WEBVTT - The 'Misfits & Ghouls' 0:00:00.200 --> 0:00:04.720 Before we begin, Please be aware this episode contains discussions 0:00:04.760 --> 0:00:09.240 around infant deaths and other difficult topics. Please take care 0:00:09.400 --> 0:00:19.200 while listening. After ten months of intense, complicated testimony, the 0:00:19.280 --> 0:00:22.680 jury in Lucy Letby's case is finally ready to give 0:00:22.720 --> 0:00:27.440 a verdict. In all, the jury was asked to consider 0:00:27.600 --> 0:00:31.880 twenty two charges. Seven of those were counts of murder, 0:00:32.600 --> 0:00:37.960 the rest attempted murder. It actually took the jury four 0:00:38.080 --> 0:00:42.360 days to deliver all their verdicts. You see, in England 0:00:42.840 --> 0:00:47.320 a jury can return a verdict while still deliberating over others. 0:00:47.680 --> 0:00:52.360 She's found guilty of murdering four babies and attempting to. 0:00:52.360 --> 0:00:55.200 Murder too, and then slowly his time went to meet 0:00:55.680 --> 0:00:56.760 all the vertices. 0:00:56.440 --> 0:01:01.040 Can Reporter Kim Pilling, who had sat through every single 0:01:01.160 --> 0:01:04.560 day of the ten month trial, remembers how the room 0:01:04.680 --> 0:01:07.920 felt each time the jury would announce a verdict had 0:01:07.920 --> 0:01:08.560 been reached. 0:01:09.120 --> 0:01:13.000 You know the tensionless you earn, Pindrop was yet very tense. 0:01:19.319 --> 0:01:24.199 Fourteen guilty verdicts all told the rest. The jury either 0:01:24.360 --> 0:01:29.640 landed on not guilty or they were unable to decide. Lucy, 0:01:30.000 --> 0:01:33.440 who had become more withdrawn and seemed to retreat into 0:01:33.480 --> 0:01:37.200 herself over the trial. Was only present for the first 0:01:37.319 --> 0:01:39.600 two days of verdict announcements. 0:01:40.000 --> 0:01:42.640 She didn't come back for those last thirty. 0:01:42.959 --> 0:01:45.960 Through her lawyer, Lucy let Be told the court that 0:01:46.000 --> 0:01:50.200 she was too unwell to attend anymore. That included when 0:01:50.200 --> 0:01:54.360 the judge would sentence her. Later, she would refuse to 0:01:54.480 --> 0:02:01.800 leave her cell as Justice Goss read her sentence. That decision, 0:02:02.400 --> 0:02:04.920 one of the few she was able to make for herself, 0:02:05.480 --> 0:02:08.120 didn't go over well with the families of the babies 0:02:08.240 --> 0:02:10.240 she had been found guilty of hurting. 0:02:11.000 --> 0:02:13.600 They were all there to met their victim personal statements 0:02:13.639 --> 0:02:15.919 in person, many of them, and I think they wanted 0:02:15.960 --> 0:02:18.640 to stare. 0:02:18.400 --> 0:02:21.720 Her down, But for many there would still be some 0:02:21.880 --> 0:02:25.640 satisfaction with how heavy the hammer of justice fell on 0:02:25.800 --> 0:02:28.960 Lucy let Be. She would be facing one of the 0:02:29.080 --> 0:02:32.960 harshest sentences ever handed down in the country. 0:02:33.320 --> 0:02:36.400 She was facing that she would face her life in prison. 0:02:38.080 --> 0:02:42.560 I'm Amanda Knox and from Vespucci and iHeart Podcasts, This 0:02:42.880 --> 0:02:47.480 is Doubt the Case of Lucy let Be Episode six, 0:02:48.120 --> 0:02:49.760 The Misfits and Ghouls. 0:03:00.320 --> 0:03:05.120 The defendant, Lucy Letby has refused to attend court for 0:03:05.160 --> 0:03:06.559 this sentence hearing. 0:03:07.480 --> 0:03:11.800 Lucy let Be's absence was definitely something that Justice James 0:03:11.840 --> 0:03:14.880 Goss had to deal with in court. We've had an 0:03:14.919 --> 0:03:17.359 actor read portions of his remarks. 0:03:18.360 --> 0:03:21.800 I shall deliver the sentencing remarks as if she was 0:03:21.880 --> 0:03:25.400 present to hear them, and I direct that she is 0:03:25.440 --> 0:03:30.640 provided with a transcript of my remarks and copies of 0:03:30.720 --> 0:03:34.280 the victim personal statements read to the court. 0:03:35.040 --> 0:03:39.640 On August twenty first, twenty twenty three, Justice Goss delivered 0:03:39.680 --> 0:03:42.400 his much anticipated sentencing decision. 0:03:43.040 --> 0:03:47.520 Lucy Letby over a period of almost thirteen months between 0:03:47.640 --> 0:03:52.800 June twenty fifteen and June twenty sixteen, when in your 0:03:52.840 --> 0:03:56.600 mid twenties and employed as a neonatal nurse in the 0:03:56.640 --> 0:04:02.280 Countess of Chester Hospital in Chester specialist training in intensive care, 0:04:02.920 --> 0:04:07.360 you murdered seven babies and attempted to murder six others. 0:04:08.400 --> 0:04:12.480 In the UK, a life sentence can mean two different things. 0:04:13.320 --> 0:04:17.440 One offers a chance at parole after serving a minimum sentence. 0:04:18.160 --> 0:04:22.359 The other is life, what they call a whole life order. 0:04:23.360 --> 0:04:28.480 This was a cruel, calculated and cynical campaign of child 0:04:28.600 --> 0:04:34.279 murder involving the smallest and most vulnerable of children, Lucy Letby, 0:04:35.680 --> 0:04:38.840 on each of the seven offenses of murder and the 0:04:38.839 --> 0:04:43.760 seven offenses of attempted murder. I sentence you to imprisonment 0:04:43.880 --> 0:04:48.799 for life, because the seriousness of your offenses is exceptionally high. 0:04:49.240 --> 0:04:52.719 I direct that the early release provisions do not apply. 0:04:53.560 --> 0:04:56.839 The order of the court therefore is a whole life 0:04:57.080 --> 0:05:01.200 order on each and every offense, and you will spend 0:05:01.240 --> 0:05:03.400 the rest of your life in prison. 0:05:05.360 --> 0:05:08.919 Lucy was now one of only three women in Britain 0:05:09.240 --> 0:05:11.520 facing a whole life sentence. 0:05:13.400 --> 0:05:17.320 As soon as she was found guilty. It was I mean, 0:05:17.320 --> 0:05:21.039 there was just no voic scene of any skepticism or 0:05:21.120 --> 0:05:23.080 doubt about the verdict. 0:05:23.680 --> 0:05:26.440 Rachel Levive is a writer with the New Yorker magazine, 0:05:26.920 --> 0:05:29.320 and while there was daily reporting of the story of 0:05:29.400 --> 0:05:32.599 Lucy let Be in the UK, it hadn't really made 0:05:32.720 --> 0:05:34.840 much of a splash in the US. 0:05:35.080 --> 0:05:37.600 It was everywhere. It was in the Daily Mail, for sure, 0:05:37.880 --> 0:05:39.480 but it was also in the Guardian. There were I 0:05:39.520 --> 0:05:41.839 think I counted more than one hundred stories about the 0:05:41.839 --> 0:05:44.640 case in the Guardian. It was a course of national 0:05:44.680 --> 0:05:48.159 fixation of a level that felt like, you know, the 0:05:48.200 --> 0:05:50.240 equivalent of the O. J. Simpson trial. It was a 0:05:50.360 --> 0:05:53.479 huge media phenomenon. 0:05:53.680 --> 0:05:57.400 But Rachel had done some reporting on other cases of 0:05:57.480 --> 0:06:02.280 women wrongly convicted of killing children, and in those cases, 0:06:02.960 --> 0:06:06.760 much of the evidence against them relied on complicated and 0:06:06.880 --> 0:06:13.599 faulty statistics and ignored medical information. According to Rachel, the 0:06:13.640 --> 0:06:16.240 similarities to let Be were striking. 0:06:16.640 --> 0:06:21.880 I started following the case and just really looking at 0:06:21.920 --> 0:06:27.520 like the daily updates on the Chester the local newspapers website. 0:06:28.240 --> 0:06:29.960 I was just sort of following it with like an 0:06:29.960 --> 0:06:32.360 increasing sense of disbelief. 0:06:33.040 --> 0:06:36.680 Rachel was shocked at the lack of critical reporting in 0:06:36.720 --> 0:06:37.160 the UK. 0:06:37.720 --> 0:06:41.360 I was struck just by the deference that, like the 0:06:41.440 --> 0:06:45.520 journalistic community played toward the courts. Just the sort of 0:06:45.520 --> 0:06:49.440 deferential attitude towards authority in general was surprising to me. 0:06:50.800 --> 0:06:55.040 When Rachel first approached Lucy's story, she did it carefully 0:06:55.360 --> 0:06:59.320 and critically. She wasn't even convinced it would turn into 0:06:59.320 --> 0:07:00.880 a story for her magazine. 0:07:01.000 --> 0:07:02.760 Well, there were two things that happened. One, I think 0:07:02.800 --> 0:07:04.719 I told my editor all along, like if I start 0:07:04.760 --> 0:07:06.880 reporting this and then I think, oh, she's guilty, I'm 0:07:06.880 --> 0:07:08.800 just gonna stop, Like there's no point in doing a 0:07:08.920 --> 0:07:11.800 she's guilty story. So all along I had a high 0:07:12.320 --> 0:07:15.600 level of being critical of the conclusions I might be 0:07:15.680 --> 0:07:17.840 drawing or not. And then when it got to the 0:07:18.040 --> 0:07:19.960 stage of the fact checking, I think the fact checkers 0:07:19.960 --> 0:07:23.200 were explicitly told like, if you start thinking she's guilty, 0:07:23.360 --> 0:07:27.520 like yeah, then the whole story collapses. And I think 0:07:27.640 --> 0:07:31.120 hearing their sort of evolving experience of reading the records 0:07:31.360 --> 0:07:34.840 was very affirming, because their job is to basically doubt 0:07:34.880 --> 0:07:37.080 me and to doubt what I'm writing, and the fact 0:07:38.000 --> 0:07:40.640 that they came in ready to doubt, and then you know, 0:07:40.680 --> 0:07:42.520 one of the fact trickers said like, oh my god, 0:07:42.560 --> 0:07:43.920 I think she might be innocent. 0:07:48.400 --> 0:07:52.760 On May thirteenth, twenty twenty four, Rachel Aviv's article a 0:07:52.800 --> 0:07:56.000 British nurse was found guilty of killing seven babies? 0:07:56.240 --> 0:07:56.760 Did she do? 0:07:56.880 --> 0:07:58.240 It? Was published? 0:07:58.480 --> 0:08:00.640 Well, the impact of the New York piece was huge, 0:08:01.080 --> 0:08:02.120 absolutely huge. 0:08:03.360 --> 0:08:06.240 It would have been impossible for Rachel Aviv to know 0:08:06.440 --> 0:08:09.600 that the mere act of publishing her article would send 0:08:09.760 --> 0:08:14.200 shock waves through an entire country, But the moment filmmaker 0:08:14.200 --> 0:08:18.280 and journalist Nikkurry heard about it, she knew the impression 0:08:18.320 --> 0:08:19.080 it would make. 0:08:19.960 --> 0:08:25.040 Just in terms of opening people's minds to the possibility 0:08:25.080 --> 0:08:29.440 that something else might have happened. In the case that 0:08:30.320 --> 0:08:32.520 everything might not be as it seemed. 0:08:33.080 --> 0:08:36.160 A Knook says the piece stood apart in a number 0:08:36.240 --> 0:08:37.960 of ways. That was. 0:08:39.400 --> 0:08:43.400 Quite an unusual piece of writing for a UK audience 0:08:43.400 --> 0:08:46.400 who's used to wait more used to sort of news reporting. 0:08:47.200 --> 0:08:51.679 The article was over thirteen thousand words. The average news 0:08:51.800 --> 0:08:53.800 article is a fraction of that. 0:08:54.480 --> 0:09:02.800 The political class and probably people working in medicine and 0:09:03.280 --> 0:09:07.000 people who had some expertise in different fields, I think 0:09:07.160 --> 0:09:09.840 it had a big impact on them, and it was 0:09:09.880 --> 0:09:13.200 just the first time that things were questioned really openly. 0:09:17.600 --> 0:09:21.240 Rachel's article looked closely at the entire Lucy let Be 0:09:21.400 --> 0:09:26.280 saga and asked questions about every step from the police investigation. 0:09:27.000 --> 0:09:32.160 The police department was actually relying on the doctors who 0:09:32.280 --> 0:09:35.040 thought that Lucy let Be was the murder as kind 0:09:35.080 --> 0:09:40.600 of translators to help them understand the medical evidence, and 0:09:40.679 --> 0:09:44.920 so then their perception of what was going on was 0:09:44.920 --> 0:09:48.880 really filtered through people who had who already had a 0:09:48.920 --> 0:09:50.000 belief that she was guilty. 0:09:50.760 --> 0:09:55.000 Was there consensus among the experts you talked to about 0:09:55.320 --> 0:09:58.480 the legitimacy or not of the evidence that was used 0:09:58.480 --> 0:09:59.400 to convict let Be. 0:10:00.040 --> 0:10:03.480 Almost everyone was quite flum mixed by the air embolism idea. 0:10:03.520 --> 0:10:06.080 There were claims being made that just like didn't cohere 0:10:06.120 --> 0:10:10.800 with people's understanding of basic physiology. As far as the 0:10:10.840 --> 0:10:13.960 insulent evidence. Everyone was very confused by those numbers. There 0:10:14.000 --> 0:10:18.440 was just a general sense of this doesn't read on 0:10:18.559 --> 0:10:25.400 paper at least as an intentional poisoning. And also the 0:10:25.480 --> 0:10:28.400 test that was used is just unreliable. 0:10:29.520 --> 0:10:34.040 Shockingly, for the first time, the public was asked to 0:10:34.160 --> 0:10:40.320 rethink the statistical information used to convict her. Specifically, that 0:10:40.440 --> 0:10:43.600 chart which showed Lucy let Be was on duty each 0:10:43.760 --> 0:10:49.640 time a baby died. It was powerful evidence. We tend 0:10:49.720 --> 0:10:54.960 to assume that irregular things happen because someone intentionally caused them, 0:10:55.200 --> 0:10:58.800 Rachel wrote. In her article, she quotes the Nobel Prize 0:10:58.800 --> 0:11:03.280 winning economist dmil Conneman, who says that our predilection for 0:11:03.440 --> 0:11:08.160 casual thinking exposes us to serious mistakes in evaluating the 0:11:08.280 --> 0:11:14.080 randomness of truly random events. Reading this article, for the 0:11:14.120 --> 0:11:18.840 first time, the British public was forced to question just 0:11:19.040 --> 0:11:26.480 how convincing this evidence really was. Was there anyone that 0:11:26.520 --> 0:11:32.360 you reached out to who was someone who questioned that narrative, 0:11:32.400 --> 0:11:34.920 but who was afraid to come forward? 0:11:36.320 --> 0:11:40.000 Yeah, there was a statistician who had consulted for the defense, 0:11:40.600 --> 0:11:46.800 who ultimately wasn't asked to testify, who had those concerns, 0:11:46.880 --> 0:11:49.200 like you know she I remember her telling me that 0:11:49.240 --> 0:11:51.840 she was really concerned that Lucy let Be was being bullied. 0:11:52.400 --> 0:11:55.520 And then the defense expert for the let Be team, 0:11:55.559 --> 0:11:59.280 who was never called, I mean, he said he was 0:11:59.320 --> 0:12:02.400 like staying up night worrying about this, Like I don't 0:12:02.440 --> 0:12:06.880 think he would have gone out and spoken about his 0:12:07.000 --> 0:12:09.679 concerns unless I don't think it was something he was 0:12:09.679 --> 0:12:11.760 going to do on his own. But once he saw 0:12:12.360 --> 0:12:15.200 that a journalist was also concerned about this, then he 0:12:15.320 --> 0:12:18.720 was willing to sort of like almost access some of 0:12:18.720 --> 0:12:20.800 those real doubts he had. But I think when I 0:12:20.800 --> 0:12:23.000 first talked to him, he wasn't in a place of 0:12:23.320 --> 0:12:26.160 this woman is definitely innocent, But he was in a 0:12:26.200 --> 0:12:29.320 place of real doubt about the quality of evidence that 0:12:29.320 --> 0:12:30.400 he had seen a trial. 0:12:31.760 --> 0:12:36.800 Beyond the complicated evidence and the investigation's tunnel vision. Rachel's 0:12:36.880 --> 0:12:41.280 article also forced readers to confront more basic problems with 0:12:41.360 --> 0:12:42.640 the case against let Be. 0:12:43.400 --> 0:12:46.280 I think status and gender also really came into play. 0:12:46.559 --> 0:12:52.160 This belief originated with a group of mal doctors who 0:12:52.200 --> 0:12:53.520 had a lot of status. 0:12:53.120 --> 0:12:54.240 In that environment. 0:12:55.120 --> 0:12:58.959 And so even though the nurses really did support Lucy 0:12:59.080 --> 0:13:02.480 let Be for a very long long time, you could 0:13:02.679 --> 0:13:06.000 see that over the years, with each sort of legal 0:13:06.080 --> 0:13:08.400 step that you could just see them sort of doubting themselves. 0:13:08.400 --> 0:13:12.040 So there was this one very painful interview with Lucy 0:13:12.120 --> 0:13:16.679 Letbe's direct manager, sort of like the nursing supervisor, And 0:13:16.760 --> 0:13:19.200 even after the verdict, you could tell she'd like come 0:13:19.240 --> 0:13:23.040 in there to say that she'd been fooled by Lucy Letbe, 0:13:23.040 --> 0:13:25.440 but like she couldn't quite say that. She was still 0:13:26.160 --> 0:13:29.240 kind of asking, like, how can this be? Like can 0:13:29.360 --> 0:13:30.800 someone be such a good actor? 0:13:31.400 --> 0:13:31.640 You know? 0:13:31.840 --> 0:13:33.560 I just I spent so much time with her crying 0:13:33.600 --> 0:13:36.400 about this. It seems so sincere. It was almost like 0:13:36.440 --> 0:13:38.800 she was asking, help me believe that she's guilty, because 0:13:38.800 --> 0:13:43.360 I still fundamentally don't. 0:13:44.720 --> 0:13:48.680 What do you think about why the evil nurse version 0:13:48.760 --> 0:13:50.800 of the story took hold so quickly? 0:13:51.880 --> 0:13:57.920 There are few events as sort of destabilizing and terrifying 0:13:58.080 --> 0:14:03.120 as a young child dying, And I do think that 0:14:03.200 --> 0:14:05.840 it kind of like breaks our brains a bit to 0:14:06.120 --> 0:14:09.960 think that this is a random act that can happen 0:14:10.000 --> 0:14:14.040 to anyone that you combine a vulnerable child with some 0:14:14.080 --> 0:14:17.559 health problems, and you combine that with an overworked hospital 0:14:17.679 --> 0:14:21.200 and busy doctors and a couple of mistakes, and your 0:14:21.240 --> 0:14:24.920 child can die. So I think like on an intellectual level, 0:14:25.320 --> 0:14:29.760 it is easier to believe that there's one evil agent 0:14:30.640 --> 0:14:34.600 creating harm than to sort of sit with the fact 0:14:34.840 --> 0:14:39.000 that we are all susceptible to these random acts of 0:14:39.360 --> 0:14:41.480 horrific luck horrific bad luck. 0:14:43.320 --> 0:14:47.520 This is especially so in the UK because in the 0:14:47.600 --> 0:14:51.840 UK all public health care is provided through the NHS, 0:14:52.400 --> 0:14:57.920 the National Health Service. It's worth taking a moment to 0:14:58.000 --> 0:15:01.520 explain a little about the law of the NHS. 0:15:02.840 --> 0:15:06.240 An enormous welcome to the City of London and to 0:15:06.360 --> 0:15:11.400 the Olympic Stadium for the Olympic Games of twenty twelve. 0:15:12.720 --> 0:15:16.880 In twenty twelve, the London Olympic Opening Ceremony set out 0:15:16.920 --> 0:15:19.880 to tell the world who Britain believed itself to be. 0:15:20.720 --> 0:15:22.160 Ladies and gentlemen. 0:15:22.520 --> 0:15:26.600 The Union flag is raised by representatives from the Royal Navy, 0:15:27.240 --> 0:15:29.120 Army and Royal Air Force. 0:15:31.840 --> 0:15:35.560 There were tributes to the monarchy, to the armed forces, 0:15:36.240 --> 0:15:40.960 to British music. Bowie the Beatles, the sex pistols, there 0:15:41.000 --> 0:15:44.640 were even dozens of Mary Poppins floating down onto the 0:15:44.680 --> 0:15:48.840 stadium floor. But the moment that lingered most for me 0:15:49.520 --> 0:15:55.960 was something else entirely a meticulously choreographed celebration of the 0:15:56.080 --> 0:15:57.600 National Health Service. 0:15:58.440 --> 0:16:02.720 Now we move on to celebrates an institution which was 0:16:02.800 --> 0:16:05.760 founded the year of the last London Olympics in nineteen 0:16:05.800 --> 0:16:11.400 forty eight, and they're going to see a very special example. 0:16:11.680 --> 0:16:15.520 Please welcome and the staff of the United Kingdom National 0:16:15.600 --> 0:16:17.000 Health Service. 0:16:17.000 --> 0:16:21.120 And our hospital beds rolled onto the stage. Nurses and 0:16:21.200 --> 0:16:24.960 doctors stood at the center of the spectacle. The NHS 0:16:25.160 --> 0:16:29.600 wasn't presented as a public service. It was presented as 0:16:29.640 --> 0:16:31.120 a national virtue. 0:16:31.240 --> 0:16:35.760 No, our Enbarns famous principle more societic than the thistlement. 0:16:35.800 --> 0:16:39.320 They called itself civilized with the same person is divided 0:16:39.480 --> 0:16:47.960 medical aid because of that of means. 0:16:49.680 --> 0:16:54.440 In Britain, the NHS is more than an institution. It's 0:16:54.480 --> 0:16:59.800 a point of pride, a moral achievement, something people grow 0:16:59.880 --> 0:17:05.639 up being taught to protect. So when allegations emerged that 0:17:05.760 --> 0:17:09.680 babies had died on a neonatal unit, the question many 0:17:09.720 --> 0:17:14.160 were primed to ask was not whether the NHS had failed, 0:17:14.720 --> 0:17:19.760 whether the hospital had failed, but who within it was responsible. 0:17:21.000 --> 0:17:23.800 By the time Lucy let Be took the stand, her 0:17:23.880 --> 0:17:28.520 task was not simply to defend herself against accusations of murder, 0:17:28.880 --> 0:17:33.879 a daunting enough challenge. Implicitly, she was being asked to 0:17:33.880 --> 0:17:38.800 do something far harder, to convince a jury and in 0:17:38.840 --> 0:17:44.840 turn the public, that something had gone catastrophically wrong inside 0:17:44.920 --> 0:17:50.879 one of Britain's most trusted institutions. All this was something 0:17:50.880 --> 0:17:53.320 that did not go unnoticed by Rachel. 0:17:53.920 --> 0:17:54.240 I mean, the. 0:17:54.320 --> 0:17:58.600 NHS is, you know, this sort of wonderful thing that 0:17:58.600 --> 0:18:01.320 that is a huge part of a national identity, and 0:18:01.400 --> 0:18:04.040 yet like it's been defunded over the years. So there's 0:18:04.200 --> 0:18:07.840 these very difficult conversations to be had about the level 0:18:07.880 --> 0:18:14.040 of healthcare, particularly for women and babies. And I think 0:18:14.359 --> 0:18:16.800 at trial you could even see the defense lawyer saying, like, 0:18:16.840 --> 0:18:19.199 we love the NHS, this isn't about the NHS, Like 0:18:19.240 --> 0:18:24.160 he was very almost afraid to make the jury think 0:18:24.200 --> 0:18:26.359 that they were being asked to say the NHS was bad. 0:18:26.520 --> 0:18:28.680 There was almost a sort of like this is our nationality, 0:18:28.760 --> 0:18:31.959 we will not ruin the symbol. It's like easier to 0:18:32.000 --> 0:18:35.119 say that there's one evil creature doing these malevolent, crazy 0:18:35.160 --> 0:18:38.560 things that have no explanation than to say, like every 0:18:38.560 --> 0:18:41.159 time I go to this hospital that's extremely important to 0:18:41.200 --> 0:18:43.560 my national identity. There are these risks that are not 0:18:43.560 --> 0:18:45.440 being properly managed. 0:18:46.280 --> 0:18:49.560 But there was one thing that pushed Rachel's article into 0:18:49.600 --> 0:18:55.600 the stratosphere above all others, good old fashioned censorship. 0:18:58.200 --> 0:19:01.320 What was the surprise was that somebody published when reporting 0:19:01.359 --> 0:19:03.800 restrictions were still in place in the UK. That was 0:19:03.840 --> 0:19:07.320 a really bold thing to do and heightened the impact 0:19:07.359 --> 0:19:11.159 in many ways because there was this element of people 0:19:11.160 --> 0:19:13.280 not being able to read it in the UK, and 0:19:14.000 --> 0:19:15.960 people want to read what they don't have access to. 0:19:16.960 --> 0:19:20.120 The restrictions that NUK Curry is talking about are pretty 0:19:20.160 --> 0:19:23.639 hard for North Americans to get their heads around. In 0:19:23.680 --> 0:19:27.560 the UK. As soon as a criminal matter becomes active, 0:19:28.160 --> 0:19:31.359 meaning a person gets arrested or a trial is announced, 0:19:32.040 --> 0:19:38.320 strict restrictions are placed on any media coverage. Anyone publishing 0:19:38.400 --> 0:19:41.480 anything that could be seen as a substantial risk to 0:19:41.560 --> 0:19:45.600 the course of justice can face contempt of court charges. 0:19:48.840 --> 0:19:51.640 Crap Prosecution Service decided that there would be a retrial 0:19:51.760 --> 0:19:55.760 on one count, and that was a baby k and 0:19:55.800 --> 0:19:58.959 I was at the court when it was just discussed 0:19:59.240 --> 0:20:02.760 announced that there would be a retrial and therefore there 0:20:02.760 --> 0:20:05.879 were reporting restrictions in place. That meant that nobody could 0:20:05.880 --> 0:20:08.479 write or talk about the Lucy let Be case for 0:20:08.640 --> 0:20:11.360 nine months, and that was absolutely extraordinary. 0:20:11.960 --> 0:20:16.080 You see, after Lucy let Be's first trial there was 0:20:16.200 --> 0:20:19.159 one count of attempted murder that the jury could not 0:20:19.400 --> 0:20:24.520 come to agreement on the death of baby K. One 0:20:24.600 --> 0:20:27.840 month and four days after Lucy was sentenced to spend 0:20:27.840 --> 0:20:31.399 the rest of her life in prison, the prosecution announced 0:20:31.480 --> 0:20:36.400 it would be retrying her for the death of Baby K. Immediately, 0:20:36.880 --> 0:20:39.359 a media blackout was put in place. 0:20:40.119 --> 0:20:46.920 Additional reporting is seen as breaking the reporting rules, so 0:20:47.400 --> 0:20:50.160 it felt like there was just no counter voices. 0:20:51.000 --> 0:20:55.159 But those restrictions are only enforceable in the UK. The 0:20:55.200 --> 0:21:02.439 New Yorker is well American. Rachel's piece came out in 0:21:02.480 --> 0:21:06.480 the spring of twenty twenty four, although some hard copies 0:21:06.560 --> 0:21:09.600 did end up making it to UK shelves. There were 0:21:09.600 --> 0:21:14.240 attempts in the UK to block access online, but clearly 0:21:14.520 --> 0:21:19.840 there are ways around geofencing and there's human instinct. People 0:21:19.880 --> 0:21:22.360 in the UK found a way to read it. 0:21:22.720 --> 0:21:24.800 So that probably heightened interest. 0:21:25.160 --> 0:21:27.320 One of the people who ended up reading the piece 0:21:27.720 --> 0:21:31.280 was a member of the British Parliament, a man named 0:21:31.359 --> 0:21:32.360 David Davis. 0:21:33.000 --> 0:21:36.560 Yesterday, The New Yorker magazine published a thirteen thousand word 0:21:36.640 --> 0:21:41.600 inquiry into the Lucy Letbee trial, which raised enormous concerns 0:21:41.960 --> 0:21:45.320 about both the logic and competence of the statistical evidence 0:21:45.640 --> 0:21:47.760 that was a central part of that trial. 0:21:48.640 --> 0:21:50.879 With the Lord Chancell Luca standing up in the House 0:21:50.920 --> 0:21:55.280 of Commons speaking about the possibility of miscarriage of justice, 0:21:55.920 --> 0:21:59.000 David Davis forced a different conversation. 0:22:00.040 --> 0:22:03.080 That article was blocked from publication on the UK Internet. 0:22:03.320 --> 0:22:06.280 I understand because of court order. I'm sure that court 0:22:06.359 --> 0:22:08.359 order was well intended, but it seems to me in 0:22:08.400 --> 0:22:09.800 defiance of open justice. 0:22:12.600 --> 0:22:15.520 Am I just naive? I mean, I've I've learned a 0:22:15.520 --> 0:22:18.439 lot about journalism, but I've never gone to a school 0:22:18.520 --> 0:22:22.600 of journalism, Like that's not my background. Am I naive 0:22:22.680 --> 0:22:27.840 to think that it's the job of journalism to question 0:22:28.760 --> 0:22:32.639 authority and not just be the mouthpiece of authority. 0:22:33.000 --> 0:22:33.639 You know what? 0:22:34.800 --> 0:22:38.280 That's a good characterization, But I think like the laws 0:22:38.359 --> 0:22:41.200 in England, I mean, I was really shocked. You're not 0:22:41.280 --> 0:22:44.439 supposed to interview people who are involved in the case, 0:22:44.960 --> 0:22:48.120 So how then are you going to get a sort 0:22:48.119 --> 0:22:51.160 of counter narrative to what the prosecution is putting out. 0:22:51.640 --> 0:22:53.959 That was the real problem, and that's why my story. 0:22:54.000 --> 0:22:56.720 I think there was just this like sense of like, 0:22:56.800 --> 0:22:59.199 how is no one else sort of articulating this? It 0:22:59.280 --> 0:23:02.520 was I mean, I think it was the reporting restrictions, 0:23:02.520 --> 0:23:04.200 but I also think it was just sort of a 0:23:04.240 --> 0:23:08.720 general sense of deference to the doctors and experts who 0:23:08.800 --> 0:23:13.600 had made these judgments. When I asked for interviews from 0:23:13.640 --> 0:23:16.119 some of the doctors involved in the case and the experts, 0:23:16.760 --> 0:23:19.800 I just don't think it occurred to them that I 0:23:19.840 --> 0:23:23.320 wouldn't just be sort of helping them do a little 0:23:23.520 --> 0:23:25.080 victory lap about the conviction. 0:23:25.520 --> 0:23:30.520 What did these doctors have at stake if Lucy wasn't 0:23:30.720 --> 0:23:32.080 found guilty. 0:23:32.040 --> 0:23:35.080 At the beginning, not much. But then I think, like anyone, 0:23:35.080 --> 0:23:38.200 they sort of developed identities that were around being these 0:23:38.240 --> 0:23:41.200 heroic whistleblowers, and they were treated like that in the media, 0:23:41.680 --> 0:23:43.800 and so yeah, it is humiliating, like if they are 0:23:43.800 --> 0:23:46.600 not these heroic whistleblowers, what have they done? They've ruined 0:23:46.640 --> 0:23:49.879 a woman's life. I can understand even on like a 0:23:49.880 --> 0:23:52.760 psychological level, why it would be heard for these doctors 0:23:52.800 --> 0:23:55.840 now to consider the evidence in a sort of neutral 0:23:55.880 --> 0:23:56.640 objective way. 0:23:57.119 --> 0:23:59.720 Were you aware of how big of a splash your 0:23:59.760 --> 0:24:01.520 peace made when it came out. 0:24:01.840 --> 0:24:04.440 I mean, something I noticed that I found really interesting 0:24:04.600 --> 0:24:07.280 was that people who read it from America and from 0:24:07.359 --> 0:24:10.359 other countries outside of England kind of read it in 0:24:10.400 --> 0:24:13.360 a pretty consistent way. They were like, I'm so horrified, 0:24:13.400 --> 0:24:16.080 I cannot believe this woman was convicted of these crimes. 0:24:16.400 --> 0:24:18.679 People who read it in England, like absolutely did not 0:24:18.760 --> 0:24:23.280 have that response, and I think that's because they were 0:24:23.640 --> 0:24:26.200 looking at it through this framework of having been exposed 0:24:26.240 --> 0:24:28.520 to so much media coverage about this case. 0:24:31.040 --> 0:24:34.280 Mike Check, Hi, nice to meet you. Would you mind 0:24:34.280 --> 0:24:36.120 introducing yourself for our audience? 0:24:36.680 --> 0:24:36.960 Sure? 0:24:37.240 --> 0:24:40.399 And my name is Polly I why can a shop 0:24:40.440 --> 0:24:43.480 actually at the moment in a small village in the 0:24:43.520 --> 0:24:46.400 English countryside sounds idyllic. 0:24:48.840 --> 0:24:52.240 I first connected with Polly way back in twenty twenty four. 0:24:52.960 --> 0:24:55.440 She was just one of many people who reached out 0:24:55.480 --> 0:24:58.400 to me about the Lucy let Beee case. In her 0:24:58.400 --> 0:25:01.600 initial email to me, she wrote, but hey, Amanda, I 0:25:01.640 --> 0:25:03.720 wanted to get in touch to ask you to consider 0:25:03.800 --> 0:25:08.320 looking into a recent case that is extremely troubling. She 0:25:08.440 --> 0:25:10.639 told me that she believed the Lucy was a victim 0:25:10.840 --> 0:25:15.439 of a troubled system, writing quote, I wholly believe it 0:25:15.520 --> 0:25:18.960 is a gross miscarriage of justice. I do not believe 0:25:19.040 --> 0:25:22.800 there were any murders or attacks. I believe those babies 0:25:22.880 --> 0:25:28.800 died due to poor care in a seriously failing hospital. Polly, 0:25:29.400 --> 0:25:32.359