“Statistical evidence helped convict Letby… and the main statistical constructs, a number of statisticians have said, was just a statistical abomination.” Statistician Peter Elston calls the statistical evidence given during Letby’s trial “a scientific fake.” @KaitBorsay

It is pretty amazing to think how far things have come since I wrote the below in my first two blog articles about the #lucyletby case in October 2022, two and a half years ago. There is still much work to be done to get her out of prison but those out there who are convinced she is innocent must never stop believing that their persistence will pay off. It absolutely will. "This week the trial of nurse Lucy Letby got underway in Manchester. Letby is accused of murdering seven babies in her care and of attempting to murder ten others. I am not suggesting she is innocent. It is possible that there is incontrovertible evidence against her as was the case with Harold Shipman. However, what I do know is if there isn't, this is yet another case in which there is scope for bad statistics and a biased investigation to be presented to the jury. And therefore for another miscarriage of justice." and "The trial of a nurse, Lucy Letby, accused of murdering 7 babies and of a further 15 attempted murders got underway in Manchester two weeks ago. It was clear from the prosecution’s opening remarks that there is no direct evidence – she was not caught in the act. Prosecution evidence has thus far been from medical experts testifying that deaths could not be explained by natural causes. There will also no doubt be roster evidence showing that Letby was on duty at the time of all 22 events. Of course there may well have been other unexplainable events at which Letby was not present, particularly since the hospital in question received a damning report around the time the murders and attempted murders were allegedly taking place about the poor processes in its neonatal unit. A look at the Websleuths thread about the trial clearly indicates a presumption of guilt among many posting comments...One must not assume guilt – our justice system is based on the presumption of innocence. Many of those posting comments are failing to take into account that given a large number of neonatal wards across the country, it is quite likely that one of them will experience an above average number of deaths/collapses – for the same reason, you are never surprised when a lottery is won, though you would be if you won it."

@kaitborsay massive miscarriage incoming

@kaitborsay Classic scapegoating. Who cares if a nurse went to prison for life - the good news is, the doctor and consultant who fingered her didn't!

@kaitborsay You mean the retired fund manager Peter Elston ?

🧠 Think twice before sharing personal info online. Hackers can use it to access your accounts. 👪 Educate yourself and your loved ones about cybersecurity; don't let them become a statistic! Start with Cybersecurity Dictionary for Everyone - on Amazon:

@kaitborsay

@kaitborsay An absolute legend.

@kaitborsay No it wasn't "statistical evidence". It was a conscious decision by management and physicians to throw someone at the foot of the totem pole under the bus to cover up for their cataclysmic failings resulting in a high-intensity neo-natal unit being unfit for purpose.

@kaitborsay Poor parents won't get a single dime. Ha ha ha

@kaitborsay yes

@kaitborsay where can these stats be found: like baby deaths before she arrive, and baby deaths after she was removed...