UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #25

[Jayney404]

If guilty this is someone who’s not used to being challenged. Notice the power play and anger whenever there’s a question she doesn’t want to answer. She ignores NJ and refuses to answer, instead sitting in silence and looking away. Screams power and control issues to me.
JMO IMO if guilty

 

[Tortoise]

O Donahughe for the BBC stopped reporting as soon as NJ stepped down as well. I kept waiting for him to say something about Meyers redirect but he never did.

Well he did return after lunch. I suspect BBC and Sky rushed out to get their reports ready for the lunchtime news bulletins.

 

[squish]

There are manipulation tactics which don’t require any smarts, they just rely on baffling people so much that they lose the ability to engage rationally - e.g. when under pressure come up with a ridiculous, irrelevant and distracting idea to throw everyone off (sewage in the sinks, doctor not washing hands), gaslight people into thinking you’re smart and great by repeatedly saying you are, etc. These tend to work with unsuspecting people but the lawyers are doing a great job simply not engaging with her at that level, so she ends up looking stupid. I reckon if they responded in the way a normal person assuming good faith would, she’d have everyone’s head spinning! Totally agree with you though, there are so many times I’ve wondered why she doesn’t just say something bloody NORMAL on the stand! and it’s so hard to reconcile her demeanour up there with her texting and her post-it breakdowns. Ultimately I have to conclude she’s not a very smart cookie, even when it comes to the medical answers she gives - they’re chatgpt-style bloviating with the rights words but no actual content.

This. She doesn't take any effort at all coming up with something reasonable, she just blasts off lie after lie without forward planning, because she's so used to relying on her confident delivery getting her through. It was honestly amazing to hear lies said with so much confidence that some part of my brain perceived it as credible, even though I knew factually it wasn't.

She also comes across as intelligent because of her eloquence, but when you listen to the content of her answers, she's really not. I think she thinks everyone else is stupider than her, so she never developed any reason to worry about what they might think.

 

[JosieJo]

If guilty this is someone who’s not used to being challenged. Notice the power play and anger whenever there’s a question she doesn’t want to answer. She ignores NJ and refuses to answer, instead sitting in silence and looking away. Screams power and control issues to me.
JMO IMO if guilty

Yes thats how I feel and if a guilty verdict is given I wonder how she will react

 

[Tortoise]

This. She doesn't take any effort at all coming up with something reasonable, she just blasts off lie after lie without forward planning, because she's so used to relying on her confident delivery getting her through. It was honestly amazing to hear lies said with so much confidence that some part of my brain perceived it as credible, even though I knew factually it wasn't.

She also comes across as intelligent because of her eloquence, but when you listen to the content of her answers, she's really not. I think she thinks everyone else is stupider than her, so she never developed any reason to worry about what they might think.

I haven't been able to work this out from the reports. Are her parents, and the babies' parents, sitting behind her or facing her?

(sorry not at all related to your post)

 

[Blondiexoxo]

She didn't have handover sheets for four of the babies, A, C, D and K.

This info was given in the podcast -
The Trial of Lucy Letby: Episode 29, Arrested - The Mail

That puts my theory to bed then! It’s strange how she didn’t search up the final 6 babies parents yet did all the others. I suppose she’d have known their names from being on the NNU and as she was searching for majority of them shortly after the attacks she’d still remember.

Very strange though that she didn’t have a handover note for baby K yet searched up the parents of baby K in April 2018! If she managed to remember the parents names for over 2 years to search them up in 2018, then how come she repeatedly said she ‘could not recall’ almost any of the events for child K’s collapse in her police interview or on the stand last week when being cross examined by NJ? IMO it was because Dr J caught her with baby K and that IMO is why she was searching the parents in April 2018 to see if they had posted anything about the collapse of their baby at COCH.

Baby E and baby K were the 2 times she was ‘caught’ if guilty. IMO that is why she searched baby E’s mother so frequently and then randomly after 2 years searched for baby K’s parents. Personally I think she was checking to see what, if anything, the parents had posted about baby K’s collapse and ultimate death.
MOO

ETA - could LL have had access to hospital records on the computer system in her ‘patient safety’ position after she was redeployed? Could she have searched for the name of baby K’s parents whilst she was in that role? If she knew their name from memory then her claiming to not remember so many events seems even more like a complete lie. IMO

 

[Becky53]

I haven't been able to work this out from the reports. Are her parents, and the babies' parents, sitting behind her or facing her?

(sorry not at all related to your post)

Letby's cross-examination back under way​

Prosecutor Nick Johnson KC is on his feet to continue his cross-examination of Lucy Letby.
The defendant, 33, is wearing a black striped suit and has her hair down.
Mr Justice James Goss, the judge in this trial, is overseeing proceedings.
Letby's parents, Susan and John, are sitting in the public gallery behind her.

From 18th May @ 10:33am for her parents.

Lucy Letby trial: Facebook searches of nurse accused of murdering babies read out in court

Lucy Letby, a former neonatal nurse, has been back in court for another day of cross-examination by the prosecution on Friday. She is accused of the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of 10 others, and denies all the charges.

news.sky.com

 

[Tortoise]

Letby's cross-examination back under way​

Prosecutor Nick Johnson KC is on his feet to continue his cross-examination of Lucy Letby.
The defendant, 33, is wearing a black striped suit and has her hair down.
Mr Justice James Goss, the judge in this trial, is overseeing proceedings.
Letby's parents, Susan and John, are sitting in the public gallery behind her.

From 18th May @ 10:33am for her parents.

Lucy Letby trial: Facebook searches of nurse accused of murdering babies read out in court

Lucy Letby, a former neonatal nurse, has been back in court for another day of cross-examination by the prosecution on Friday. She is accused of the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of 10 others, and denies all the charges.

news.sky.com

Thank you!

 

[Blondiexoxo]

If guilty this is someone who’s not used to being challenged. Notice the power play and anger whenever there’s a question she doesn’t want to answer. She ignores NJ and refuses to answer, instead sitting in silence and looking away. Screams power and control issues to me.
JMO IMO if guilty

I agree IMO this is why she took the stand in the first place. I can imagine BM strongly advised her not to, but when someone has issues with needing to be in control they won’t listen to others even when what they’re saying is in their best interests IMO. It’s like a warped belief that they can convince others that they are telling the truth, even when evidence is staring them in the face they have manipulated for so long it’s like second nature IMO. Don’t think she was banking on NJ being so thorough and knowing this case so well, nothing slipped past him IMO.

I wonder if she understood that these little snippets of information we hadn’t already heard about would come out, specifically the falsifying documents?

-Question for anyone with legal knowledge.. I’m not a lawyer so no idea how it works but if a defendant lies on the stand about something such as ‘I have never falsified notes’, does this open the door for NJ to bring in evidence to refute this claim? Same with the having no social life claim, did that then open the door for the little document she got handed on Friday morning? In other words, when the evidence hasn’t already been presented in court, if the defendant claims something the prosecution believe to not be true, can they then present the evidence to the defendant?

MOO

 

[Becky53]

Thank you!

What it is like inside the trial of Lucy Letby?​

By Megan Baynes, news reporter inside Manchester Crown Court
It has been 233 days since the trial of Lucy Letby first opened, and soon a jury of eight men and four women must decide if she is innocent or guilty of the murder of seven babies, and the attempted murder of 10 more.
Letby has spent most of the trial behind a glass-fronted dock, but for the last seven days, she has been seated in the centre of the court, on the witness stand. She is seated behind a wooden table, with an iPad and piles of binders next to her - there is a significant amount of paperwork being submitted as evidence in this trial, and while a lot has been digitised, there is still a need for paper copies.

Her seat faces head-on to the jury, who in turn sit behind computers, their own copies of the evidence also supplied in binders and iPads.

Letby is always flanked by two members of the court security. Behind her sit her parents. And across a short divide sit the parents of the babies in question. The evidence is hard to hear, and some of them have walked out of the room at certain points.

And in front of them sits the media. Sky News is one of just a handful allowed inside the courtroom - most of the other media is watching a live stream from an adjacent courtroom.

same link but 25th May @ 10:04

I assume the divide is between her parents and babies parents (Someone who has been will know better).

 

[Tortoise]

I agree IMO this is why she took the stand in the first place. I can imagine BM strongly advised her not to, but when someone has issues with needing to be in control they won’t listen to others even when what they’re saying is in their best interests IMO. It’s like a warped belief that they can convince others that they are telling the truth, even when evidence is staring them in the face they have manipulated for so long it’s like second nature IMO. Don’t think she was banking on NJ being so thorough and knowing this case so well, nothing slipped past him IMO.

I wonder if she understood that these little snippets of information we hadn’t already heard about would come out, specifically the falsifying documents?

-Question for anyone with legal knowledge.. I’m not a lawyer so no idea how it works but if a defendant lies on the stand about something such as ‘I have never falsified notes’, does this open the door for NJ to bring in evidence to refute this claim? Same with the having no social life claim, did that then open the door for the little document she got handed on Friday morning? In other words, when the evidence hasn’t already been presented in court, if the defendant claims something the prosecution believe to not be true, can they then present the evidence to the defendant?

MOO

I'm not sure a barrister advises their client not to take the stand. I could be wrong on that, but that does seem to me to be something the accused could raise in an appeal, because it doesn't seem quite ethical to me.

As regards the evidence of alleged falsified notes, that was already introduced into evidence with the electronic stuff. It would have been argued in closing arguments as to the prosecution's case that these were false entries not backed up for instance by other clinical notes or obs charts, but she's just made life easier for the prosecution demonstrating their case in her cross-exam. The Facebook photos etc would have also been in police records but not deemed relevant to use until she took the stand and made representations that she was isolated from her friends on the unit for two years.

JMO

 

[Jayney404]

I agree IMO this is why she took the stand in the first place. I can imagine BM strongly advised her not to, but when someone has issues with needing to be in control they won’t listen to others even when what they’re saying is in their best interests IMO. It’s like a warped belief that they can convince others that they are telling the truth, even when evidence is staring them in the face they have manipulated for so long it’s like second nature IMO. Don’t think she was banking on NJ being so thorough and knowing this case so well, nothing slipped past him IMO.

I wonder if she understood that these little snippets of information we hadn’t already heard about would come out, specifically the falsifying documents?

-Question for anyone with legal knowledge.. I’m not a lawyer so no idea how it works but if a defendant lies on the stand about something such as ‘I have never falsified notes’, does this open the door for NJ to bring in evidence to refute this claim? Same with the having no social life claim, did that then open the door for the little document she got handed on Friday morning? In other words, when the evidence hasn’t already been presented in court, if the defendant claims something the prosecution believe to not be true, can they then present the evidence to the defendant?

MOO

Completely agree, firing post it notes out also points to wanting to continue to exert control and orchestrate things from the stand. It must be relatively frequent too as NJ mentioned this behaviour.

JMO if guilty ….

 

[Becci]

I wonder whether dr choc gave her the info for baby k?
Also i hope his wife/ex ewife unmasks him after this. (I would) haha

 

[Dotta]

Completely agree, firing post it notes out also points to wanting to continue to exert control and orchestrate things from the stand. It must be relatively frequent too as NJ mentioned this behaviour.

JMO if guilty ….

Do you mean from "the dock"?

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Yes thats how I feel and if a guilty verdict is given I wonder how she will react

In my experience of dealing with people that have this type of controlling / denial personality they tend to be stunned to their core and look as if they've been punched in the guts and start spiralling out of control emotionally and immediately act out in any one of many directions. I suspect they default to 'their usual' and think they're diverting attention from the real issue at hand when they act out in that moment, so expect dramatics.

JMO MOO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

When it's estimated she didn't search for the most part of a year, is it possible she was using some type of different online device or one with a VPN / browser that was clearing cookies ?

I'm not a techie person but how did they know she was searching those names, was it only via her FB search history whilst logged into FB? Maybe she started a second / secret account? Or maybe she had some reason to swerve FB?

 

[katydid23]

That puts my theory to bed then! It’s strange how she didn’t search up the final 6 babies parents yet did all the others. I suppose she’d have known their names from being on the NNU and as she was searching for majority of them shortly after the attacks she’d still remember.

Very strange though that she didn’t have a handover note for baby K yet searched up the parents of baby K in April 2018! If she managed to remember the parents names for over 2 years to search them up in 2018, then how come she repeatedly said she ‘could not recall’ almost any of the events for child K’s collapse in her police interview or on the stand last week when being cross examined by NJ? IMO it was because Dr J caught her with baby K and that IMO is why she was searching the parents in April 2018 to see if they had posted anything about the collapse of their baby at COCH.

Baby E and baby K were the 2 times she was ‘caught’ if guilty. IMO that is why she searched baby E’s mother so frequently and then randomly after 2 years searched for baby K’s parents. Personally I think she was checking to see what, if anything, the parents had posted about baby K’s collapse and ultimate death.
MOO

ETA - could LL have had access to hospital records on the computer system in her ‘patient safety’ position after she was redeployed? Could she have searched for the name of baby K’s parents whilst she was in that role? If she knew their name from memory then her claiming to not remember so many events seems even more like a complete lie. IMO

Maybe some of the handovers were never recovered? She could have lost or destroyed some? Or they were stashed at a different location?

 

[Dotta]

When it's estimated she didn't search for the most part of a year, is it possible she was using some type of different online device or one with a VPN / browser that was clearing cookies ?

I'm not a techie person but how did they know she was searching those names, was it only via her FB search history whilst logged into FB? Maybe she started a second / secret account? Or maybe she had some reason to swerve FB?

I somehow doubt it.
She seemed oblivious of many things, digital trails included IMO.

But who knows.

JMO

 

[CS2C]

@Tortoise your timeline you put together showing the pattern of Facebook searches and the collapses is brilliant. It shows how in some instances LL was searching for the parents of babies who would go on to die along with the parents of babies who had already died.

It’s also very damning how pretty much every attack corresponds with a Facebook search. And she is searching the parents of baby I in between attacks. I recall them saying there were some victims she didn’t have handover notes for. I wonder if the ones she searched are all ones she had notes for?

Did she have notes for baby O as I notice she only searched Facebook for the surname? It’s asif she didn’t know the first name of baby O’s parents. She also didn’t search for the parents of babies N M L P (obviously P is the same parents as O) and Q.

Were babies L M N O P and Q the ones she didn’t have handover notes for? Would be interesting to find out.

ETA - I’ve just realised it is the last 6 babies she didn’t Facebook search the parents (O was a search for the surname only so I’m guessing she didn’t know the first name of either parent at the time). Going to try and find out if she did infact take handover notes for those last 6 babies….

MOO

Tortoise could you please re post this if possible ?
I have used the search function but cannot seem to see it.

 

[dm799]

Mr Tortoise could you please re post this if possible ?
I have used the search function but cannot seem to see it.

Previous thread I think
UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #24