to murder. Nothing this occurred during period
when she was under suspicion. A probe has now been
launched into a married consultant twenty years older than let Be,
who can't be named for legal reasons. He is accused
of sharing information with the nurse an infant let Be

(03:34):
was convicted of attempting to murder. The consultant is also
being investigated over his requests. This is important over his
requests to have let me visit him so she could
watch him perform surgeries on infants up until June twenty seventeen. Remember,
the facts of this case deal with really the period
around twenty sixteen. My opinion has always been that in

(03:57):
order to get the married doctor's attention, whom she was
I believed obsessed with, Lucy created emergencies late at night,
which basically engineered the two of them being together and
at close quarters. If this seems well fetched, ask yourself
if Lucy had any other romantic interest in her life?
Any other boyfriends? Can you name one? Anyway back to

(04:21):
the sun. This doctor organized the trips off to let
Be had already been moved to an administrative role in
July twenty sixteen over concerns with the volume of baby
deaths on her ward. These really took place over the
course of about a year, from around about mid twenty
fifteen to twenty sixteen. This doctor had been on shift
when the nurse murdered two triplets and allegedly tried to

(04:44):
harm a third one in June twenty sixteen. In September
twenty sixteen, this doctor sent Lucy a message in which
he called her the best neonatal nurse he'd ever worked with.
The pair were found to have exchanged more than one
thoy three hundred message while working as colleagues at Countess
of Chester Hospital, and the prosecution labeled him let Be

(05:06):
his boyfriend. Jurors at the trial were also told they
had gone on London day trips and went out for dinners. Now,
I don't know, I think you can take all of
that away, and just look at the one three hundred
text messages. If you had to average those out almost
over five years, it would be around one text message
every single day over about five years. A little bit

(05:29):
less than that. But I mean, we are dealing with
a married individual, and it's not as though Lucy literally
worked side by side with this doctor all the time.
That is a lot of interaction. Number two, did Lucy
rarely confess post its under scrutiny? Now? Police found notes
in the killer's home with his name on them, with

(05:50):
the doctor's name on them. One read I loved you
and I think you knew that. I wanted you to
stand by me, but you didn't. According to The Independent,
notes such as I am evil I did this were
scrawled on a scrappy note bad found in her house.
It also read I killed them on purpose because I'm
not good enough to care for them and I am

(06:11):
a horrible evil person. I mean, when did you randomly
impulsively confess to murder at home when you were under
no duress and no coercion. Have you ever done that?
According to the Daily Mail quote, But Lucy's bestie Dawn Undermines,
claims that scribbled notes found in Letby's house were any

(06:34):
sort of confession. She reveals that at sixth form college
together both trained in peer support counseling and learned of
a common method to deal with anxieties, to write down
your worst fears and feelings. Well, how many people's worst
fears and feelings have to do with killing other people?
And one does have to wonder, Dawn, have you ever

(06:55):
written note saying that you're evil, that you killed someone
in the context of a lot of people dying in
your care? Anyway, let's go back to the daily mail.
If you're feeling overwhelmed, you write down everything that's going
through your mind, Dawn said, And this is what let
me did when undergoing counseling arranged for her by the hospital.

(07:15):
Dawn recalled her reaction when she learned that her friend
is being accused. I watched it all unfold, and every
step of the way I couldn't believe it. Well, a
lot of what is going on now is about people
simply refusing to believe that someone they knew was capable
of such evil. British newspapers, come to think of it,
seemed to be very good at riding the wave of guilt,

(07:37):
then writing it again via the counter narrative of alleged innocence.
We saw this in the mccan case, and it's kind
of a way the media seemed to double their money
on a particular case. But is it good for trust
in the judiciary, in policing, in investigations? And I guess
is it true? To begin with? According to The Daily Mail,

(07:58):
in her darkest moments, Dawn and that if let be
had perhaps inadvertently caused harm because she was newly qualified
and under heavy pressure. But that was the limit of
what she could believe. Number three was insulin poisoning rarely
a murder weapon. Now the real difficulty, the real challenge
in prosecuting this case has always been hard evidence, because

(08:22):
many of the methods Lucy used, such as injecting an
air bubble, could be natural or inadvertent. According to the Times,
the prosecution said the results of blood tests for the
two babies, which showed that very high insulin levels and
low levels of a molecule called sea peptide, which is
created in the body as insulin is produced, are proof

(08:43):
that insulin had been given externally in an attempt to
poison them. However, Shannon and Chase, who have been given
access to the baby's medical notes and asked to look
again at the insulin test results of surprise, surprise, come
to a different conclusion. According to the pair, many newborn babies,
also known as neonates, are born with their specific type

(09:05):
of antibodies in their blood. They say they can show
that insulin produced naturally by the babies can bind to
these antibodies and can stay longer in the bloodstream, giving
a high reading, while seapeptide continues to be cleared, thus
giving a low reading. Well, you can see what's happening.
The defense are trying to manufacture a counter narrative to

(09:27):
each prosecution hurdle number four. How strenuous is the nurse's defense? Well,
did you know that just one witness was called in
let be's defense at trial? She's on trial and now
so chance to stay her case, And so instead of
calling a single colleague, she called a hospital plumber to

(09:49):
testify to sue each issues and therefore possible hygiene problems
on the ward. Now you can see no one else
is implicated here, just basically a vague concept of high
or unigenic conditions. According to the Times, the prosecution's main witness,
doctor Dewey Evans, has since changed his mind on how

(10:09):
one of the babies let Be was convicted of killing died.
That's one of them, one of seven. And we are
invited to consider how all of this should be weighed
against let Bey's apparent lack of motive and more implicitly,
the extreme rarity of young female serial killers of children.
No motive. If you can't think of a motive, does

(10:32):
that mean there isn't one? And if the motive against
each child isn't direct, you can imagine killing a child
of that age. You know, the child has done nothing
to the killer, right, so there's no animus there. I mean,
these very small babies don't even cry, really, they didn't
really even make a sound most of the time. So

(10:53):
if the motive against each child isn't direct, if it
is using their distress to lure a dashing doctor to
her side, then it's an indirect motive. An indirect motive
is still a motive. You may have noticed lately in
true crime that everything is a conspiracy. For every crime,
there's a counter narrative involving unseen pedophile rings, shadowy drug cartels,

(11:16):
or corrupt cops, and usually the counter narrative is a
lot more exciting. It's hard when everyone is seeing things
in the woods for reality itself to emerge unscathed. What
we're experiencing right now is the gas lining of justice itself,
and there are so many people participating in that. And
guess what the gas lders are winning. The gas lighters

(11:38):
are getting better. Number five, Justice on Trial is the
Coburger case likely to follow the trajectory of the Letby case,
while unlike Coburger, Lucy didn't take a plea deal and
she has her whole life ahead of her to beat
back the chargers. Remember it took Ammanda Knox just four
years to successfully win an appeal and exonerate herself. You see,

(12:00):
in a sense, is only halfway to that milestone. According
to The Guardian, which seemed to love ITV's counter narrative documentary,
the documentary makers do not dwell on why let Be's
team but forward such a minimal defense, And then she writes,
though I'm sure further and broader analyses will come in time,

(12:20):
probably encompassing such factors as the trust we place in
ministering angels and the fury we feel when it appears
to have been betrayed. The reason Lucy's defense put up
such a minimal defense when she was on trial is
because she had such a minimal defense. And if she
had a strong defense, where were her friends? Where were

(12:43):
her defenders, Where were people like Dawn when she needed them?
Where was her doctor friend? Well, I'm not going to
take it further than that. Thank you for listening, and
I'll see you guys next time.