Comments by "Ruth Bashford" (@ruthbashford3176) on "Peter Hitchens Claims Doubts Over Baby Killer Nurse Lucy Letby" video.

  1. The so called expert medical evidence in Letby's trial was utter crap. The post mortems tell the story of those deaths, all by natural causes. The obvious cause of death was early onset neonatal sepsis likely in each case. There was a systematic failure to maintain oxygenation and respiration in every case. Ventilation of many of these preterm babies is phenomenally difficult with the equipment they had. They couldn't sustain central lines, couldn't insert arterial lines. Pulse oximetry and perfusion monitoring in these babies is very difficult, it's rarely possible to say a baby was stable. But the worst evidence given against Letby was the diagnosis of air embolism. The most common sources of air emboli (of which there is zero evidence) are central lines and CPR and there is no way to distinguish the source. The insulin "science is junk" Preterm neonates metabolise glucose entirely differently from adults and can easily produce blood results like these cases of poisoning. Hindmarsh calculated the dose wrongly. Milan said she was measuring insulin - she wasn't - she was measuring antibodies to insulin which is fraught with technical and biological problems, one test is never sufficient to draw a valid conclusion. The level of negligence and incompetence on that unqualified unit was breathtaking. That is the only crime committed.
    50
  2. I look forward to the day the INNOCENT Lucy is released from prison.
    36
  3. 17 babies actually died over the same time period but they only managed to pin 7 of them on Lucy. And the babies she was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes.
    18
  4. 10 babies also died over the same time period but they couldn't pin them on Lucy. The jury were not told about them
    18
  5. Agree, most of the babies probably had sepsis
    15
  6. Lucy did no such thing, those notes were written when she was under extreme duress. Lucy was actually writing about what she thought the police & others thought of her. It was a case of 'cherry picked' evidence the same as the bogus spreadsheet.
    15
  7. No they don't as they don't prove anything. The most damning piece of evidence was the post note but it wasn't a confession, it was the ramblings of someone under extreme duress
    11
  8.  @Flash-sr8hm  I've watched that piece of propaganda and I'm surprised Cheshire police don't take it down. Lucy's conviction is getting more untenable by the day. Right from the outset the very consultants who were the subject of a critical report by the Royal College of Paediatrics & Child Health (RCPCH) were recruited by Cheshire police and became Lucy's accusers. Since when in any potential murder enquiry has the person/persons reporting the crime been discounted as a suspect before police even reach the crime scene? Their potential negligence or the possibility they may have been the murderer was never investigated
    10
  9. That is true although I think the only crime the consultants are guilty of is being incompetent and running an appalling neonatal unit. The babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes, no doubt aggravated by the poor care they received at the CoCH
    7
  10.  @jaylockwood5030  That is not true as there were 10 other deaths over the same time frame but they couldn't pin those on Lucy.
    7
  11. Lucy is innocent. The trial was reminiscent of a 17th Century witch trial, Dewi Evans was the new Witchfinder General.
    6
  12. Lucy is NOT guilty
    6
  13.  @Lonsome1223  It did not. Lucy was supposed to have murdered 7 babies and yet there were a further 10 deaths over the same period that they could not pin on her
    5
  14. More and more people are beginning to realize she is innocent.
    4
  15.  @DorothySnow-jb1os  That is just your opinion
    4
  16. You can dismiss it because its not true as there were a further 10 babies that died over the same time period.
    3
  17.  @TeddyG-y6s  The Lucy Letby miscarriage of justice will be like "The Post Office" scandal on steroids"
    3
  18. That is simply not true because there was actually another 10 babies that died over the same time frame. And the babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes.
    2
  19.  @bigcookprintables1968  The evidence in the case was flawed and even fraudulent.
    2
  20.  @constantgardener19  You didn't have to be in court to know the evidence the jury heard was flawed!
    2
  21.  @Messier45_Pleiades  yes its all very odd as the babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes.
    2
  22.  @DorothySnow-jb1os  No you don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to do some basic research on the case
    2
  23. That's NOT true, there were 10 other deaths over the same time frame. You should do some proper research on this case and you might then learn why so many people believe Lucy is innocent.
    2
  24. You didn't have to be in court to know the evidence the jury heard was flawed.
    2
  25. Lucy is undoubtedly innocent and I'm surprised she had the strength to go into the witness box, she was bullied by that awful Johnson. His accusations were nothing but speculation. Poor Lucy must be suffering from PTSD And the doctor's evidence was certainly contradictory!
    2
  26. The babies Lucy was supposed to have murder had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes.
    1
  27.  @S.Trades  The evidence presented to the jury was flawed.
    1
  28. If you care to do some research you would soon realise why people believe Lucy is innocent. Try reading the Guardian and Telegraph articles on the case. You could also listen to the excellent podcasts 'Lets Talk About Lucy Letby' by Dr Michael McConville & Peter Elston. And remember the babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes.
    1
  29. Dr Ravi Jayaram said he caught Lucy Letby VIRTUALLY red handed, whatever that means? but then his evidence is, to say the least, contradictory. Babies also died when Lucy was not on duty, 10 other babies died over the same time frame but they couldn't pin them on Lucy for some reason. And the babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had autopsies and were found to have died from natural causes.
    1
  30.  @DorothySnow-jb1os  it dropped because the neonatal unit was downgraded to a level 1 unit and could not take babies less than 32 weeks gestation. Actually it did rise again in 2018 and only fell when the senior consultant, Dr Gibbs, retired.
    1
  31.  @lesley9989  Of course the consultants were suspects but they were never investigated by Cheshire Constabulary. The consultants told the police Lucy was guilty of murdering babies and they set about 'proving' she was a murderer
    1
  32.  @lesley9989  There was a lot Lucy's defence team seemed unaware of, like the fact there was no evidence of babies being poisoned with insulin.
    1
  33.  @shaz2761  I don't know Lucy Letby but I've listened to the people who do know her. And I've listened to the medical experts who who have called Dewi Evans evidence "utter crap" I've also listened to statistical experts who have debunked the bogus spreadsheet. Lucy's trial was reminiscent of a 17th Century witch trial with the discredited, long retired paediatrician, Dewi Evans, as the new Witchfinder General. There was no solid evidence, just opinion and speculation. Only a fool would believe Lucy was guilty after those awful biased trials she was subjected to.
    1
  34.  @shaz2761  The babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes. Unless of course you prefer to believe a long retired, discredited paediatrician, Dewi Evans. who fantasized about air embolisms and insulin poisoning.
    1
  35.  @shaz2761  Many neontologists, forensic scientists, consultants have complained to the GMC about the medical evidence in the Letby trial which, to put it in the words of one retired doctor, was "utter crap" Even professor Shoo Lee, who wrote the 1989 scientific paper that Evans relied on in court to prove air embolisms, said publicly at the Letby appeal his paper had been "misrepresented."
    1
  36.  @shaz2761  There is NO direct evidence that Lucy did anything wrong - NONE. There is NOT even any circumstantial evidence that is remotely convincing.
    1
  37.  @shaz2761  What has Jimmy Savile got to do with the Letby case?? The evidence the jury heard was flawed. The medical evidence in this case has been so thoroughly discredited it almost looks like Dewi Evans plucked it from thin air.
    1
  38.  @RC-gh7os  I thought it was 11
    1
  39. The jury heard flawed evidence.
    1
  40. The babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes. Unless you believe the discredited, long retired, Dewi Evans who fantasized about air embolisms and insulin poisoning.
    1
  41.  @pamelahunter8659  Especially when they were born into a chaotic, shambolic open sewer with incompetent consultants and under trained staff.
    1
  42.  @blakeyonthebuses  you didn't have to be to know that Lucy Letby is innocent!
    1
  43. This is going to be one of the biggest miscarriages of justice this country has seen
    1
  44.  @jaylockwood5030  Why are you repeating that myth? 10 other babies died in the neonatal unit over the same time frame. And the babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes. Unless, of course, you prefer to believe the discredited, long retired paediatrician, Dewi Evans who fantasized about air embolism and insulin poisoning.
    1