Last night Channel 5 screened a documentary which looked critically at the evidence in the case of nurse Lucy Letby, who was convicted of seven murders and seven attempted murders of babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital intensive care unit during 2015-16.
While many have raised concerns about the evidence following her most recent conviction on July 2nd 2024, my colleague Scott McLachlan (along with statistician Richard Gill) was raising legitimate concerns about the case well before Lucy’s first trial ended in August 2023. At that time nobody else was raising such concerns. An interview I did with Scott shortly after the first conviction was watched by over a million people on X, YouTube and Rumble.
Scott is a Lecturer in Digital Technologies for Health at Kings College London in the Division of Digital Health and Applied Technology Assessment within the Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care. In addition to his PhD in computer science he has extensive training in law and nursing and has a forensic knowledge of the case. Qualifications that speak for themselves.
My own interest in the case focuses on the “probability of coincidences and clusters”; it was the “too many deaths occurring when Lucy was on duty for it to be a coincidence” narrative that was a major driver of the case against her. Using Bayesian probability analysis, I had previously written about how such clusters of deaths are likely to occur without any malpractice and had provided such evidence to support the case for appeal in a similar case (Ben Geen).
When the company making the documentary for Channel 5 approached Scott and I to be interviewed for it we were happy to oblige. It was agreed filming would take place in my house. A crew came and filming lasted all day. Here Scott is being prepared for his interview.
At that point the documentary producers were very happy with our interviews.
However, on August 2nd Scott and I got phone calls informing us that, because of some of our views expressed on X (Twitter), they were cutting our interviews from the documentary. Views which had nothing to do with the Lucy Letby case and our investigation of it. No specific examples were given.
What is more important in a documentary whose strapline was “Unpacking and questioning the evidence used to convict neonatal nurse Lucy Letby”? That our investigation, prescient and hitherto considered crucial enough to include, is heard, or omitted due to what can only be described as the chilling vagaries of cancel culture? One of our chief concerns surrounding Lucy’s trial is that evidence that should have been heard, was not, potentially leading to a miscarriage of justice. It is ironic therefore, that the makers of this documentary have sought to do the same. It illustrates just how pernicious cancel culture has become.
In my phone call, I said I hoped they would reinstate our interviews, as it is vital that all the concerns about Lucy’s trial be heard. If they did not, I was prepared to write about it publicly and so I am. It goes without saying, Scott and I would be happy to help in any way we can to see that justice is eventually done.
For anybody who wants an idea of the material Scott provided, and which was edited out of the documentary, here is an interview I did with him while the crew were setting up their equipment:
Until he retired last year, Norman Fenton was Professor in Risk Information Management at Queen Mary University of London. Subscribe to his blog.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
China get 1 thing correct very specifically. They use coal to generate electricity and not windmills.
“Even a broken clock is right twice a day”
It’s hardly surprising a country the size of china gets some things right and even things like child abduction are down in countries like the UK as even though we don’t have the CCTV/facial recognition systems they do the growing network of private CCTV/ring doorbell type systems mean that (if the police choose to investigate) there will almost certainly be evidence to be found.
I’m sure the streets are very sage at night in Noerh Korea. General public safety tends to be a feature of steong authoritarian regimes.
Also, the advancement of women has always been a feature of Communism. It sounds like a good thing, and in many ways is, but it relates also to the communist idea of dissolving the family unit in favour of the state unit. Your country is your family, so to speak.
There are plenty of other goid things to pont out about Chuna. Ubiquitous and fast service for almost anything, great food, great atmosphere in the streets in the evenings.
Freedom comes at a price. Not just the one that everyone assumes – the risks of confronting authoritarian – but rather losing some of the inevitable benefits of a strong, forceful authority putting order.
My relatives who lived in what used to be the DDR said they used to feel safer than they do now. How much of the changes are to do with less rigid control and how much to do with importing cultures who are more likely to commit crimes is debatable. People probably used to feel quite safe in certain parts of Paris, or Brussels, or Stockholm.
I think if one had to live in one of those countries in the Far East I would choose Japan, South Korea or Singapore long before I would contemplate China. But I would not want to live in any of those countries. I would like to live in an England that will soon not exist, or in some staunchly Republican state in the US except I wouldn’t fit in there either because I’m not religious.
I don’t think it uniformity I the key. Spanish cities in the 1980s became less afe after Franco’s death. There was no iimmigration worth mentioning at the time. It was 100% down to a new culture of permissiveness.
I didn’t know that about Spain; thanks for the info.
As evidenced by the display of nakedness on Spanish beaches
I used to carry out some consultancy work for a Scandinavian airline. I was speaking to people who worked in their offices, prior to the fall of communism. I asked if they were happy with their new freedom of movement. They said that was nice, but the streets were much safer and there was much less crime under the communists.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/tarawa-when-america-was-shown-wars-grim-reality/
The film “With the Marines at Tarawa” is embedded. This required the authorisation of President Roosevelt before release and there is a warning at the start.
“With the Marines at Tarawa won the 1944 Oscar for Best Documentary Short Subject. You can see it here.”
Chinese politicians have the confidence from knowing that internally they control any opponents and internationally they have bought their silence or support. In the UK tax payers finance opponents of what a majority of us support and internationally we do as they say.
A cage …. even if it is comfortable – is still a cage.