UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #11

[Bakers]

This is the case where they say she put insulin in the glucose. Child L was on milk feeds, not TPN.

Sorry misread your reply

 

[Tortoise]

This is one. I’m sure there are others as well if I remember correctly.

“A 10% dextrose infusion is administered for Child F at 3.50am, plus a 10% dextrose bolus at 4.20am.

Dr Harkness said the administrations had "an effect", but the blood sugar levels "kept drifting up and down".

Mr Myers, for Letby's defence, says there will be no questions asked for Dr Harkness at this time.”

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, November 25

The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more,…

www.leaderlive.co.uk

That doesn't mean they're going to question him at a later date about his testimony regarding baby F. There would be no reason to delay asking him questions about that.

Dr Harkness is a regular witness in many of the cases, and I'm pretty sure Mr Myers was acknowledging that he will have questions for him regarding other cases that have not been heard yet.

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

Reminder trial is not sitting tomorrow.

 

[Dotta]

Dr Harkness is a regular witness in many of the cases, and I'm pretty sure Mr Myers was acknowledging that he will have questions for him regarding other cases that have not been heard yet.

JMJMO

Really???

Wow, what a small world

So, I guess they meet regularly in Court.

Provided I understood what you suggested haha

 

[Tortoise]

Really???

Wow, what a small world

So, I guess they meet regularly in Court.

Provided I understood what you suggested haha

Now I'm guessing you might be thinking I meant he is a witness in lots of trials?

I meant in this trial, with the cases of the different babies/allegations being heard, he is a regular witness.

 

[WaxLyrical]

I assume the final piece of the prosecution’s case is likely to be the notes found at LL’s house. I’m particularly interested to learn more about LL’s responses in the police interview when questioned about the ‘confession note’. Is it going to be another case of “I don’t recall” as she’s said previously about the FB searches. Or is there going to be an explanation. And, will the defence present her diaries and other notes which contained the purported protestations of innocence? Time will tell.

 

[Dotta]

I meant in this trial, with the cases of the different babies/allegations being heard, he is a regular witness.

HahahA
I'm guilty

But, Your Honour,
you misled me saying:

"Dr H. is a regular witness in many of the cases"
(In general sense)

This trial is messing with me!!!

 

[Tortoise]

I assume the final piece of the prosecution’s case is likely to be the notes found at LL’s house. I’m particularly interested to learn more about LL’s responses in the police interview when questioned about the ‘confession note’. Is it going to be another case of “I don’t recall” as she’s said previously about the FB searches. Or is there going to be an explanation. And, will the defence present her diaries and other notes which contained the purported protestations of innocence? Time will tell.

The prosecution will present all the notes found.

It's their duty to present all the evidence, not just that which tends to prove guilt.

 

[WaxLyrical]

The prosecution will present all the notes found.

It's their duty to present all the evidence, not just that which tends to prove guilt.

Ah yes, of course.

And if she was an avid keeper of a journal, which has kind of been suggested (and she also wrote in her diary about one of the babies in particular I believe?), then that will be a LOT of extra material for the jury to have to digest and consider.

 

[Sweeper2000]

One thing that has bugged me about this trial has been the seeming lack of questioning by the jury. I don’t know if that is just the reporting though.

 

[GoodDayToYouSir]

The prosecution will present all the notes found.

It's their duty to present all the evidence, not just that which tends to prove guilt.

I’ve watched a few criminal trials from the public gallery (because I was interested to see some real life criminal trials) .

These were cases where there were one or two charges . But in those cases, the prosecution put the police officer who interviewed the accused on the stand and the prosecution barrister and the police officer together read through the entire transcript of the police interview with the accused, with the prosecution playing the accused and the police officer playing himself.

It took over an hour for them to read out the transcript, and I was bored senseless by the time they had finished, as was the jury from the looks on their faces. I wonder whether that is the format all trials take (unless of course, the accused has just replied “no comment” to all questions, in which case you don’t need to read the transcript).

But LL seems to have actually replied to the questions , albeit the answers were often that she “didn’t recall” the event, but if the prosecution have to go through that process of reading out the transcripts, it is presumably going to take days considering she was interviewed something like three times, and given the volume of the charges, the interviews must have been fairly lengthy.

Otherwise, I don’t know how they introduce the police interviews in their entirety into evidence. Presumably they don’t just say to the jury that the transcripts have been put onto their iPads along with all the other evidence and they can read through them at their leisure?

Does anyone have any insight into these things?

 

[Tortoise]

One thing that has bugged me about this trial has been the seeming lack of questioning by the jury. I don’t know if that is just the reporting though.

What gives you the impression they don't understand the evidence, or that the experts, defence, prosecution and the judge aren't doing their job properly in assisting the jury to understand the evidence?

 

[GoodDayToYouSir]

One thing that has bugged me about this trial has been the seeming lack of questioning by the jury. I don’t know if that is just the reporting though.

There have been questions from the jury. They pass their questions to the judge, who considers the question, and either asks the witness the question himself or, if that isn’t appropriate, he has a private discussion with the prosecution and defence barristers as to how they might answer the question for the jury through the presentation of further evidence or questions.

I’ve seen a few reports where the reporter mentions that the judge has asked a question, but they may not distinguish between questions which the judge is asking for his own interest, and those he is asking on behalf of the jury after one of them has sent him a question.

 

[Dcflag]

Another reference to the “poor skill” of other staff in her texts (okay, a poor skill mix, but I think this is a polite way of putting it!). She also moves on from the bad day quickly to focus on the positives of winning money, which doesn’t jive with theories of her doing it for attention. She was planning to have a party; if she wanted to milk the deaths for sympathy that would have been the perfect time, but we don’t see it.

About the bag - sorry sure this must have been covered already but how much of it is pre-prepared? Does LL take the pre-prepared mix and put it in the bag or is the bag itself already made up for her?

I didn’t take from her “poor skill mix” comment that she meant the skills of the individual people themselves were poor, but that collectively there was a poor mix of skill sets that isn’t really great for such an environment.

For example (a poor example mind ) if you have ten world championship winning tea makers with three of those having had small experience in making coffee, and then someone comes in and needs 100 coffees.. you have a great level of skill individually, but your skill mix is poor.

 

[Dotta]

It took over an hour for them to read out the transcript, and I was bored senseless by the time they had finished, as was the jury from the looks on their faces. I wonder whether that is the format all trials take (unless of course, the accused has just replied “no comment” to all questions, in which case you don’t need to read the transcript).

But LL seems to have actually replied to the questions , albeit the answers were often that she “didn’t recall” the event, but if the prosecution have to go through that process of reading out the transcripts, it is presumably going to take days considering she was interviewed something like three times, and given the volume of the charges, the interviews must have been fairly lengthy.

Otherwise, I don’t know how they introduce the police interviews in their entirety into evidence. Presumably they don’t just say to the jury that the transcripts have been put onto their iPads along with all the other evidence and they can read through them at their leisure?

Does anyone have any insight into these things?

Well,
I will be VERY interested in hearing these transcripts, although, unfortunately, we will get only little snippets.

Or they might present audio recordings.
I think all Police questionings are recorded.

Maybe the Jury will hear LL's voice at last.

But the greatest surprise will be if she takes the stand.

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

I’ve watched a few criminal trials from the public gallery (because I was interested to see some real life criminal trials) .

These were cases where there were one or two charges . But in those cases, the prosecution put the police officer who interviewed the accused on the stand and the prosecution barrister and the police officer together read through the entire transcript of the police interview with the accused, with the prosecution playing the accused and the police officer playing himself.

It took over an hour for them to read out the transcript, and I was bored senseless by the time they had finished, as was the jury from the looks on their faces. I wonder whether that is the format all trials take (unless of course, the accused has just replied “no comment” to all questions, in which case you don’t need to read the transcript).

But LL seems to have actually replied to the questions , albeit the answers were often that she “didn’t recall” the event, but if the prosecution have to go through that process of reading out the transcripts, it is presumably going to take days considering she was interviewed something like three times, and given the volume of the charges, the interviews must have been fairly lengthy.

Otherwise, I don’t know how they introduce the police interviews in their entirety into evidence. Presumably they don’t just say to the jury that the transcripts have been put onto their iPads along with all the other evidence and they can read through them at their leisure?

Does anyone have any insight into these things?

Recordings of police interviews can be used in the trial. I don't know why some are read out and others are shown on video.

In this case I think the prosecution and the defence agreed summaries of her interviews for each baby because there must have been a lot of time given to reading over nursing notes.

I do think it would be useful for them to see parts of her interviews, since I'm assuming she won't be giving evidence.

 

[Dotta]

since she won't be giving evidence.

I have this strange feeling you might be surprised.
I think she is listening attentively and even taking notes (in one of the Court sketches).
So far, the things look damning for her - IMO - and she will be fighting for her life.
What can she lose after all?
But it is only MY opinion of course.

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

I have this strange feeling you might be surprised.
I think she is listening attentively and even taking notes (in one of the Court sketches).
So far, the things look damning for her - IMO - and she will be fighting for her life.
What can she lose after all?
But it is only MY opinion of course.

JMO

Yes, I would be very surprised if she goes into the witness box.

I think because her barrister said -

"You won't get your answers [to what Letby is like] through seeing her in the dock."

 

[Dotta]

"You won't get your answers [to what Letby is like] through seeing her in the dock."

What a cryptic remark!

 

[Tortoise]

A nurse accused of multiple murders at a hospital neo-natal unit broke down in tears as a doctor began giving evidence at her trial.

Lucy Letby, 33, abruptly left her seat in the middle of the glass-panelled dock at Manchester Crown Court as the medic, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, confirmed his name.

She was visibly upset as she walked towards the exit door before she had a brief, hushed conversation with a woman dock officer.

10% per copyright - more to read at link

Evening Standard - Nurse accused of murdering babies breaks down as doctor gives evidence at trial