The Trial of Lucy Letby

[bimble]

That she has no redeeming characteristics and the only thing in life that gave her any satisfaction was her crimes.

We all like to say there's good and bad in everyone. Although I obviously don't know her I don't see her having any good or redeeming characteristics. She even seemed not only to get a thrill from the parents grief, she actively sort it out online.

How she became that way I don't know but I only see evil and malice here.

I think we all agree that in the grand scheme of things she is a baddie. But that’s not an explanation. You said “pure evil” was enough of an explanation for you, which that’s nice I suppose.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

"Evil" is just a convenient way to label something which is beyond our comprehension.

 

[kabbes]

It’s interesting the very different ways people are trying to make sense of it/her/the horror of what she’s done.

And using a lot of “psychological” language too, but completely divorced from the theoretical framework that the language actually belongs to. It tells you something about the way academic psychology has come to construct the way that people see themselves as much as vice versa.

 

[bimble]

"Evil" is just a convenient way to label something which is beyond our comprehension.

yep. And "evil" has an anachronistic religious flavour to it (unsurprising) similar to the declarations on this thread of "rot in hell" from people who i don't think believe in hell, habitually,
So we either reach for that stuff, old religious flotsam, or its shards of half digested stuff drifted from the 'science' of psychiatry. Neither of which hit the spot of a satisfying story do they.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

Beverley Allitt was diagnosed with Munchausens by Proxy.

 

[petee]

whereas "psychopaths" tend to be more sadistic but not all psychopaths are evil. Some of them are very successful people.

this would describe some i've known, including the head of the school i've worked in these 18 years.

 

[BigMoaner]

"Evil" is just a convenient way to label something which is beyond our comprehension.

Not so sure there's a lot to comprehend if I choose to kill a baby. It's the act being described, not the reason. It's an evil act. Otherwise there is no moral judgements to be made at all, because we just cannot "comprehend or understand". If I choose to murder someone I would fully expect for my act to be called evil. It's a sort of flattening through relativity, escape through "complexity" which is just as a bleak as using absoloute terms for people.

 

[BigMoaner]

Fred west used to bury people alive, with tubes in their mouths to keep them breathing, but let's not call him evil. Let's find out why he done it...

How about we call him evil and find out why he done it, because no "reasons", other than psychosis, can possible flatten his act into anything other than evil.

 

[bimble]

It's the act being described, not the reason.

In case of that poster i was responding to, it wasnt the act being described it was the person whodunnit. Nobody is confused about the ok-ness of the actions. But "pure evil" was presented as an explanation not an adjective and that doesnt work it has no explanatory power does it.

 

[BigMoaner]

In case of that poster i was responding to, it wasnt the act being described it was the person whodunnit. Nobody is confused about the ok-ness of the actions, but "pure evil" was presented as an explanation not an adjective. That doesnt work.

I agree, but there's also problems about not using moral judgements on people, even their entire beings. Reason dictates that people are a mixed bag, even the worsr acting people, with all sorts of socioecobiological forces at play but there's also the bleak prospect of not identifying those who are acting badly as "bad". Turtles all the way down into an impossible bottomless pit of "explanation". There's no root first cause to any of us, for a start. But that's a whole other packet of Walkers.

 

[kabbes]

I’m curious to know what people think it actually means to “diagnose” somebody with a “personality disorder”, or other psychological condition. Specifically, what actually is a psychological diagnosis? Etiologically, physically, mechanically etc.

When you’ve specified that in sufficient detail, we can move on to how and why it differs from the diagnosis of “evil”

 

[LeytonCatLady]

In case of that poster i was responding to, it wasnt the act being described it was the person whodunnit. Nobody is confused about the ok-ness of the actions. But "pure evil" was presented as an explanation not an adjective and that doesnt work it has no explanatory power does it.

But some acts aren't just bad things to do, you do have to be bad to do them. Generally speaking, I'm all for judging the behaviour and not the person, and that's because we're all human and fuck up/hurt people's feelings at times but don't actually ruin anyone's life by doing so. Anyone can have bad days and even the nicest of people can sometimes say or do things that are - for example - spiteful, jealous, selfish or mean etc. without being a spiteful, jealous, selfish or mean person on the whole. But there's no way you can coldly and premeditatedly murder innocent babies who have harmed no one, without being evil.

 

[BigMoaner]

yep. And "evil" has an anachronistic religious flavour to it (unsurprising) similar to the declarations on this thread of "rot in hell" from people who i don't think believe in hell, habitually,
So we either reach for that stuff, old religious flotsam, or its shards of half digested stuff drifted from the 'science' of psychiatry. Neither of which hit the spot of a satisfying story do they.

Exactly. Each ways are lacking. We bumble through.

 

[bimble]

I’m curious to know what people think it actually means to “diagnose” somebody with a “personality disorder”, or other psychological condition. Specifically, what actually is a psychological diagnosis? Etiologically, physically, mechanically etc.

When you’ve specified that in sufficient detail, we can move on to how and why it differs from the diagnosis of “evil”

Had a chat with someone this eve who is convinced that their girlfriend has "undiagnosed borderline personality disorder" which, to him, that acronym, that sanctioned idea, is apparently a great source of comfort, the scienceyness of it all!
Any port in a storm but really, the way we use these things as crutches / explanations its not that different from ancient beliefs about posession and the devil and that stuff.

 

[savoloysam]

If we cannot use "evil" in the context of people like Fred west and the like, then we cannot use it at all. I think I'd prefer to live In a world where "evil" is a term that can be used rather than not. It might not describe her whole personality, but yes killing babies is an act of evil. An evil act.

If this is not an example of evil then fuck knows what is. Obviously we will never fully understand her reasons for committing these crimes but if being an evil person is not the answer other suggestions are welcome....

 

[kabbes]

Had a chat with someone this eve who is convinced that their girlfriend has "undiagnosed borderline personality disorder" which, to him, that acronym, that sanctioned idea, is apparently a great source of comfort, the scienceyness of it all!
Any port in a storm but really, the way we use these things as crutches / explanations its not that different from ancient beliefs about posession and the devil and that stuff.

Exactly. And there’s no practical, meaningful difference between a diagnosis of “antisocial personal disorder” and one of “evil”. They are both statements about some innate essence, outside conscious control and divorced from context or system.

 

[savoloysam]

"Evil" is just a convenient way to label something which is beyond our comprehension.

Of course. You would commit such an evil act would you. You couldn't possibly comprehend such a thing.

 

[Looby]

If this is not an example of evil then fuck knows what is. Obviously we will never fully understand her reasons for committing these crimes but if being an evil person is not the answer other suggestions are welcome....

Isn’t the point that ‘evil’ isn’t really a thing at all. As bimble said it seems to be a way to explain actions or people we don’t/can’t understand.

 

[bimble]

if being an evil person is not the answer other suggestions are welcome....

Do you think some people are born evil?

 

[Agent Sparrow]

I’m curious to know what people think it actually means to “diagnose” somebody with a “personality disorder”, or other psychological condition. Specifically, what actually is a psychological diagnosis? Etiologically, physically, mechanically etc.

When you’ve specified that in sufficient detail, we can move on to how and why it differs from the diagnosis of “evil”

You probably shouldn’t direct that question at me unless you want a 5000 word essay. But yes, whilst such speculation is an understandable attempt for meaning making, I agree that the conversations are simplistic, problematic and often plain wrong. Often the more a person knows about this then the more wary they are of armchair diagnosing but not always; which is why I get cross when celebrity psychologists/psychiatrist DO diagnose from afar.

 

[savoloysam]

Do you think some people are born evil?

No.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Had a chat with someone this eve who is convinced that their girlfriend has "undiagnosed borderline personality disorder" which, to him, that acronym, that sanctioned idea, is apparently a great source of comfort, the scienceyness of it all!
Any port in a storm but really, the way we use these things as crutches / explanations its not that different from ancient beliefs about posession and the devil and that stuff.

I do hope they’ve also read up about the controversy around BPD.

 

[BigMoaner]

Isn’t the point that ‘evil’ isn’t really a thing at all. As bimble said it seems to be a way to explain actions or people we don’t/can’t understand.

I understand raping or killing babies as evil as I understand some flowers as being beautiful. While I get the need to not use absolutist language for people's entire beings, I also find a world of not being able to use moral judgements on people because it's "not understanding enough" equally as problematic.

 

[agricola]

Not so sure there's a lot to comprehend if I choose to kill a baby. It's the act being described, not the reason. It's an evil act. Otherwise there is no moral judgements to be made at all, because we just cannot "comprehend or understand". If I choose to murder someone I would fully expect for my act to be called evil. It's a sort of flattening through relativity, escape through "complexity" which is just as a bleak as using absoloute terms for people.

I do disagree a bit with this - a lot of people do confuse the act for the motivation, understandably because of the great impact that the act has.

There are people who kill and maim other people for motives that most people would describe as evil (this case, for example, or the Fred West killings) but there are rather more who kill and maim people for motives that most people would describe as idiotic, or through their utter incompetence, or a mix of both.

 

[bimble]

No.

So everyone is born ok but then some of them turn evil?
How come “being an evil person” satisfies you then as any kind of explanation? Don’t understand how this works.

 

[BigMoaner]

I do disagree a bit with this - a lot of people do confuse the act for the motivation, understandably because of the great impact that the act has.

There are people who kill and maim other people for motives that most people would describe as evil (this case, for example, or the Fred West killings) but there are rather more who kill and maim people for motives that most people would describe as idiotic, or through their utter incompetence, or a mix of both.

...or through wars and fights over oil etc. But we need the tools of moral judgement equally as we need the tools of enquiry and understanding, in my view.

 

[Looby]

I understand raping or killing babies as evil as I understand some flowers as being beautiful. While I get the need to not use absolutist language for people's entire beings, I also find a world of not being able to use moral judgements on people because it's "not understanding enough" equally as problematic.

I didn’t say ‘not understanding enough’ in the context I think you’re implying though. I do think it’s better to try to get an understanding of why people do terrible things to each other than just label it as evil and that’s that.

 

[LeytonCatLady]

No.

Nor me. I believe everyone's born innocent and it's experiences that change you. However, we all have the choice of how to respond to that. I've no idea why Letby chose to do the things she did, and we'll probably never know for sure. But she always had the choice of whether to do the right thing or not, and she chose to cross that point of no return. I'm sure loads of people have urges to do bad stuff but never actually give in to it, and to me that's the difference between being evil or not. We do all have good and bad in us. Best way I can explain it is irreversably giving in to your bad side.

I understand raping or killing babies as evil as I understand some flowers as being beautiful. While I get the need to not use absolutist language for people's entire beings, I also find a world of not being able to use moral judgements on people because it's "not understanding enough" equally as problematic.

This. I said this about my ex when he beat up his subsequent girlfriend and tried to strangle her. Someone tried to make excuses for him that we shouldn't judge because she must have cheated on him or provoked him in some way. But some things are inexcusable and absolutely worthy of judgment. According to the court case coverage in the papers, she was pregnant and it was only by some miracle that the baby was OK and the mum's physical injuries were only minor. She was so terrified of him she had to get a restraining order and God knows what damage he must have done to her mental health. And the stupid judge only gave him eight months for assault! (he got out in four for good behaviour). I would've given him the max for attempted murder if it was up to me. I have no qualms about calling that bastard evil, and I don't care if that makes me a judgmental bitch.

 

[BigMoaner]

I didn’t say ‘not understanding enough’ in the context I think you’re implying though. I do think it’s better to try to get an understanding of why people do terrible things to each other than just label it as evil and that’s that.

Don't disagree.

 

[savoloysam]

So everyone is born ok but then some of them turn evil?
How come “being an evil person” satisfies you then as any kind of explanation? Don’t understand how this works.

Yup well done for setting up a question with whatever answer I would have picked you would have jumped on.

Let's try this another way. What would you say drove her to do this?