Lucy Letby – "I AM EVIL I DID THIS

 "I am a horrible evil person... I AM EVIL I DID THIS."

"I don't deserve to live. I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them."

"I'll never have children or marry... I will never know what it's like to have a family... despair."

We will never have a full understanding of what drove Lucy Letby to harm and kill vulnerable infants under her care; to know what urged this dark desire and the enjoyment of the pain she inflicted on parents.

What has struck Happy Jack is the absence of any substantial Christian commentary on this.

Should we try to understand this undoubted manifestation of evil? Or is it best to just accept Lucy Letby's own explanation - that she is evil and deserves to die? 

Let’s here what Justice Goss had to say in sentencing her:

"You acted in a way that was completely contrary to the normal human instincts of nurturing and caring for babies … The babies you harmed were born prematurely and some were at risk of not surviving, but in each case you deliberately harmed them intending to kill them … The great majority of your victims suffered acute pain as a result of what you did to them. They all fought for survival; some, sadly, struggled in vain and died …

"Loving parents have been robbed of their cherished children and others have to live with the physical and mental consequences of your actions. Siblings have been deprived of brothers and sisters. You have caused deep psychological trauma, brought enduring grief and feelings of guilt, caused strains in relationships and disruption to the lives of all the families of all your victims …

"It is no part of my function to reach conclusions as to the underlying reason or reasons for your actions. Nor could I, for they are known only to you ...

"This was a cruel, calculated and cynical campaign of child murder involving the smallest and most vulnerable of children, knowing that your actions were causing significant physical suffering and would cause untold mental suffering … There was a deep malevolence bordering on sadism in your actions … You have shown no remorse. There are no mitigating factors."

The motivation behind such Lucy Letby's horrific killing spree is as unfathomable to experts who have spent years profiling murderers.

Gemma Peplow at Sky News offers an overview:


The judge, having discounted Lucy Letby's actions as falling outside of all known "typical" killer profiles, one expert offered this insight:

"So to answer the question, what is the motivation? It's really hard to actually know. When people do things like this and don't fit into those categories, it's usually out of some sort of jealousy or some sort of anger."

One of the lines in the note by Lucy Letby found by police, which was shown to the court during her trial, said she had an "overwhelming fear... I'll never have children or marry... I will never know what it's like to have a family... despair".

"I think at a stretch you could say she was jealous of these happy families. I think maybe [an explanation could be] that she is somehow connected potentially to the emotional process of grieving. She was present when a lot of these babies died, sometimes when they weren't even her patients, it's almost like she went out of her way to be part of that. And that's something I've never heard of or seen in my clinical experience, but it's the only logical answer I can come to."

"People can commit horrible crimes and still feel guilty. In fact, serial killers, especially disorganised serial killers, often battle with this internal kind of conflict, so they feel compelled to go out and kill but they also feel at times guilty of their actions as well. But whatever that part is, it obviously wasn't present enough for her to tell the truth during a criminal trial."

Maybe these two observations holds a key to an understanding sin. 


A search of Christian websites revealed just three
articles, none of which really addressed our question.

The first by Katherine Bennett in the Catholic Herald is more of a general thesis on the "upside-down world” we live in, where while Letby killed babies on a ward, a nurse in another part of the hospital was getting paid to kill babies in utero, concluding: "We are crazy without God.”

She asked: “Do our lives really only have value to the extent that someone else wants us to live?” Answering, “We are living with the consequences of a “no” to God our father, a “no” to truth, beauty and goodness, a “no” that ushers in a “yes” to the father of lies, ugliness and evil.”

Are Lucy Letby's murders so unthinkable in a world that considers the killing of a baby with Down’s syndrome a “right”, that calls for abortion on demand up to birth? "Are we so blind that we cannot see the lies, the ugliness and the evil that lurks beneath what bubbles up to the surface?"

On one level, this commentator is correct. As a society, our consciences have become "deeply corrupted", and yet her 'answer' remains inadequate.

Another by Peter Holloway at Premier Christianity, doesn't address our search for understanding at all.

He reminds us that God's love is unbounded and extends to everyone equally; that divine grace is unmerited and given without favour; that Jesus never seeks retribution; and that in God’s economy of grace, we must see justice and mercy as coexisting together. His is a call for restorative justice. One not seek to replace the state’s criminal justice system (retributive justice), but to complement it; to move forward and enable possibilities for transformation by repairing harm.
And finally, Shelby Bowen of Charisma News, attributes Lucy Letby's actions to demons possessing her and influencing her decisions. "Anyone who has murderous intent in their heart and acts it out, especially against innocent babies is being influenced by Satan ... For Christians it is clear why serial killers do the things they do. As we near closer to the return of Jesus, the world will continue to grow darker as the enemy becomes more apparent in his schemes."

In Happy Jack's opinion, none of the above "answers", secular or Christian, are entirely satisfactory in addressing the central questions: What drove Lucy Letby's evil desire to harm and kill infants under her care, and what caused her to give in to them? What opened the door to evil and why did she give into it in such a cruel and malevolent manner?

One is a question about human weakness in the face of temptation to sin; the other about grace and its operation in our lives. 

A common expression of my Irish Catholic mother comes to mind: "There but for the grace of God, go you or I." This is an acknowledgement of humility; that were it not for the work of God's grace and, perhaps, one's upbringing among those formed in God's grace, any number of trials or tribulations could befall a person that  leads them to give into internal or external temptation,
 
Shelby Bowen ends her article with a request for prayer and so will Happy Jack: 

"Pray for Letby, that God would set her free and pour His love over her. Pray for the families that lost their babies that the Holy Spirit would comfort their hearts. The Bible says that Jesus is near to the broken hearted, and that is a promise we can rest in every day."

Comments

  1. I would call it "envy" rather than "jealousy". Jealousy often has a clear motive or even an excuse, envy never. Back in earlier centuries, envy was sometimes described as the ugliest of the seven deadly sins and the most embarrassing to confess.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point, Ray.

      Excellent article here on envy and well worth a read.

      Pride is a kind of self-idolatry, a disordered love. Satan fell by pride. But small-minded envy, the cousin of pride, is rather a disordered hate. By its nature it cannot be consumed with self-regard. Envy is instead consumed with the idea that everyone and everything outside the self is threatening or diminishing it. St. Thomas Aquinas says - with much qualification and explanation - that envy is the hatred of a good enjoyed by one’s neighbor or the rejoicing in his harm. The proud man wants to usurp the lord’s rightful power. The envious man wants there to be no lord at all.

      That nervous hatred is what the Latin term 'invidia' literally suggests: seeing things inside out, looking at them askance, interpreting them all wrong.

      Delete
    2. Thank you, Jack, for that article by Anthony Esolen. Very thoughtful, very informative, very enlightening!

      Delete
    3. The proud man wants to usurp the lord’s rightful power. The envious man wants there to be no lord at all.

      These are really two manifestations of pride. In both cases, I'm driven by the belief that I'm too good to be ruled by another. Pride is the root of all sin, which is why the Fathers considered it to be spiritual death and insisted that cultivating humility was essential to salvation.

      As for Letby, I can't see how her actions aren't those of a badly disordered mind. If her diary entries genuinely reflect her thoughts, there seems to be one side of her that was self-destructive and tormented; but she also carried out the killings with medical precision, went out of her way to part of the aftermath and kept the shift notes for each child like some kind of trophy. This side of her seems to have revelled in it, almost taking a professional pride in dispatching her victims in a way that would be camouflaged by their existing illnesses or treatments. It almost has a kind of Munchausen-esque feel to it for me, of someone who gets a thrill out of being in the centre of a drama.

      There should also be a round of sackings and/or prison time for the managers who refused to act on warnings about her behaviour and tried to sweep it all under the rug, IMO.

      Delete
    4. Be fair, Lain. The managers and administrators in the NHS are mentally and spiritually exhausted fighting a 24/7 battle to hunt out all those evil Christian nurses who go around praying for their patients.

      Delete
    5. This is true. It's unfair to expect them to waste their time safeguarding children when they've got important issues to deal with, like making sure that everyone has the correct pronoun badge.

      Delete
  2. This is an interesting discussion on the story from the New Culture Forum. One thing I find fascinating -- assuming he's not mistaken -- is the contribution from Rafe Haydel-Mankoo, about 20 minutes in, that MALE nurses who kill always kill elderly patients, never children. Children who are murdered by their nurses are always killed by FEMALE nurses. I'm not at all sure what this signifies, but I do find it a fascinating detail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, here's the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZTP3OsSrUI

      Delete
    2. That's an interesting claim, and it does seem to hold up. I'll have to watch the discussion. I wonder if it's possible that male nurses are simply more likely to work with the elderly - which is a more physical role - than with babies.

      Delete
    3. Prof Generaliter26 August 2023 at 12:15

      ell, ref the lack of children killed by male nurses, would that not also be a reflection perhaps of the lack of male nurses working with children?

      It's an interesting observation.

      Delete
    4. Prof Generaliter26 August 2023 at 12:15

      ell, ref the lack of children killed by male nurses, would that not also be a reflection perhaps of the lack of male nurses working with children?

      It's an interesting observation.

      Delete
    5. Prof Generaliter26 August 2023 at 12:16

      Apologies it appears to have cut the first letter of your name!

      Delete
    6. Prof Generaliter26 August 2023 at 19:16

      @Lain we appear to have the same thoughts

      Delete
    7. @ Prof - Great minds...

      Delete
  3. Replies
    1. Here's a YouTube discussion on Marissa Harrison: “Just as Deadly: The Psychology of Female Serial Killers.

      Delete
  4. Lucy Letby's own explanation (as presented here), that she is evil and deserves to die seems succinct to me (where's Francis Pakenham when you need him??) But haven't we all met wicked people, who would happily consider hurting others if they thought that they could get away with it? One had hoped that not too many of them went into nursing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's a whole body of literature around the subject of moral luck - the idea that most of our (im)moral actions are attributable to situations outside of our control. I.e., the only difference between Letby and another non-offending psychopath is situational.

      Delete
    2. I'm sure there is a whole body of literature around the subject of moral luck, but the 'situational' aspect is one but several so one suggests "e.g." instead of "I.e.".

      How does jack view "divine providence"? I'm assuming not Calvinistically, but it can still be useful to ask.

      Delete
    3. (Should have been "... but one of several ...".)

      Delete
    4. When being a grammar pedant, it's helpful to proof read one's own contribution.

      Delete
    5. @ Anonymous ... who is this?

      Jack follows the 'solution' of Fr William Most.

      The solution: There is no time in God, but one thing may be logically before another. There are three logical points in His decisions on predestination:

      1) God wills all men to be saved. This is explicit in 1 Tim 2:4, and since to love is to will good to another for the other's sake, this is the same as saying God loves us. To deny that, as Bañez did is a horrendous error, it denies the love of God. How strong this love is can be seen by the obstacle it overcame in the work of opening eternal happiness to us: the death of Christ on the cross.

      2) God looks to see who resists His grace gravely and persistently, so persistently that the person throws away the only thing that could save him. With regrets, God decrees to let such persons go: reprobation because of and in view of grave and persistent resistance to grace.

      3) All others not discarded in step two are positively predestined, but not because of merits, which are not at all in view yet, nor even because of the lack of such resistance, but because in step 1, God wanted to predestine them, and they are not stopping Him. This is predestination without merits.

      This can also be seen from the Father analogy of the Gospels. In even an ordinarily good family: 1) the parents want all the children to turn out well. 2) No child feels he/she needs to help around the house etc. to earn love and care. The children get that because the parents are good, not because they, the children are good. 3) Yet the children know that if they are bad they can earn punishment, and if bad enough long enough, could be thrown out and lose their inheritance.

      This can be read here. This website has the full book in electronic form – its long!

      If you’re interested, HJ has a link to an easy to read PDF version.

      Delete
    6. @HJ,
      It's Gadjo, Jack, sorry about that, other phone again, and again didn't spot that it is not recognizing its master's voice... also was away for a few days). Not for the first time one finds oneself in broad agreement with Jack's soteriology (plus, the explanation here is rather cozily family-orientated).

      雲水,
      A grammar pedant will indeed seek to correct mistakes, including those he/she has made, others don't have the cojones :-) Feel free to say what 'moral luck' Lucy Letby is enjoying here, and why it it 'situational' considering that she herself chose to be a nurse.

      Delete
  5. What about the hospital managers who pooh-poohed the doctors' suspicions? Will they keep their jobs? Will they end up in court?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The common public reaction? One cannot tell - it is not a subject discussed around the water-cooler. Shock and incomprehension mainly, and some calls to unearth the death penalty. Think too much about it and we me be faced with the realisation (as if looking at the world around we needed reminding) of what is in humanity, and so in all of us.
    Babies are the most precious, most joyful, and most vulnerable thing this world affords. This shakes our every instinct. Yet I also had the reaction Katherine Bennett dared to express: that we express our boundless horror at these murders while approving of those being done legally down the corridor.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Has Israel lost the war against Hamas?

The Wind that's Coming

Shades of Things to Come?