Last edited by a moderator:
UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #13
- Thread starter sleuth777
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,022
- Reaction score
- 116,263
ADMIN NOTE:
This is a trial thread to discuss the trial only. It is not a general discussion thread.
Although WS is based in the USA, we do try to manage the various discussions according to laws of other countries.
As this trial is in the UK, the case is under sub judice so please stick to discussing the trial content without posting anything that violates the following principles:
Basically anything that may prejudice the accused’s right to a fair trial
Any suggestion, opinion, or direct accusation that the accused is either guilty OR innocent
(i.e. the accused cannot be called "the killer"; use "the accused", "the alleged killer", or "the defendant")
A defendant’s previous history of any offences is off limits
Scandalizing the court (disparaging judges, lawyers, any officer of the Court) is off limits
Broadcasting anything about proceedings which happen in the jury's absence is off limits
Any non compliance with an Order of the court is off limits
Note in the event of an Appeal subsequent to verdict:
Appeals are usually heard by senior judges who are not likely to be influenced by the media, therefore responsible comment is usually considered acceptable once a trial has concluded, regardless of if there is going to be an appeal.
Reference: UK Contempt of Court Act 1981
This is a trial thread to discuss the trial only. It is not a general discussion thread.
Although WS is based in the USA, we do try to manage the various discussions according to laws of other countries.
As this trial is in the UK, the case is under sub judice so please stick to discussing the trial content without posting anything that violates the following principles:
Basically anything that may prejudice the accused’s right to a fair trial
Any suggestion, opinion, or direct accusation that the accused is either guilty OR innocent
(i.e. the accused cannot be called "the killer"; use "the accused", "the alleged killer", or "the defendant")
A defendant’s previous history of any offences is off limits
Scandalizing the court (disparaging judges, lawyers, any officer of the Court) is off limits
Broadcasting anything about proceedings which happen in the jury's absence is off limits
Any non compliance with an Order of the court is off limits
Note in the event of an Appeal subsequent to verdict:
Appeals are usually heard by senior judges who are not likely to be influenced by the media, therefore responsible comment is usually considered acceptable once a trial has concluded, regardless of if there is going to be an appeal.
Reference: UK Contempt of Court Act 1981
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,022
- Reaction score
- 116,263
ADMIN NOTE:
This thread is specifically dedicated to discussion of the trial for the accused Lucy Letby. Please discuss this trial without bringing other cases into the discussion. All that does is introduce support for speculation regarding guilt or innocence which is sub judice.
This thread is specifically dedicated to discussion of the trial for the accused Lucy Letby. Please discuss this trial without bringing other cases into the discussion. All that does is introduce support for speculation regarding guilt or innocence which is sub judice.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2010
- Messages
- 4,222
- Reaction score
- 12,530
MOD NOTE:
From the Verification Process page:
If you would like to add yourself as an expert in a certain field or as an insider to a case, please send an email to wsverify@yahoo.com Please note this is a new email address.
If you do not wish to be identified as an expert in a certain area, we ask that you refrain from answering questions that are specifically directed to those that have been verified as specialist in their area and that you do not claim to be a professional in any area.
If a member posts with "expertise" please check to make sure they are on this list. If not, please do not take their post as professional information, but rather just as another opinion; much as you would with any member of the general posting membership.
Click here for the list of verified professionals and verified insiders.
Please cease the bickering about statistics and statisticians. We have no verified statisticians posting on this thread, no statisticians who have testified in court and whose testimony you can discuss. You may have a conversation in PMs if you wish, but don't bring it to the thread. Up to 20 can participate, and such a thread can't be seen or moderated by moderators or administration.
From the Verification Process page:
If you would like to add yourself as an expert in a certain field or as an insider to a case, please send an email to wsverify@yahoo.com Please note this is a new email address.
If you do not wish to be identified as an expert in a certain area, we ask that you refrain from answering questions that are specifically directed to those that have been verified as specialist in their area and that you do not claim to be a professional in any area.
If a member posts with "expertise" please check to make sure they are on this list. If not, please do not take their post as professional information, but rather just as another opinion; much as you would with any member of the general posting membership.
Click here for the list of verified professionals and verified insiders.
Please cease the bickering about statistics and statisticians. We have no verified statisticians posting on this thread, no statisticians who have testified in court and whose testimony you can discuss. You may have a conversation in PMs if you wish, but don't bring it to the thread. Up to 20 can participate, and such a thread can't be seen or moderated by moderators or administration.
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,022
- Reaction score
- 116,263
ADMIN NOTE:
Please remember that any post expressing an opinion of either guilt or innocence is in violation of sub judice rules.
Posts that violate sub judice get removed, along with all responses to them.
Please remember that any post expressing an opinion of either guilt or innocence is in violation of sub judice rules.
Posts that violate sub judice get removed, along with all responses to them.
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,022
- Reaction score
- 116,263
Hey everyone,
This is a reminder that ANY expressed opinion related to the guilt or innocence of the accused is sub judice. Please read Post #2 of the Opening Posts in this discussion.
As we don't have the staff to sit in this thread 24/7 to read posts in real time, please use the Report feature to alert Moderators to any post that you feel is sub judice and it will be reviewed and removed if necessary.
Also, this thread is to discuss the trial, not statistics or other cases.
Thank you.
This is a reminder that ANY expressed opinion related to the guilt or innocence of the accused is sub judice. Please read Post #2 of the Opening Posts in this discussion.
As we don't have the staff to sit in this thread 24/7 to read posts in real time, please use the Report feature to alert Moderators to any post that you feel is sub judice and it will be reviewed and removed if necessary.
Also, this thread is to discuss the trial, not statistics or other cases.
Thank you.
@Sweeper2000 regarding evidence or lack of;
putting aside the *how* people die or become injured etc for a moment if you will; when crimes are reported, even with a lack of hard evidence (but suspicious events) it all still requires such scrutiny as we are seeing.
I completely hear you when you mention “concrete evidence” and I recognise a lot of people - rightly so, feel that factor is needed to establish for definite there is foul play.
But equally, sometimes, lots of crimes do not have the kind of evidence some are hoping for to make firm/definite views. Domestic and sexual abuse is an example of that. The evidence might not be concrete or even at all noticeable (which has been reported in dozens of cases)- but in such situations they actually do need to examine who was doing what and also rely on medical experts reviews, notes and accurate record keeping to help establish events.
The problem we have is that we just don’t know *where* LL was stood for definite (in either baby M or N) but it doesn’t completely rule it out if she was there or went near etc. Another issue as we have already heard so far is some of the notes are not always recorded timely as they should. Therefore, if that is the case, equally then- is that timeframe accurate?
We have already heard LL has omitted medical results from baby Ns file yet shared it with this *unamed* doctor she’s messaging on social media. Her account of this babies care is quite inaccurate here on the very basis of withholding medical information from others involved in his care. She cannot explain herself for this reason and this is a major concern (imo and the professional duty) in her fitness to practice. It’s like playing roulette with peoples lives which simply isn’t right.
Lots of things to consider here, all my own opinions of course.
putting aside the *how* people die or become injured etc for a moment if you will; when crimes are reported, even with a lack of hard evidence (but suspicious events) it all still requires such scrutiny as we are seeing.
I completely hear you when you mention “concrete evidence” and I recognise a lot of people - rightly so, feel that factor is needed to establish for definite there is foul play.
But equally, sometimes, lots of crimes do not have the kind of evidence some are hoping for to make firm/definite views. Domestic and sexual abuse is an example of that. The evidence might not be concrete or even at all noticeable (which has been reported in dozens of cases)- but in such situations they actually do need to examine who was doing what and also rely on medical experts reviews, notes and accurate record keeping to help establish events.
The problem we have is that we just don’t know *where* LL was stood for definite (in either baby M or N) but it doesn’t completely rule it out if she was there or went near etc. Another issue as we have already heard so far is some of the notes are not always recorded timely as they should. Therefore, if that is the case, equally then- is that timeframe accurate?
We have already heard LL has omitted medical results from baby Ns file yet shared it with this *unamed* doctor she’s messaging on social media. Her account of this babies care is quite inaccurate here on the very basis of withholding medical information from others involved in his care. She cannot explain herself for this reason and this is a major concern (imo and the professional duty) in her fitness to practice. It’s like playing roulette with peoples lives which simply isn’t right.
Lots of things to consider here, all my own opinions of course.
Tortoise
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 26,239
- Reaction score
- 131,996
Text messaging (reformatted)
Evening of 15th June 2016
"Manchester Crown Court heard that the registrar, who was working nights, messaged Letby..."
Bef 5.25pm
Doc: 'Only a few hours to go and it's holiday time - do you think you'll manage to hand over quickly?'
5.25pm
LL: 'I'll still be here. He's (Child N) poorly, bled again and became apnoeic.
LL: 'Sat having a quiet moment and want to cry. Just mad with so many people and lack of space etc.'
Doc: 'Oh Lucy, poor little thing and you.
Doc: 'Are you OK? Have a cry, you'll feel better for it I'm sure. You're welcome to take my car home if you're too tired to walk. I sort out picking it up in the morning.
Doc: 'So sorry you've had a rubbish day at the end of your long run - holiday well and truly deserved.'
LL: 'I'm OK just feel like I've been running around all day and not really achieved anything positive for him.
LL: 'Don't want to cry in front of people here, maybe when I'm home! That's very kind re the (car) but should be OK. Have you managed to switch off at all and sleep?'
Doc: 'No not really. Your day sounds as though as it's been horrible. Poor you. Are you going to be OK?
Doc: 'I'm sure he's had the best care possible today and that you will have done everything you can for him.
Doc: 'Are you doing anything nice before you go on holiday? You're not having to do a long run of shifts to get the time off for that are you?'
LL: 'No off for nearly 2 weeks!'
Doc: 'Oh what an end to a rubbish day. I haven't been back to Torbay for a few years .. I'm always surprised how little it changes when I go back. Happy memories.
Doc: 'I used to love Cockington in the summer - it always looked so pretty when the flowers were out. Have you handed over yet?'
Doc: 'Look on the top shelf. Right hand side. For the walk home. Your [sic] still welcome to the car.'
LL: 'Cockington is gorgeous!! We always go there for afternoon tea. Dad was offered a job in Paignton many moons ago, could have been a very different childhood growing up by the sea. Looking forward to going back.
LL: 'Hope little man is OK and your night isn't too stressful. On the home straight now at least.
LL: 'You are a sweetie (name of doctor), thank you.'
Doc: 'Chocolate makes bad days a little better. Hope you liked it.'
LL: 'That's true. Just a shame I don't usually eat chocolate ... but on this occasion ...'
Doc: 'It was well deserved today. Are you OK?
LL: 'Yes thank you. Just glad he's (Child N) OK.
LL: 'Hopefully I'll sleep well tonight and can enjoy getting ready for hols. Are you OK?'
Abt 11pm
Doc: 'He's just left the building. I'd be surprised if you didnt sleep well after so many long days.'
LL: 'Glad he got off safely.'
Doc: 'My night is complete! Just been handed a 3-week-old for a cuddle, who am I to refuse!!'
LL: 'Aww baby cuddles make everything seem better.'
links
Daily Mail Nurse Lucy Letby 'wanted to cry' after baby collapsed, trial hears
Chester Standard Lucy Letby told colleague she ‘wanted to cry’ after baby collapsed
ITV https://www.itv.com/news/granada/2023-03-03/lucy-letby-told-colleague-she-wanted-to-cry-after-baby-collapsed-
trial-hears
Irish News - Lucy Letby told colleague she ‘wanted to cry' after baby collapsed, trial hears
Evening of 15th June 2016
"Manchester Crown Court heard that the registrar, who was working nights, messaged Letby..."
Bef 5.25pm
Doc: 'Only a few hours to go and it's holiday time - do you think you'll manage to hand over quickly?'
5.25pm
LL: 'I'll still be here. He's (Child N) poorly, bled again and became apnoeic.
LL: 'Sat having a quiet moment and want to cry. Just mad with so many people and lack of space etc.'
Doc: 'Oh Lucy, poor little thing and you.
Doc: 'Are you OK? Have a cry, you'll feel better for it I'm sure. You're welcome to take my car home if you're too tired to walk. I sort out picking it up in the morning.
Doc: 'So sorry you've had a rubbish day at the end of your long run - holiday well and truly deserved.'
LL: 'I'm OK just feel like I've been running around all day and not really achieved anything positive for him.
LL: 'Don't want to cry in front of people here, maybe when I'm home! That's very kind re the (car) but should be OK. Have you managed to switch off at all and sleep?'
Doc: 'No not really. Your day sounds as though as it's been horrible. Poor you. Are you going to be OK?
Doc: 'I'm sure he's had the best care possible today and that you will have done everything you can for him.
Doc: 'Are you doing anything nice before you go on holiday? You're not having to do a long run of shifts to get the time off for that are you?'
LL: 'No off for nearly 2 weeks!'
Doc: 'Oh what an end to a rubbish day. I haven't been back to Torbay for a few years .. I'm always surprised how little it changes when I go back. Happy memories.
Doc: 'I used to love Cockington in the summer - it always looked so pretty when the flowers were out. Have you handed over yet?'
Doc: 'Look on the top shelf. Right hand side. For the walk home. Your [sic] still welcome to the car.'
LL: 'Cockington is gorgeous!! We always go there for afternoon tea. Dad was offered a job in Paignton many moons ago, could have been a very different childhood growing up by the sea. Looking forward to going back.
LL: 'Hope little man is OK and your night isn't too stressful. On the home straight now at least.
LL: 'You are a sweetie (name of doctor), thank you.'
Doc: 'Chocolate makes bad days a little better. Hope you liked it.'
LL: 'That's true. Just a shame I don't usually eat chocolate ... but on this occasion ...'
Doc: 'It was well deserved today. Are you OK?
LL: 'Yes thank you. Just glad he's (Child N) OK.
LL: 'Hopefully I'll sleep well tonight and can enjoy getting ready for hols. Are you OK?'
Abt 11pm
Doc: 'He's just left the building. I'd be surprised if you didnt sleep well after so many long days.'
LL: 'Glad he got off safely.'
Doc: 'My night is complete! Just been handed a 3-week-old for a cuddle, who am I to refuse!!'
LL: 'Aww baby cuddles make everything seem better.'
links
Daily Mail Nurse Lucy Letby 'wanted to cry' after baby collapsed, trial hears
Chester Standard Lucy Letby told colleague she ‘wanted to cry’ after baby collapsed
ITV https://www.itv.com/news/granada/2023-03-03/lucy-letby-told-colleague-she-wanted-to-cry-after-baby-collapsed-
trial-hears
Irish News - Lucy Letby told colleague she ‘wanted to cry' after baby collapsed, trial hears
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,151
- Reaction score
- 12,474
She was certainly getting a lot of attention and sympathy from the Dr re Baby N
Tortoise
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 26,239
- Reaction score
- 131,996
It's funny because she's getting attention but my take on it is that he's putting in more effort to chat than she is.
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,151
- Reaction score
- 12,474
From the texts we've seen yes. Although there's the possibility that her coming in early for her day shift was because she knew he'd still be there on his night shift. Either way, the interest in each other seems mutual.
Tortoise
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 26,239
- Reaction score
- 131,996
And I suppose their paths didn't cross on the 15th night-shift (she stayed late) because people from Alder Hey were there and he wasn't needed.
LL: 'Sat having a quiet moment and want to cry. Just mad with so many people and lack of space etc.'
---
"The doctor has told the court she remembers the events of that evening and Ms Letby. She said the nurse 'she seemed quite agitated' when a team of specialists arrived from Alder Hey to help with Child N's treatment
'She approached me a few times and said who are these people, who are these people....from working alongside the nurses and doctors at Chester, I felt that it was out of character from what I’d experienced previously in a medical emergency', she said"
https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,151
- Reaction score
- 12,474
Ohhhh so even though she stayed over and was still there at the time of the 7.40pm resus, she wouldn't have seen the Dr at the resus, as they sent the Alder Hey specialists instead?
Tortoise
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 26,239
- Reaction score
- 131,996
Doesn't sound like their paths crossed with him asking if she's handed over yet and telling her to take the chocolate and his car.
Dotta
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Messages
- 10,681
- Reaction score
- 64,492
And who are these Alder Hey specialists?
A team from another hospital?
Is it common practice?
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,151
- Reaction score
- 12,474
I'd assumed that conversation was around 5.25pm , the same time she said she would still be there after handover, as that's the only time mentioned . However he wouldn't have been at work at 5.25pm to have left the chooclate yet, so yes that part of the conversation about the chocolate must have been later!
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,151
- Reaction score
- 12,474
It's where Baby N was being transfered to that evening.
ETA @Dotta
Child N had haemophilia and on June 15, the parents were informed the baby boy had had a bleed. The parents were informed to attend hospital as soon as possible.
Child N was in intensive care, and on arrival Lucy Letby was there with other people.
They were told they had tried to intubate Child N between 4-8am.
Child N had two collapses that day - the parents were told to go out and get some fresh air in between the two collapses. While they were out, Child N had his second collapse.
A 'spur of the moment' baptism took place. Lucy Letby stayed beyond the end of her shift, and Child N was transferred to Alder Hey, where he recovered quickly over the following couple of days.
Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Thursday, March 2
The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more, is…
Last edited:
Hmm. What did she omit and when please?
Tortoise
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 26,239
- Reaction score
- 131,996
An intensive care chart is presented to the court, which records the amount of dextrose going into Child N.
The bleeding record, of 10am '1ml fresh blood', recording aspirates from the NG tube.
Said bleeding, the prosecution say, is not recorded anywhere in the medical notes. It was more than 2 hours after the attempts to intubate.
At 11.29am Letby sent a Facebook message to the doctor telling him “small amounts of blood from mouth and 1ml from ng. Looks like pulmonary bleed on x ray [i.e. a bleed from the lungs]. Given factor 8 – wait and see”. Other than that phone message, there is no evidence that Lucy Letby brought the bleeding to the attention of any of the medical staff.
--
She could not explain the entry in her notes timed at 10am on June 15 in which she recorded aspirating more fresh blood which she had not apparently brought to the attention of anyone else.
Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders
Okay so it's not that she omitted it from her notes, it's that she didn't escalate it according to the prosecution opening statement which isn't evidence.
As far as I can see, they didn't actually explore this with evidence in court reporting. She followed her message to tk the doctor you've quoted with "Looks like pulmonary bleed on xray...". So do we really think only LL was able to see this bleed on the xray? That nobody else knew about bleeding? It sounds unlikely.
It wouldn't be the first instance the opening speech mentioned something that hasn't been explored according to the reporting. We even had something in the opening statement which have been disputed by those giving evidence. So I think we probably shouldn't be viewing it as evidence to back up statements.
As far as I can see, they didn't actually explore this with evidence in court reporting. She followed her message to tk the doctor you've quoted with "Looks like pulmonary bleed on xray...". So do we really think only LL was able to see this bleed on the xray? That nobody else knew about bleeding? It sounds unlikely.
It wouldn't be the first instance the opening speech mentioned something that hasn't been explored according to the reporting. We even had something in the opening statement which have been disputed by those giving evidence. So I think we probably shouldn't be viewing it as evidence to back up statements.
- Status