UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #10

[ColourPurple]

It's usually after a serial killer has been convicted that we find out details about their past, after many interviews and tests with psychologists.

The findings are very useful. There is a lot of information about male serial killers but not enough when it comes to women.

ETA, Jmo

And yes, there is usually not any rational explanation for the crimes, at least from our point of view.

It only makes sense in the perpetrator's mind.

Yes, there's no rational explanation for these alleged crimes. No motive really makes sense, regardless of who the culprit may be.

If guilty, I guess we might hear things afterwards such as maybe LL had always had a preoccupation with death, or maybe pets had unexpectedly passed away in her care when she was younger, but I doubt we'd hear anything about her openly harming anybody or anything.

IMO

 

[WaxLyrical]

There are certain aspects of this case which are really niggling at my mind. IMO I feel yet to be convinced that murders definitely took place, never mind who committed them.

These experts who are testifying that the only possibility of death was air embolism are doing so without any real experience of air embolism. Sure they are experts, I don’t question their expertise. But Bohin has seen one embolism in a child, and the research is so (understandably) limited.

My mind keeps going back to the fact that causes of death, in general, are often cited as “extreme prematurity” etc. Are these experts suggesting that if we go back and review the notes and X-rays of every premature baby that has died, we would be able to categorically say the actual reason for death in every instance? Or would some of them have the same markers that these babies did, and were therefore murders?

I’m reminded again of when they said these particular air pockets are seen in SIDS cases. We know that SIDS babies have not had an intentional air embolism, and also have no known cause of death, so how does the air get there? Initially they said sudden unexplained death isn’t possible in a hospital, due to continued monitoring and alarms etc. But there seems to have been several instances in this hospital of alarms being off or not sounding over many months, without any serious action being taken. Is it really a case of LL switching monitors off in order to allegedly commit a murder? Or was it commonplace in this understaffed hospital? Did issues with babies go unnoticed for too long?

It’s been said under oath that the (insulin case) TPN bag was changed. But it’s fairly reasonable to assume it wasn’t and the poisoned bag continued to be used (or else we’re assuming one stock bag was poisoned on the off chance it might be needed).

It paints a picture of a hospital which is not doing things by the book and cutting corners. A hospital which would allow someone that had suspicions floating around to continue caring for the sickest babies and even offer extra shifts to them. A hospital which appears to actively prevents consistency in the allocated caregiver (suggested by LL responding “that’s understandable” when told she could not care for the same baby twice in a row).

Either we have a situation involving the UK’s worst female serial killer, who was allowed to continue killing in plain sight and without challenge for a year (including obvious insulin poisonings). Or we have a situation where the NHS has been run into the ground so badly that it looks like nurses are murdering patients.

All just my opinion.

My thoughts ultimately are with the parents, it must be devastating to listen to this evidence. Whatever the cause, their precious babies are gone and their lives changed forever.

 

[marynnu]

I wanted to start a discussion about the fact that we have been given so little information about LL during the trial so far. It’s a bit long!

I have to say that I have a real concern with the lack of background information being presented, and how this will play with the jury. To be clear, I’m not talking about character evidence: I don’t need to know if she volunteered at an animal charity in her spare time, or always helped her elderly neighbour with her shopping (as random examples). And I’m not necessarily talking about evidence regarding her motive for committing these crimes, if guilty. Motive is obviously something that we all would like to know about because humans are curious, and we particularly want to know why someone has done a terrible thing. I accept that you don’t necessarily need evidence of motive in order to find someone guilty of murder. If I see an accused walk up to someone in the street and shoot them in the head, killing them, I would like to know why they did that, but I don’t need to know because there is no doubt that they did it. But motive can become more important where the evidence isn’t as direct as the example above, as it can, in my opinion, help a jury to feel more comfortable with delivering a guilty verdict.

What I am talking about in this case is more the absence of the background narrative: some (if not all) of the sequence of events leading to LL’s alleged crimes.

What we have been presented with so far is a woman who historically appeared to be fairly well liked and respected by her colleagues (noting however that there are the text messages after the alleged crimes began which indicate some difficulties with the professional relationships). A woman who had worked at the same hospital for four years without apparent incident or complaint. A woman who one day in 2015 went to work as normal, and within 20 minutes of starting her shift, allegedly murdered a poorly newborn baby for the first time.

I think it is fair to say that everyone on here has at least a passing interest in true crime . We all probably know a great deal about serial killers and patterns of behaviour and escalation of crimes.

If LL is guilty, she will be one of the most prolific serial killers this country has ever seen. We all know that a serial killer doesn’t just become a serial killer one day. Even if a person has always had the urge to kill, they don’t go from 0 to 60 overnight. There are, in nearly all cases, common patterns of behaviour. It starts out with lesser crimes, and then escalates to some form of assault, and then to murder or AM.

Just to be clear, I know that crimes of passion do just happen out of the blue without necessarily any buildup in levels of aggression. For example, a couple where one has committed infidelity has an argument and the wronged party stabs the cheater during the ensuing argument in a fit of rage . I don’t think LL’s alleged crimes could be characterised as crimes of passion.

The absence to date of some sort of background narrative, or even some evidence which could contextualise the alleged crimes in terms of triggers for the behaviour (such as a period of financial difficulties, a breakdown of a romantic relationship, illness in a family member, other difficulties with family relationships, personal medical problems) is a concern.

JMO etc

The following is just my opinion.
One problem is the nature of her work. If she's guilty, I'm not convinced personally that murder was the goal, rather that it was to inflict pain and/or damage. To do this under the radar would be extremely easy. As a health care worker caring for sick neonates, you've already crossed boundaries in the interests of the child - who in normal life inserts a tube into a baby's nose & pushes it down to their stomach, pricks their heel with a sharp object etc. etc.? To a certain kind of mind, it wouldn't take much extend those boundaries.

 

[Dotta]

There are certain aspects of this case which are really niggling at my mind. IMO I feel yet to be convinced that murders definitely took place, never mind who committed them.

These experts who are testifying that the only possibility of death was air embolism are doing so without any real experience of air embolism. Sure they are experts, I don’t question their expertise. But Bohin has seen one embolism in a child, and the research is so (understandably) limited.

My mind keeps going back to the fact that causes of death, in general, are often cited as “extreme prematurity” etc. Are these experts suggesting that if we go back and review the notes and X-rays of every premature baby that has died, we would be able to categorically say the actual reason for death in every instance? Or would some of them have the same markers that these babies did, and were therefore murders?

I’m reminded again of when they said these particular air pockets are seen in SIDS cases. We know that SIDS babies have not had an intentional air embolism, and also have no known cause of death, so how does the air get there? Initially they said sudden unexplained death isn’t possible in a hospital, due to continued monitoring and alarms etc. But there seems to have been several instances in this hospital of alarms being off or not sounding over many months, without any serious action being taken. Is it really a case of LL switching monitors off in order to allegedly commit a murder? Or was it commonplace in this understaffed hospital? Did issues with babies go unnoticed for too long?

It’s been said under oath that the (insulin case) TPN bag was changed. But it’s fairly reasonable to assume it wasn’t and the poisoned bag continued to be used (or else we’re assuming one stock bag was poisoned on the off chance it might be needed).

It paints a picture of a hospital which is not doing things by the book and cutting corners. A hospital which would allow someone that had suspicions floating around to continue caring for the sickest babies and even offer extra shifts to them. A hospital which appears to actively prevents consistency in the allocated caregiver (suggested by LL responding “that’s understandable” when told she could not care for the same baby twice in a row).

Either we have a situation involving the UK’s worst female serial killer, who was allowed to continue killing in plain sight and without challenge for a year (including obvious insulin poisonings). Or we have a situation where the NHS has been run into the ground so badly that it looks like nurses are murdering patients.

All just my opinion.

My thoughts ultimately are with the parents, it must be devastating to listen to this evidence. Whatever the cause, their precious babies are gone and their lives changed forever.

I have a question.
We read here about Arrowe Park Hospital which, as I understood, seems excellent.

And is also NHS.

So,
how come 2 hospitals in the same area can differ sooo much in care of patients?

Is Arrowe better funded as a some kind of Emergency hospital?

Has better staff?

Pays better and has no shortage of nurses?

Has better management?

Both hospitals work as NHS institutions, no?

I'm really curious.

 

[bbsaz]

The following is just my opinion.
One problem is the nature of her work. If she's guilty, I'm not convinced personally that murder was the goal, rather that it was to inflict pain and/or damage. To do this under the radar would be extremely easy. As a health care worker caring for sick neonates, you've already crossed boundaries in the interests of the child - who in normal life inserts a tube into a baby's nose & pushes it down to their stomach, pricks their heel with a sharp object etc. etc.? To a certain kind of mind, it wouldn't take much extend those boundaries.

I wholeheartedly agree with this
(imo etc..)

 

[bbsaz]

I have a question.
We read here about Arrowe Park Hospital which, as I understood, seems excellent.

And is also NHS.

So,
how come 2 hospitals in the same area can differ sooo much in care of patients?

Is Arrowe better funded as a some kind of Emergency hospital?

Has better staff?

Pays better and has no shortage of nurses?

Has better management?

Both hospitals work as NHS institutions, no?

I'm really curious.

Its a much bigger hospital covering a larger area. It is also a teaching hospital, and Im not sure if Chester is. The differences dont necessarily make any difference in terms of patient care, funding, expertise etc..., but they are very different hospitals.

In terms of neonatal care, they were different levels. Chester didnt take babies as sick as Arrow and Liverpool Womens did. Alder Hey take the sickest of them all.

 

[bbsaz]

I've personal experience of using all 4 hospitals and they are very different.

On purpose. They cater for different needs/populations

 

[marynnu]

I have a question.
We read here about Arrowe Park Hospital which, as I understood seems excellent.

And is also NHS.

So, how come 2 hospitals in the same area can differ sooo much in care of patients?

Is Arrowe better funded as a some kind of Emergency hospital?
Has better staff?
Pays better and has no shortage of nurses?
Had better management?

Both hospitals work as NHS institutions.

The pay will be the same and I can guarantee it has staff shortages! Everywhere does, and neonatal is probably among the worst.
Extreme preterm infants (I'd say <27 weeks) require staff to have very specialist experience to give them a chance of surviving well. However, there aren't huge numbers born, so for staff to gain expertise you need to centralise the care so they look after them all the time. This can involve parents travelling quite a distance, so other hospitals also provide care. And of course don't forget all maternity hospitals have a neonatal unit!

 

[GoodDayToYouSir]

I think there's the additonal problem here that if guilty, and if there was an escalation of criminal behaviour, such as starting off deliberately harming babies in lesser ways, then she would presumably have done so whilst alone with the babies, without any witnesses and if there was no major effect on the babies health it could easily have gone unnoticed. What kind of evidence would you expect to see?

Yes, I agree with that. If she is guilty, I think it is almost certain that she did things to harm babies earlier on, because from all the research on serial killers, they don’t just suddenly commit a murder, but start off with lesser assaults . And even if, as you say, the assaults she allegedly committed on the babies still cannot be identified now because there were no witnesses and no major effect on the babies’ health, I think it remains that something has to have happened in order for her to allegedly move from “just” hurting babies (whether that was by pinching them, sticking them with sharp implements, intermittent, smothering, or whatever) to actually allegedly murdering one.

You can call it a stressor or a trigger or something else , but in these cases, something happens in the perpetrator’s life that causes them to move onto actual killing. It is the absence of any evidence as to a stressor or a trigger in this case, which I find curious. The police will have gone through every aspect of LL’s life with a fine tooth comb by now. They must have been able to identify something which, if guilty, occurred in the days/weeks/months before baby A died which could constitute a stressor or trigger for LL to allegedly move to murder. It could be many things: a breakdown in a romantic relationship, or disciplinary issues at work, or a personal medical condition or something else entirely.

But at the moment, it just seems there is a huge gap in the place where you would expect this kind of evidence to be.

 

[Dotta]

Its a much bigger hospital covering a larger area. It is also a teaching hospital, and Im not sure if Chester is. The differences dont necessarily make any difference in terms of patient care, funding, expertise etc..., but they are very different hospitals.

In terms of neonatal care, they were different levels. Chester didnt take babies as sick as Arrow and Liverpool Womens did. Alder Hey take the sickest of them all.

I see.
Some ppl see the problem in NHS - underfunded, cutting corners, etc, etc.

But there are excellent hospitals in NHS too.

The problem lies in "work culture" in particular hospitals it seems.

And it is the management's task.

Sometimes when I read comments here, I have a feeling that NHS became a "whipping boy" for SPECIFIC people.
And these people must take responsibility, not mythical NHS.

In my country we also have NHS funded by the whole nation, and also have endless discussions about the state of it.

Never ending discussions...
Oh well.

 

[GoodDayToYouSir]

I think I understand what you mean. In many trials, information about the defendant's character and behaviour is given in the opening statements to contextualise the offence and the defendant's demeanour at the time. I looked for an example of a recent case in the UK and found that of the murder of Megan Newborough. The following quotes are taken from her thread here on websleuths and do give a character sketch of the defendant at the time of the murder.

The court heard that McCullum had not been in an 'emotional or sexual' relationship for around eight years, with his last one 'hampered by difficulties with erectile dysfunction.'

During the prosecution’s opening speech, the jury was told “inappropriate” behaviour by McCullum was noticed by his workplace boss on August 5 and 6. Mr Cammegh said the killer, a former labourer and cleaner, had joined Ibstock’s laboratory around 18 months before.

On the day of the killing, the manager “became troubled by the defendant’s increasingly juvenile behaviour”, which included throwing clay around the room, the court heard

Indeed, evidence of that nature is what I am thinking of. Because at the moment, anything we have heard about LL’s behaviour and potential feelings is all related to the period after the alleged killings started. We haven’t been told anything to give us an impression of her behaviour and potential feelings and circumstances prior to the death of baby A.

 

[Dotta]

Yes, I agree with that. If she is guilty, I think it is almost certain that she did things to harm babies earlier on, because from all the research on serial killers, they don’t just suddenly commit a murder, but start off with lesser assaults . And even if, as you say, the assaults she allegedly committed on the babies still cannot be identified now because there were no witnesses and no major effect on the babies’ health, I think it remains that something has to have happened in order for her to allegedly move from “just” hurting babies (whether that was by pinching them, sticking them with sharp implements, intermittent, smothering, or whatever) to actually allegedly murdering one.

You can call it a stressor or a trigger or something else , but in these cases, something happens in the perpetrator’s life that causes them to move onto actual killing. It is the absence of any evidence as to a stressor or a trigger in this case, which I find curious. The police will have gone through every aspect of LL’s life with a fine tooth comb by now. They must have been able to identify something which, if guilty, occurred in the days/weeks/months before baby A died which could constitute a stressor or trigger for LL to allegedly move to murder. It could be many things: a breakdown in a romantic relationship, or disciplinary issues at work, or a personal medical condition or something else entirely.

But at the moment, it just seems there is a huge gap in the place where you would expect this kind of evidence to be.

If guilty...

The only "stressor"/trigger I can see would be the need to increase the dose of stimulants in the brain produced during commiting the crime.

After all, alcoholics, drug addicts, cigarette smokers etc, all start with a little and finish with the most.

Starting with their own "Staircase to Heaven" and finishing with their own "Highway to Hell".

Ooops, my love of music shows!
But I think it is a safe addiction

JMO

 

[marynnu]

There are certain aspects of this case which are really niggling at my mind. IMO I feel yet to be convinced that murders definitely took place, never mind who committed them.

These experts who are testifying that the only possibility of death was air embolism are doing so without any real experience of air embolism. Sure they are experts, I don’t question their expertise. But Bohin has seen one embolism in a child, and the research is so (understandably) limited.

My mind keeps going back to the fact that causes of death, in general, are often cited as “extreme prematurity” etc. Are these experts suggesting that if we go back and review the notes and X-rays of every premature baby that has died, we would be able to categorically say the actual reason for death in every instance? Or would some of them have the same markers that these babies did, and were therefore murders?

I’m reminded again of when they said these particular air pockets are seen in SIDS cases. We know that SIDS babies have not had an intentional air embolism, and also have no known cause of death, so how does the air get there? Initially they said sudden unexplained death isn’t possible in a hospital, due to continued monitoring and alarms etc. But there seems to have been several instances in this hospital of alarms being off or not sounding over many months, without any serious action being taken. Is it really a case of LL switching monitors off in order to allegedly commit a murder? Or was it commonplace in this understaffed hospital? Did issues with babies go unnoticed for too long?

It’s been said under oath that the (insulin case) TPN bag was changed. But it’s fairly reasonable to assume it wasn’t and the poisoned bag continued to be used (or else we’re assuming one stock bag was poisoned on the off chance it might be needed).

It paints a picture of a hospital which is not doing things by the book and cutting corners. A hospital which would allow someone that had suspicions floating around to continue caring for the sickest babies and even offer extra shifts to them. A hospital which appears to actively prevents consistency in the allocated caregiver (suggested by LL responding “that’s understandable” when told she could not care for the same baby twice in a row).

Either we have a situation involving the UK’s worst female serial killer, who was allowed to continue killing in plain sight and without challenge for a year (including obvious insulin poisonings). Or we have a situation where the NHS has been run into the ground so badly that it looks like nurses are murdering patients.

All just my opinion.

My thoughts ultimately are with the parents, it must be devastating to listen to this evidence. Whatever the cause, their precious babies are gone and their lives changed forever.

Just a brief response! In my opinion this unit wasn't particularly understaffed, at least by NNU standards (in fact, according to the report staffing was above average). And even if it were, that doesn't lead to alarms being switched off, if anything the opposite would be the case.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Lucy Letby: Baby in extreme pain as she died, trial hears

Lucy Letby made three attempts to kill a baby before succeeding on the fourth attempt, it is alleged.

www.bbc.com

 

[WaxLyrical]

Just a brief response! In my opinion this unit wasn't particularly understaffed, at least by NNU standards (in fact, according to the report staffing was above average). And even if it were, that doesn't lead to alarms being switched off, if anything the opposite would be the case.

The staffing being above average doesn’t seem to correspond with their apparent reliance of people picking up overtime though. Is it commonplace/expected for staff to be regularly asked to do extra?

 

[Sundial]

There are certain aspects of this case which are really niggling at my mind. IMO I feel yet to be convinced that murders definitely took place, never mind who committed them.

These experts who are testifying that the only possibility of death was air embolism are doing so without any real experience of air embolism. Sure they are experts, I don’t question their expertise. But Bohin has seen one embolism in a child, and the research is so (understandably) limited.

My mind keeps going back to the fact that causes of death, in general, are often cited as “extreme prematurity” etc. Are these experts suggesting that if we go back and review the notes and X-rays of every premature baby that has died, we would be able to categorically say the actual reason for death in every instance? Or would some of them have the same markers that these babies did, and were therefore murders?

I’m reminded again of when they said these particular air pockets are seen in SIDS cases. We know that SIDS babies have not had an intentional air embolism, and also have no known cause of death, so how does the air get there? Initially they said sudden unexplained death isn’t possible in a hospital, due to continued monitoring and alarms etc. But there seems to have been several instances in this hospital of alarms being off or not sounding over many months, without any serious action being taken. Is it really a case of LL switching monitors off in order to allegedly commit a murder? Or was it commonplace in this understaffed hospital? Did issues with babies go unnoticed for too long?

It’s been said under oath that the (insulin case) TPN bag was changed. But it’s fairly reasonable to assume it wasn’t and the poisoned bag continued to be used (or else we’re assuming one stock bag was poisoned on the off chance it might be needed).

It paints a picture of a hospital which is not doing things by the book and cutting corners. A hospital which would allow someone that had suspicions floating around to continue caring for the sickest babies and even offer extra shifts to them. A hospital which appears to actively prevents consistency in the allocated caregiver (suggested by LL responding “that’s understandable” when told she could not care for the same baby twice in a row).

Either we have a situation involving the UK’s worst female serial killer, who was allowed to continue killing in plain sight and without challenge for a year (including obvious insulin poisonings). Or we have a situation where the NHS has been run into the ground so badly that it looks like nurses are murdering patients.

All just my opinion.

My thoughts ultimately are with the parents, it must be devastating to listen to this evidence. Whatever the cause, their precious babies are gone and their lives changed forever.

That’s an awful lot of babies with a possibility of dying with SIDS though.

Whilst you make some valid points here, even the radiologist report has clearly indicated massive amounts of air in the bowels of some of these cases.
JMO

 

[WaxLyrical]

That’s an awful lot of babies with a possibility of dying with SIDS though.

Whilst you make some valid points here, even the radiologist report has clearly indicated massive amounts of air in the bowels of some of these cases.
JMO

Yes, sorry, I wasn’t suggesting these babies died of SIDS. I’m just struck by the fact that there are indeed deaths which have no identifiable cause, and which DO contain the lines of air seen here, and where an intentional air embolism did not happen. And without knowing WHY that air appears, it makes me feel less confident that the ONLY possible conclusion must be deliberate air embolism in these cases.

Thank goodness I’m not on the jury. I’d be the one person who’s hung up on something mentioned on day 1 while everyone else is on month 7!

 

[GoodDayToYouSir]

Mr Myers refers to an event on August 23, 2015 which Dr Bohin had described in her report as "suspicious", when Child I had developed an abdominal distention. This incident was when Lucy Letby was not on duty.


Oh come on, surely that can’t be all that was said in court about this particular event? Mr Myers presumably asked Doctor Bohin why she thought the event was suspicious? What did the doctor say in response? Does she still think it was suspicious?

 

[Lammergeier]

I’ve been following these threads for a few months and have similar thoughts to WaxLyrical. My impression of the evidence so far is that much of it boils down to “something strange happened to these babies; LL was present in many instances.” It’s not much of a smoking gun for murder, let alone LL’s guilt. I hope we hear more about who LL thought wasn’t pulling their weight and the general state/working practices of the ward. Especially since the events involve equipment, technology and bags that LL herself probably didn’t have the ultimate responsibility for - I feel like we’ve heard very little yet about other staff who should have been handling those items or should have been overseeing matters. What else changed on the ward around the time these events started? Did LL have her own suspicions when complaining about other staff (or, if guilty, was she trying to pin it on someone else)? It would be very easy for a person who IMO was a little awkward, criticised others and ‘didn’t fit in’, and who was also very often present because they were picking up others’ slack, to end up as the fall guy for systemic issues. All JMO…

 

[Dotta]

These discussions and various points of view are really interesting.

They help us all not to get stuck forever on our chosen "side of the fence"

Eye opening and, most importantly, all striving to find the TRUTH.

JMO