Speaker 1: So I'm about to sit and watch the arrest of Lucy.
Speaker 1: Let be it's the first time I've seen it, as
Speaker 1: I don't love to go out of my way to
Speaker 1: see people getting arrested. All right, let's see how this goes.
Speaker 2: Hello, Lucy, is it hell? I'm please stepan seven? Yeah,
Speaker 2: thank you.
Speaker 3: It's six am.
Speaker 1: Lucy's wearing a powder blue hoodie matching sweatpants.
Speaker 3: She's letting the officers inside.
Speaker 1: Eleven minutes later, it's recording again and we can see
Speaker 1: Lucy being led out of the house in handcuffs.
Speaker 3: She looks just shocked.
Speaker 1: We're all seeing the same facial expression. But what meaning
Speaker 1: are we imbuing to it? Depending on what you feel
Speaker 1: about her, you think, oh, she's in shock because she's
Speaker 1: being accused of a crime she didn't commit, or she's
Speaker 1: in shock because she thinks she was going to get
Speaker 1: away with it. I don't know, Lucy. I do know
Speaker 1: that feeling of shock and just helplessness, and how suddenly
Speaker 1: you go from being a regular person who has the
Speaker 1: ability to just open a door.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 1: That's something that immediately is triggering for me, is the
Speaker 1: memory of suddenly not having access to the world, the
Speaker 1: way that a normal person has access to the world,
Speaker 1: and now the world is completely changed and shifted around you.
Speaker 1: I remember the actual moment they put handcuffs on me.
Speaker 1: They told me that it was a mere formality. It's
Speaker 1: just a bizarre moment of change that you don't really understand,
Speaker 1: going from being a free person to a person in custody.
Speaker 1: It's there's nothing really that compares to that. It's the ultimate,
Speaker 1: like being rendered small.
Speaker 4: I'm just gonna put me in the box seat in
Speaker 4: the hair.
Speaker 5: Oh, I have to take a seat in that.
Speaker 1: Today, watching this, it brings me back to the day
Speaker 1: I was arrested. I was so in shock that I
Speaker 1: didn't even realize what was happening. It was so unfathomable
Speaker 1: to me that I could be accused that I believed
Speaker 1: the police when they told me they were taking me
Speaker 1: somewhere for my own protection. Even as the handcuffs clicked
Speaker 1: on my wrists, it still didn't click for me. It
Speaker 1: wasn't until several days later, after repeatedly crying myself to
Speaker 1: sleep in a prison cell, that I was escorted to
Speaker 1: a makeshift courtroom in the prison, where a judge told
Speaker 1: me I was accused of murder. Only then did I
Speaker 1: finally understand what was happening to me? I don't know
Speaker 1: what Lucy let Be felt the day she was arrested,
Speaker 1: but in the video of her arrest released by the police,
Speaker 1: that dazed expression.
Speaker 3: It gives me chills.
Speaker 1: But for whatever confusion Lucy let Be may have been feeling,
Speaker 1: a much more straightforward narrative was starting to emerge in
Speaker 1: the media.
Speaker 6: A woman who worked at the Countess of Chester Hospital
Speaker 6: has been arrested on suspicion of murdering eight babies and
Speaker 6: attempting to murder another six still probably.
Speaker 1: As part of the investigation, the Cheshire Police search Lucy's home,
Speaker 1: her parents' house, and Lucy's office the hospital. They sees
Speaker 1: her diaries, her computer, her phone, and paperwork she has
Speaker 1: stashed under her bed. What they find will become key
Speaker 1: evidence against Lucy at her trial. One item in particular
Speaker 1: seems so damning it could well be irrefutable proof that
Speaker 1: Lucy is exactly what the doctors suspect her of being
Speaker 1: a serial killer. The next day, Lucy's name and the
Speaker 1: accusations against her will make the front page of every
Speaker 1: major newspaper, every news show, and every radio broadcast.
Speaker 3: From this moment on Lucy.
Speaker 1: Let Be is a character in her own life story.
Speaker 1: This is the moment Lucy loses hold of her own narrative.
Speaker 1: I'm Amanda Knox and from Vespucci and iHeart Podcasts. This
Speaker 1: is out the Case of Lucy let Be, Episode three,
Speaker 1: Operation Hummingbird.
Speaker 3: It's been nearly.
Speaker 1: Two years since the death of Baby A. Doctors on
Speaker 1: the neonatal unit at the Countess feel like they.
Speaker 3: Are banging their heads against the wall.
Speaker 1: So far, they've had two external reviews and a third
Speaker 1: is underway, but still none of the reviews are coming
Speaker 1: to the same conclusion as the doctors.
Speaker 6: Let's say we've got a problem. The facts are we've
Speaker 6: had an increase in death and we think it's her.
Speaker 1: Michelle Warden is a former neonatal nurse at the Countess.
Speaker 1: She never worked with Lucy, but she knew a lot
Speaker 1: of the people who did, and she says the doctors
Speaker 1: in charge were ready to blame Lucy very early on, from.
Speaker 6: The first moment that they pointed the finger at Lucy.
Speaker 6: They were not thinking that Lucy had made a clinical
Speaker 6: mistake or there'd been an accident. All the way along,
Speaker 6: they'd only had on average three deaths a year. They
Speaker 6: were definitely considering that this was a malicious act. I
Speaker 6: think because they were saying there were so many, I'm saying, oh,
Speaker 6: these are unexplained collapses.
Speaker 1: Just a side note for those who are not familiar.
Speaker 1: In this context, a collapse is a sudden deterioration in
Speaker 1: a baby's health, a drop in vital signs, a change
Speaker 1: in heart rate, or if they stop breathing. For the doctors,
Speaker 1: the sheer number of deaths while Lucy let Be was
Speaker 1: on shift are looking like much more than mere coincidence,
Speaker 1: and it needed the police. But still none of the
Speaker 1: hospital administrators agree, that is until doctor Jayram tells them
Speaker 1: a story that, if true, is the first hand account
Speaker 1: of attempted murder.
Speaker 7: That is a night that is etched on my memory
Speaker 7: and will be in my nightmares forever.
Speaker 1: Doctor Jerram tells hospital administrators that two years prior, he
Speaker 1: had walked in on Lucy watching a baby nearly suffocate
Speaker 1: to death. But a question remains, why didn't he just
Speaker 1: call the police.
Speaker 6: Then he suddenly came up with this idea that he
Speaker 6: caught her virtually red handed with baby Ka, but he
Speaker 6: didn't document anything in the note, and he didn't tell
Speaker 6: anybody for over twelve months now. If you seriously think
Speaker 6: you've walked into a nursery where somebody's about to murder
Speaker 6: a baby, you just get in your car and drive
Speaker 6: to the police station, wouldn't you.
Speaker 1: After initial conversations with hospital higher ups, the police are
Speaker 1: still skeptical that there even is a case, but after
Speaker 1: receiving an email from doctor Jayram, a detective decides to
Speaker 1: meet with the doctors.
Speaker 8: I met with Stephen Breary and Rabbi Jayream and asked
Speaker 8: them to explain to me, in the very short timescale
Speaker 8: we had, why I should or should not take this
Speaker 8: forward to be investigated.
Speaker 1: This is a quote from Detective Superintendent Paul Hughes of
Speaker 1: the Cheshire Constabulary, read by an actor. It's from an
Speaker 1: interview he did on a podcast hosted by the UK
Speaker 1: tabloid The Daily Mail.
Speaker 8: Although they are very, very fragile, very delicate babies that
Speaker 8: need care, there's no expectation of depth, there's no expectation
Speaker 8: of collapse.
Speaker 1: Detective Hughes looks like he could be a character in
Speaker 1: a Guy Ritchie movie. He's bald, barrel chested with a
Speaker 1: close trimmed beard. He has a kind of Jason Statham
Speaker 1: vibe about him. In interviews and press conferences about the case,
Speaker 1: he wears a suit that barely contains him and a
Speaker 1: somber expression. During their initial meeting, doctor Breery and doctor
Speaker 1: Jayram tell Detective Hughes that although babies on the unit
Speaker 1: are fragile, one thing they don't do is die suddenly.
Speaker 1: Of course, it's not like babies never die in a
Speaker 1: neonatal unit, but the doctors explain they usually know when
Speaker 1: it's going to happen. The doctors go on to explain
Speaker 1: just how unusual these deaths were, and Detective Hughes leaves
Speaker 1: the encounter convinced there's a case. Here's doctor Jayram during
Speaker 1: his ITV interview.
Speaker 7: The very fact that the police, after listening to us
Speaker 7: for less than ten minutes, realize that this is something
Speaker 7: that they had to be involved with. To me, speaks
Speaker 7: volumes and I could have punch the air.
Speaker 1: Finally, the police open an investigation into the deaths at
Speaker 1: the Countess and code name it Operation Hummingbird. The following
Speaker 1: series of events would forever change the hospital and everyone
Speaker 1: on that unit, from staff to parents. A narrative would
Speaker 1: take hold, and there was no going back from here,
Speaker 1: this is now a murder case, and at the helm
Speaker 1: would be Detective Hughes as senior detective. Here he is again,
Speaker 1: this time in a promotional video put out by the
Speaker 1: police themselves.
Speaker 8: What I was presented with was effectively a number of
Speaker 8: reports written in medical jargon.
Speaker 1: It's a lot for the detective and his team to
Speaker 1: get their heads around, but thankfully the Countess pediatricians are
Speaker 1: on hand to answer questions. When I sat down with
Speaker 1: doctor Phil Hammond, I asked him about this moment in
Speaker 1: the investigation.
Speaker 9: I don't like it. In a proper scientific investigation, you'd say, okay,
Speaker 9: we're going to get someone independent to look at this.
Speaker 1: If you recall, doctor Hammond is a retired doctor and
Speaker 1: medical columnist for Private Eye, a popular current affairs magazine
Speaker 1: in Britain, and he's written over thirty articles about the
Speaker 1: Let Be case.
Speaker 9: I think the first thing to say is that doctors
Speaker 9: a human, so with suspect of the same biases and
Speaker 9: temptations as everything else. I think the biggest failure in
Speaker 9: that is that police allowed the doctors to investigate these
Speaker 9: deaths and mark their own homework.
Speaker 1: Doctor Hammond says that it is clear that doctors wanted
Speaker 1: the police to see things their way and to ignore
Speaker 1: other issues that were plaguing the unit.
Speaker 3: He tells me about the flurry.
Speaker 1: Of emails the seven senior pediatricians from the Countess were
Speaker 1: sending each other right as the police investigation was getting
Speaker 1: under way.
Speaker 9: They're saying, you know, we've got to make sure the
Speaker 9: police act on this, and we'll cut this bit out
Speaker 9: and here are my suggestions, what are yours? And it's
Speaker 9: clearly they're gaming the information. They actually say, we want
Speaker 9: to peak the interest of the police.
Speaker 1: Specifically, doctor Jayram writes in one of those emails, quote,
Speaker 1: should we highlight explicitly for these cases that LLL was
Speaker 1: in attendance and in close proximity to the incubators.
Speaker 3: This is, after all, the basis of.
Speaker 1: Our concerns, and I think for the police to have
Speaker 1: their interest piqued, we need to have that.
Speaker 9: And I think that's just wrong that they shouldn't be
Speaker 9: investigating that they were trusted as doctors. They were the
Speaker 9: ones who raised concerns.
Speaker 1: One of the things I've had to wrap my mind
Speaker 1: around is that good people make mistakes. The consultants, like
Speaker 1: even the doctors who were sort of cherry picking information
Speaker 1: to make it palatable to the police. They were going
Speaker 1: off of what seems like a gut feeling and out
Speaker 1: of concern for patients.
Speaker 9: I think in my interactions with doctor Jerrohm when I
Speaker 9: first started investigating this, he appeared to me to be
Speaker 9: very genuine in his beliefs. However, they spun the information
Speaker 9: a removed it's about the baby's being really sick and
Speaker 9: then not having enough staff.
Speaker 1: Detective Hughes felt the doctor's help was so invaluable that
Speaker 1: he would go on to publicly praise their contributions. In
Speaker 1: an interview with The Observer, Hughes is quoted as saying
Speaker 1: the doctors were the golden thread of the investigation. But
Speaker 1: it wouldn't be accurate or fair to say that detectives
Speaker 1: based their entire investigation on the information provided by the doctors.
Speaker 3: Far from it.
Speaker 1: In fact, Operation Hummingbird doesn't truly kick off until detectives
Speaker 1: are introduced to a completely different doctor, a doctor who's
Speaker 1: never set foot in the Countess of Chester Hospital, but
Speaker 1: one who becomes indispensable to the investigation. He's the man
Speaker 1: reporters would take to calling the Welsh Wizard.
Speaker 10: Dear Demander I enclose a letter I sent to Private
Speaker 10: Eye yesterday.
Speaker 1: This is an email I received from doctor Dowie Evans
Speaker 1: last year, read by an actor. I had been briefly
Speaker 1: corresponding with him in October of twenty twenty four and
Speaker 1: again in twenty twenty six, but he never responded to
Speaker 1: giving me a formal interview. But that didn't stop him
Speaker 1: from sharing his thoughts via email.
Speaker 10: Doctor Hammond has no experience of medical legal practice, and
Speaker 10: as far as I know, has no pediatric or neonatology experience.
Speaker 10: He's best known as a stand up comedian and writes
Speaker 10: for satirical magazine Private Eye.
Speaker 1: As you can tell, he's not doctor Hammond's biggest fan.
Speaker 10: The Eye is not really qualified to engage on matters
Speaker 10: as sensitive and complicated as the murder of little babies.
Speaker 1: Doctor Evans is in his seventies, a grandfather, living out
Speaker 1: his retirement in his beloved Welsh countryside. He has white hair,
Speaker 1: fair complexion, gold rimmed glasses and a rotating supply of cardigans.
Speaker 1: Early one Sunday morning in twenty seventeen, an article in
Speaker 1: the Sunday Paper catches his attention, and, in true doctor
Speaker 1: Evans fashion, he's inspired to fire off an email Dear Nick.
Speaker 1: Nick is a contact at the National Crime Agency, a
Speaker 1: sort of clearing house that connects expert witnesses with police departments.
Speaker 10: I've read about the high death rate for babies in
Speaker 10: Chester and that the police are investigating do they have
Speaker 10: a pediatric neonatal conduct I was involved in neonatal medicine
Speaker 10: for thirty years.
Speaker 1: Doctor Evans has been out of clinical practice for nearly
Speaker 1: a decade, but he keeps busy by working as an
Speaker 1: expert witness, mainly on cases of medical malpractice and child abuse.
Speaker 10: If the Chester police have no one in mind, I'd
Speaker 10: be interested to help. Sounds like my kind of case.
Speaker 3: The police agree.
Speaker 1: Doctor Evans begins work on Operation Hummingbird as an expert
Speaker 1: witness in the summer of twenty seventeen. Here he is
Speaker 1: talking on the RAJ persad In Conversation podcast.
Speaker 10: I said, if you suspect somebody, or you suspect some people,
Speaker 10: don't I don't want to know. This is July twenty seventeen.
Speaker 10: What I need is to get the notes of every
Speaker 10: baby who's died and every baby who's collapsed from January
Speaker 10: twenty fifteen to July twenty sixteen, not just the suspicious
Speaker 10: ones or the ones you can't explain. I want all
Speaker 10: of them.
Speaker 1: That attitude, he goes on to say, allowed him to
Speaker 1: approach the task of investigating in a completely unbiased way.
Speaker 1: But the records from the police investigation, the ones detailing
Speaker 1: doctor Evans's involvement in the case, they tell a different story.
Speaker 1: According to doctor Hammond.
Speaker 9: And he said, within ten minutes of looking at the
Speaker 9: notes of the baby, I knew this was inflicted harm.
Speaker 11: It's in the police thought. Oh and it was his certainty.
Speaker 1: As long as there have been police and investigations, there
Speaker 1: has been tunnel vision. Tunnel vision is when investigators get
Speaker 1: so focused on one theory they may inadvertently ignore or
Speaker 1: even deliberately suppress evidence that doesn't fit. You can think
Speaker 1: of it as a species of confirmation bias, the human
Speaker 1: tendency to look for evidence that confirms an established belief
Speaker 1: or favored theory and to discount evidence that contradicts it.
Speaker 1: It's a very dangerous problem, one that is at the
Speaker 1: heart of many wrongful convictions, including mine. Even after the
Speaker 1: true perpetrator's DNA was identified in and on the body
Speaker 1: of my roommate, the investigators and the prosecutor, who already
Speaker 1: believed I was somehow involved, ignored exonerating evidence like the
Speaker 1: fact that none of my DNA was ever found in
Speaker 1: the room where the murder occurred. But they also magnified
Speaker 1: the importance of irrelevant evidence, like the fact that my
Speaker 1: DNA was found in the bathroom, the bathroom I used
Speaker 1: every day. It was tempting to think at the time
Speaker 1: that they were simply out to railroad me, no matter
Speaker 1: the cost. But I've learned to see that malice isn't
Speaker 1: necessary to explain that behavior.
Speaker 2: Justice can make mistakes because the machinery is run by
Speaker 2: human beings. Human beings make mistakes.
Speaker 1: John Sweeney from episode one, the former war correspondent with
Speaker 1: The Unrulyed. He has done a very deep dive into
Speaker 1: the investigation into Lucy Ledby's case.
Speaker 2: I do not believe that the police did a proper
Speaker 2: job when they took the advice of an expert who
Speaker 2: knocked on their door.
Speaker 1: John says that from the very beginning, Lucy was the
Speaker 1: person at the end of the tunnel, and those with
Speaker 1: the power to accuse her, charge her, and then prosecute
Speaker 1: her saw nothing and no one else, and he believes
Speaker 1: that included their star witness, doctor Evans aka the Welsh Wizard.
Speaker 2: Essentially, the stististics don't make sense. They're wrong. The idea
Speaker 2: of somebody being locked up, the idea of me being
Speaker 2: locked up for a crime that didn't happen, or that
Speaker 2: you're entirely innocent of that's a terrible, terrible thing. And
Speaker 2: what happens if they're wrong? What happens if the doctors
Speaker 2: have improperly excluded other alternative explanations.
Speaker 1: John believes that doctor Evans only helped reinforce the police's
Speaker 1: tunnel vision, that he was irresponsible with the way he
Speaker 1: interpreted the evidence supplied by investigators, especially the information gathered
Speaker 1: that showed Lucy was at work for every suspicious incident.
Speaker 12: You know, you've got to be quite careful with the
Speaker 12: statistics of it.
Speaker 1: John Sweeney is not the only one with that opinion.
Speaker 1: This is doctor Jane Hutton, a professor of statistics at
Speaker 1: the University of Warwick.
Speaker 12: I've been interested in mathematics for a long time and
Speaker 12: also in using mathematics to address problems in the real world.
Speaker 1: Doctor Hutton, like doctor Evans, was hired by the Cheshire
Speaker 1: Police to consult with their investigation into Lucy let be.
Speaker 12: The first I knew, Butchlor's background noise was in about
Speaker 12: April twenty eighteen when I was asked to get involved.
Speaker 1: Doctor Hutton recalls that investigators were asking her to find
Speaker 1: numbers that fit their theory.
Speaker 12: Their initial thing was, we'd like you to help us
Speaker 12: understand the statistical issues, and we would like you to
Speaker 12: calculate a probability of one member of staff being present.
Speaker 12: Can you come up with a figure of something like
Speaker 12: one in a million for probability of somebody being on duty?
Speaker 12: So I said, well, that's completely the wrong way to
Speaker 12: do it.
Speaker 1: That's like asking a fingerprint analyst, can you come up
Speaker 1: with an explanation for why these two prints match instead
Speaker 1: of asking them to determine if they are a match
Speaker 1: or not. As doctor Hutton goes on to explain, when
Speaker 1: it comes to the neonatal unit and infant deaths, finding
Speaker 1: a cause of death isn't always straightforward. For doctor Hutton,
Speaker 1: looking at neonatal deaths is a bit like being asked
Speaker 1: to explain the exact cause of death of a very
Speaker 1: old person.
Speaker 12: You know, it can be slightly tricky to think, well,
Speaker 12: was it the kidneys or the liberal the lungs or
Speaker 12: the heart or the brain. So yet it always get
Speaker 12: a very clear cause. And also, if you've got to
Speaker 12: talk about an unexpected collapse of anybody in intensive care,
Speaker 12: you're in intensive care because you're seriously unstable.
Speaker 1: And as Hutton says, the babies in the Countess's neonatal
Speaker 1: unit were sick babies.
Speaker 12: The best you can be a stable contrary to what
Speaker 12: was said in the trial that the babies were well.
Speaker 12: If they were well, they were taking up places they
Speaker 12: didn't need.
Speaker 1: Doctor Hutton adds that the information she was given on
Speaker 1: the babies who died or collapsed was not only insufficient,
Speaker 1: but also income example, all.
Speaker 12: The deaths and look at all the factors of the deaths,
Speaker 12: and then you might say, okay, we want to look
Speaker 12: at twins who didn't die, or we want to look
Speaker 12: at triplets who didn't die, or so on.
Speaker 11: So you've got a comparison group.
Speaker 1: Without all the needed information rigorously and properly collected, Doctor
Speaker 1: Hutton could not determine anything.
Speaker 12: So I basically said, that is not what I will do,
Speaker 12: because that is the wrong thing to do. I can
Speaker 12: tell you what the correct approach is, and I did
Speaker 12: at some meetings discussing the correct approach, what was needed,
Speaker 12: and so on.
Speaker 1: I'll be the first to admit that my brain isn't
Speaker 1: wired for math and statistics. But even I can tell
Speaker 1: you you don't need a PhD in statistics to understand
Speaker 1: what was lacking here. Basically, Hutton needed a bigger sample size.
Speaker 3: She needed more.
Speaker 1: Information on the babies and their mothers, the pregnancies and
Speaker 1: the outcomes. For Hutton, cherry picking the evidence that way
Speaker 1: is a recipe for tunnel vision.
Speaker 12: You need to interpret them correctly. You need to be
Speaker 12: very aware of cognitive bias and the risks of bias
Speaker 12: in people looking for evidence.
Speaker 1: But doctor Hutton says her warnings seemed to fall on
Speaker 1: deaf ears.
Speaker 12: And then essentially it went quiet, and I would get
Speaker 12: the old trickle of oh, we're waiting for the Crime
Speaker 12: Prosecution Service. They might have different views about evidence, so
Speaker 12: just went silent.
Speaker 1: In fact, the next time doctor Hutton heard anything substantial
Speaker 1: about the Lucy let Be case was when let Be
Speaker 1: was arrested.
Speaker 12: You don't start by assuming that there's murder when you
Speaker 12: have no evidence.
Speaker 1: Doctor Hutton might have had real trouble with the task
Speaker 1: she was given by the police, but doctor Dowie Evans,
Speaker 1: he would go on to be the prosecution star witness.
Speaker 1: Just before the trial, the doctors of the Countess helped
Speaker 1: police piece together a graph. On one side of the
Speaker 1: graph the babies who had collapsed or died. On the
Speaker 1: other a list of the nurses on staff, and right
Speaker 1: down the middle under Lucy's name, a column of x'es.
Speaker 1: She was there for every single suspicious incident. But for
Speaker 1: doctor Hutton that graph proved nothing.
Speaker 12: Well, all the graph shows is was prison when she
Speaker 12: was present. It doesn't actually show you anything else than that.
Speaker 1: You know, one thing that this this raises is the
Speaker 1: question of why Lucy? Why are they targeting her? I'm
Speaker 1: back speaking with journalist John Sweeney. Is it just because
Speaker 1: she's conveniently a young woman who's there at the wrong
Speaker 1: place at the wrong time? Like, why are the police
Speaker 1: willing to assume you know, criminal intent or criminal fault,
Speaker 1: criminal wrongdoing? I mean, and I ask this also from
Speaker 1: a very personal place, right because I also you know,
Speaker 1: to this day, am like, why me, what was it
Speaker 1: about me that like made the entire world think that
Speaker 1: I was some kind of insane murder orgy? Why?
Speaker 9: Why?
Speaker 1: So?
Speaker 2: What happens with Lucy is I think she's just like
Speaker 2: you were. You were very unlucky, and I think she
Speaker 2: was very unlucky, and she was the wrong woman in
Speaker 2: the wrong place. And then you've got the police. Now,
Speaker 2: the police like nailing mass murderers. You've learned from Viscer experience.
Speaker 2: So you've got to come out, and you've got to
Speaker 2: come out fighting. You do, because otherwise.
Speaker 1: The narrative is this boulder that rolls down the hill
Speaker 1: and you can't stop it.
Speaker 3: The more momentum it gets.
Speaker 5: It's true, it's.
Speaker 1: Fair to ask why Lucy was the target. From our
Speaker 1: work and other investigations into her case, it's clear there
Speaker 1: are problems with the investigation, and the tunnel vision of
Speaker 1: the police seems obvious but not completely unfounded. Even if
Speaker 1: it didn't prove that she was guilt. Lucy was in
Speaker 1: the wrong place at the wrong time a lot, and
Speaker 1: I can see how that might give rise to suspicion.
Speaker 1: And there was more because on the day that the
Speaker 1: police searched Lucy's house and office, they discovered something that
Speaker 1: seemed like definitive proof of her guilt on post it notes,
Speaker 1: on sheets of paper, and in her diaries. Were words
Speaker 1: and scribbles written by Lucy that pointed to the evil
Speaker 1: the police believed lived inside the young.
Speaker 4: Nurse, basically as a note saying, I don't deserve to live.
Speaker 4: I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough
Speaker 4: to care for them. And then in capital letters leaping
Speaker 4: out at you, I am evil. I did this. That's
Speaker 4: a very striking visual piece of evidence for the jury.
Speaker 4: So we got that very early on. And of course
Speaker 4: you look at that and you think, ah, well, this
Speaker 4: could be game O her already here where you know,
Speaker 4: this person's literally confessed to what she's done.
Speaker 3: Next on doubt the case of Lucy.
Speaker 13: Let Be, physical evidence cannot lie. Insulin testing from this
Speaker 13: laboratory should not be used as evidence of poisoning. They
Speaker 13: knew that what they were doing was not the proper
Speaker 13: way and should not be used as evidence in the case,
Speaker 13: but yet they did it anyway.
Speaker 4: And then finally just comes in, all Rice, we gonna
Speaker 4: stand up. And that's that's the start of the court deck.
Speaker 2: There was a woman accused of.
Speaker 4: The murders of seven babies. You were going to see a.
Speaker 11: In person.
Speaker 3: Doubt.
Speaker 1: The case of Lucy let Be is brought to you
Speaker 1: by Vespucci, iHeart Podcasts and Knox Robinson Productions.
Speaker 3: I've been your Host Amanda Knox.
Speaker 1: This episode was written by clusy To Olivera, Kathleen Goldhar,
Speaker 1: and Natalia Rodriguez. The co producers were Clusy To Olivera
Speaker 1: and Lucy Ditchmont. The assistant producer was Amy Gill. Senior
Speaker 1: producer is Natalia Rodriguez. Audio mix by Tom Biddle. The
Speaker 1: theme music was written by Tom Biddle, story editing by
Speaker 1: Kathleen Goldhar. Legal advice was provided by Jack Browning. The
Speaker 1: producers at iHeart Podcasts are Chandler Mays and Katrina Norville.
Speaker 1: The executive producers were Joe Meek, Amanda Knox, Christopher Robinson,
Speaker 1: Daniel Turkin, and Johnny Galvin.
Speaker 3: Thank you for listening.