UK - Lucy Letby - Post-Conviction Statutory Inquiry

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I doubt it. They'll double down. That sort does. The grand conspiracy is a more romantic, enticing story than the fact that a nurse killed babies and a mixture of incompetence and willful ignorance from her superiors allowed her to do it for a minimum of a year.

Murderers, as I said to my partner today, are more often than not underwhelming. We're expecting the grand, melodramatic motive, the complicated web of intrigue, but those are things of the realm of fiction. I'm not saying that the truth can't be fantastical, complicated and fascinating, but generally, murderers are boring and mundane. They're people, not fanged monsters with cape and claws, drinking the blood of the innocent. Just a spiteful, bland nurse, committing acts of cruelty and murder to fuel her own sense of power and self importance and distract herself from her cardboard cutout life.

MOO

I think for a lot of the long term LL sympathisers it’s about far more than LL now. It’s become part of their identity. Even outside of the small group who have blogs, websites, podcasts and substacks to promote, friendships and communities have been built off the back of this shared belief in her innocence. It’s given those people a sense of purpose, a common goal, a feeling that they’re making a difference. To question her innocence now would mean that they would risk losing all of that.
 
Thanks for all the updates on this I’ve just been catching up.

My thoughts go out to all those families.

I just can’t begin to imagine the complete anger - especially those parents of the babies which happened AFTER concerns have been raised - at this stage these deaths were so preventable.
 
The inquiry started off in date order but then seemed to go backwards and forwards in time as it progressed. I feel like it should have been kept in date order to aid with understanding.

I'm not at all sure how Letby came to know what she was suspected of - to me it seems to jump from investigating her practices to her knowing she was suspected of murder at the family meeting.
You think the grapevine reached her? She had nurses who wanted her back right? Makes sense to me that she was informed. She's also probably smart enough to put two and two together. Is it about the same time as the "not so nice comments"?
 
You think the grapevine reached her? She had nurses who wanted her back right? Makes sense to me that she was informed. She's also probably smart enough to put two and two together. Is it about the same time as the "not so nice comments"?
I think she had her own little network of informants letting her know everything that was going on. Loyal nurses and supervisors, Doc Choc, the head guy... Emails, texts, facebook messages, lunch dates...

She was the spider in the web. It must have been such a shock to her when that support dried up and the police kept coming closer and closer.

MOO
 
11:48am
Dr David Harkness, in a statement to the inquiry, says he would initiate a Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy and Childhood procedure, which would involve a post-mortem examination in the case of Child E, with the benefit of his increased experience and knowledge now.
No post-mortem examination was pursued for Child E to save the parents further distress.
The cause of death was recorded as prematurity and necrotising enterocolitis [known as NEC in the trial], and no recommendations were made.

11:52am
Lucy Letby had agreed at trial that Child F and Child L had been poisoned by insulin, but denied being the poisoner.
Child F's low insulin c-peptide to insulin ratio test was relayed to the Countess of Chester Hospital. It was established that no other baby on the Neonatal Unit had been prescribed insulin, making accidental administration unlikely.
A Countess doctor's statement to the inquiry said: "I felt that the most likely explanation for the results was some sort of inaccuracy with the test and I would have liked to repeat them, but Child F had no further periods of hypoglycaemia and was transferred back to his local unit.
"It is our usual practice to repeat neonatal bloods that do not fit with the expected clinical picture."
She did consider whether insulin could have been delivered deliberately: “but this seemed absurd and ridiculously unlikely so the tests being wrong seemed the only possible explanation.”
She added in her police statement that: “with hindsight I should have flagged up this unexpected result.”

11:53am
Dr Gibbs, in his statement to the inquiry, said: "I helped during the initial management of Child F’s low blood glucose, in August 2015, at which time infection was suspected. Low blood glucose is a common problem in babies in early life, more so in premature babies.
"Blood results in Child F indicated that the low blood glucose was likely to have been caused by the administration of synthetic insulin. These blood results were only available several days after being taken, by which time the low blood glucose had resolved.
"The results were not interpreted correctly at the time and so, highly regrettably, an indication that someone was deliberately harming patients was overlooked.
"Not being aware of these insulin results meant that Child F did not cause me to be suspicious of deliberate harm on the NNU.”
Dr Gibbs characterises it as “a collective failure” on the part of the paediatric team to have not recognised the significance of the insulin and c-peptide results in Child F in mid-August 2015.

11:54am
Medical Director Ian Harvey has said in his statement to the Inquiry: “This situation [the insulin result] was not reported to me at any time before my retirement. It should have been. I feel strongly that had this been reported to me, this would have alerted me to an urgent problem and significantly altered my perception of the events on the neonatal unit.”

11:55am
Ms Langdale KC says to Lady Thirlwall: "In light of what we know about the facts of this case, and indeed the facts of the [Beverley] Allitt case and others, where the deliberate administering of insulin has been used to cause harm, you may consider that this is an area that requires particularly careful consideration."

Live: Thirlwall inquiry into Lucy Letby baby deaths case begins

I'm not so sure about the insulin cases, looking at its short lived duration it could easily be interpreted as "self correcting" and nobody would assume its deliberate insulin administration. Its quite sad to think you have numerous staff all desperately looking for a medical solution and missing that it's some hellbound horror walking amongst them thats doing it.
 
Good point they made about having concerns. If they had concerns then who's bright idea was it to move her onto dayshifts instead of investigating it properly.
And they highlight questions about Lucy Letby in red, after a doctor questions if she is harming the bAbies, and they fob off the concern until a meeting 'next Wednesday.' Meanwhile that nurse highlighted in red is on the day shift until next Wednesday.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
2,455
Total visitors
2,530

Forum statistics

Threads
603,992
Messages
18,166,304
Members
231,905
Latest member
kristens5487
Back
Top