UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #12

[Tortoise]

”according to her account” which means if ll was near
the incubator she didn’t notice and that’s not likely IMO.

the most common usage of the word “several“ means three and I think coming from a doctor that is what he means as he really shouldn’t be giving an undefined amount of time especially as it’s relevant to the diagnosis of an AE. Ie speed and volume. Several can also mean “more than two but not many“ so what limit would you put on that? Assuming you would put a limit on it at all. I think at most would be five.

mg has not stated at all any point in time in which she noticed ll near the apparatus preceding the event. The prosecution have stated ll co signed for the antibiotics fifteen which is many minutes before the event as the strongest proof that ll had the opportunity. Mg was also baby m designated nurse so much more likely that she administered it and tended to baby m as per need and would most likely have noticed ll near the equipment in the necessary time frame And would have testified to that. It’s also true that there is no signs of discomfort from baby m preceding the collapse which IMO doesn’t fit. That’s a icu with heavy monitoring of babies and nothing to indicate that this child is about to have a significant event. We also have that article stating ll was helping prepare the meds immediately before and at the same time as the collapse. It would be up to the jury to look at that and see what they conclude and the above is my opinion of that evidence.

So there is no supporting testimony then and Dr Evans did not say three minutes.

MG is silent on the matter of where LL was.

It isn't more likely that MG administered medication at 3.45pm if she was on the computer at that time, and was dealing with his twin's blood sample, dextrose bolus, and increased dextrose prescription. She hadn't even managed to get the blood sample posted off to the lab in the 25 minutes between taking the blood and baby M's collapse, which shows how preoccupied she was.

JMO

 

[Sweeper2000]

So there is no supporting testimony then and Dr Evans did not say three minutes.

MG is silent on the matter of where LL was.

It isn't more likely that MG administered medication at 3.45pm if she was on the computer at that time, and was dealing with his twin's blood sample, dextrose bolus, and increased dextrose prescription. She hadn't even managed to get the blood sample posted off to the lab in the 25 minutes between taking the blood and baby M's collapse, which shows how preoccupied she was.

JMO

The jury will have to look at the evidence. Supporting testimony for what exactly?

is it your guess then that dr evans usage of the word ”several” means an undefined amount of time?

mg silence is something the jury will have to consider. I think the evidence points to baby m being directly behind her and is then in a good position to notice anyone tending to baby m. It’s a icu and she is the dn so she has to be very focused on clinical care and not the computer, nor anything else. Thus much more likely to be the one administering care or otherwise.

if we had the bed numbers and allocations we could say with more certainty but the dn saying she turned her head indicates imo that baby m is behind her and not beyond the screen directly to her left when facing the computer. That screen also means imo that she is more likely to notice any movement behind her. As that’s all she can see or notice and is related to her designated baby imo.

 

[Sundial]

If someone is in the room watching someone else and the latter individual is accused of something, the accused is present but without opportunity. I have never said she wasn’t present just that she didn’t have the opportunity assuming five seconds of someone not having eyes on them is not considered an opportunity.

your scenario isn’t at all comparable. knife wounds before and after death indicate murder in this case we have medical scenarios that are not conclusively this or that. I’m still waiting on any ideas on anything that would give a medical professional absolute and concrete proof of an air embolism. The strongest I think I have read of is presence of gas after x ray, it seems it’s quite a broadly applicable diagnosis not at all comparable to stab wounds. The x ray would have to be just after death or collapse though because according to testimony gas is Normal after death.

jmo

But the point of what you referred wasn’t about *how someone* has died.

I am not exploring the difference between stab wounds vs air embolism: it was to highlight whether someone’s presence indicates they have done something wrong. I used my scenario to explain how a persons presence (or lack thereof) can still hold people accountable for a crime, irregardless of how a crime is committed.

Whilst I appreciate that you say; “if someone is in the room watching someone else and the latter individual is accused of something, the accused is present but without opportunity.”

I feel this is also a view that could be challenged. There are plenty of crimes committed where another person is in the same room/place, and crimes can and still do occur even with others in the room “supposedly supervised or being watched. Some instances can and do take seconds if someone is deliberately trying to cause harm.

However, in regards to the trial, witness testimonies have already given evidence that they don’t know where she was stood (baby N), or at the computer (baby M) or having gone on their break (as with other nurses testimonies), parents leaving for food/for the night etc. No-one has stated in the evidence they are in a room *watching* the accused so it can’t be her etc.
Just because she was (or wasn’t) present, doesn’t mean very much especially when we consider what happened with the insulin cases.
IMO

 

[LorriB]

Timeline for Child N and the different incidents

June 2

13.42 Child N born

14:00 admitted to NICU

15:00 temperature dropped to 36.4 degrees, and the temperature of the cot was increased to 39 degrees.

15:10 nurse Oakley records 1 min desat down to 67% and notes sounds mucusy dropped desat to 67% when upset and needed 60% o2 to recover.

Pre 18:00 xray shows N likely had an infection

18:46 nurse Oakley records temp now recovered

19:30 LL starts night shift

20:00 Nurse Booth writes taken over approx 2000...oxygen saturations predominantly in mid 90s-100%'

22.55 Dr L consultant notes Child N was 'screened [for infection] - due to grunting at four hours'. Child N 'self ventilating in air', 'respiratory rate 60', 'Sats 96% room air'

June 3

1.05 nurse Booth writes "One episode whilst I was on my break, whereby infant was crying++ and not settling. He became dusky in colour, desaturating to 40s. Responded to facial oxygen within 1-2 minutes, crying [subsided] after 30 minutes'. The note adds Child N's colour returned to pink perfusion.

1.10 Significant desaturation, Dr L informed by unknown. Note says: "Child N 'got upset, looked mottled, dusky, sats 40%, O2 100%'."Dr L notes 'On my arrival, 40% O2, screaming, sternal recession, poor trace on Sats probe, pink'.

Pre 2am Dr L notes "Child N's saturation levels recovered to 100%, and he was "asleep".

8am nurse Hudson takes over care for the day shift. 'Tachypnoeic on handover, unsettled'.

6pm Nurse Hudson notes slightly mucky aspirate. Day summary says 'settled for the rest of the day', with 'minimal aspirates obtained. Aspirates clear with tiny old blood specks'.

June 15th

1am nurse Jones-Key records Child N 'very unsettled' and was 'pale, mottled and veiny' with slight abdominal distension. Blood test performed.

Before 6am nurse Jones-Key records baby looked worst this morning and cap refil after 3 secs. Reviewed again by paeds...'

7.10 LL arrives for day shift early and enters room 1 to chat to her colleague and friend nurse Jones-Key

7.15 LL goes over to N as his monitor goes off. Nurse Jones-Key records baby looked worst this morning and cap refil after 3 secs. Reviewed again by paeds...'
Desat. N had to be given 100% oxygen support by a doctor.

8am N transferred to room 1 LL shift begins. LL records
'Mottled, desaturating requiring Neopuff and oxygen...cold to touch.'

8amish unknown writes NG resited in right nostril with acide reaction. At handover baby dropped saturations and required Neopuff. Care handed over to NNU nurse Lucy Letby'.

9am written retrospectively. LL records
'Unable to intubate - fresh blood noted in mouth and yielded via suction ++.'

Doctors note swelling in throat seen during attempted intubation

11 LL notes small amount of fresh blood orally and 1ml from NG tube

14:50 LL notes state: 'Infant became apnoeic with desat to 44%. heart rate 90bpm. Fresh blood noted from mouth'

minutes later a number of senior medics were crash bleeped to attend the child. 2 doctors fail to insert ET tube, 2 consultants are called who also fail to insert ET tube.

19:40 'profound desaturation'. Child N had 'colour loss' and required neopuff breathing support

19:48 N required resuscitation and 6 doses of adrenaline


From Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Thursday, March 2

Lucy Letby 'agitated' by specialists' arrival, trial told

A colleague says Lucy Letby acted "out of character" when specialists arrived to help a baby boy.

www.bbc.com

 

[Dotta]

"The doctor said: “Oh Lucy, poor little thing and you.

“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.

“So sorry

"You are a sweetie (name of doctor), thank you.”

The doctor messaged: “Chocolate makes bad days a little better. Hope you liked it.”

Letby said: “That’s true. Just a shame I don’t usually eat chocolate … but on this occasion …”

The doctor replied: “It was well deserved today. Are you OK?"

Lucy Letby told colleague she ‘wanted to cry’ after baby collapsed

MURDER-ACCUSED nurse Lucy Letby told a colleague she “wanted to cry” after a baby in her care had collapsed, her trial has heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[Sundial]

"The doctor said: “Oh Lucy, poor little thing and you.

“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.

“So sorry

"You are a sweetie (name of doctor), thank you.”

The doctor messaged: “Chocolate makes bad days a little better. Hope you liked it.”

Letby said: “That’s true. Just a shame I don’t usually eat chocolate … but on this occasion …”

The doctor replied: “It was well deserved today. Are you OK?"

Lucy Letby told colleague she ‘wanted to cry’ after baby collapsed

MURDER-ACCUSED nurse Lucy Letby told a colleague she “wanted to cry” after a baby in her care had collapsed, her trial has heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

Interesting insights here imo

 

[Tortoise]

I thought they said she went to Ibiza, for one week.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I think now we know what that reaction in court was about. A tale of hoped for love and happy future severed.

 

[WaxLyrical]

I thought they said she went to Ibiza, for one week.

15 -23 June she was in Ibiza according to the opening statement.

 

[ColourPurple]

So on 15th June the Dr was working nights and LL was working days but because she got to work early at 7.10am it meant that he was still working his night shift and was the doctor who responded to the crash call at 7.15 (when LL had her hair in a bun) The first alleged attempted murder that day.

Then there was the next alleged attempted murder that day around 2.50pm (while Dr was not on shift)

Then later at 5.25pm, in response to the Dr asking if LL thought the handover would be quick, LL said she'd still be there, as baby N was "poorly, bled again and became apnoeic."

Then around handover time there was another de-sat at 7.40pm with resus and adrenalin at 7.48pm, while LL was still there (and presumably the Dr had started his next night shift).

So despite being on days, by coming in early and staying late it looks like LL was working when the Dr was doing his night shifts.

Was the Dr involved in the 7.48pm resus too?

Lucy Letby told colleague she ‘wanted to cry’ after baby collapsed

MURDER-ACCUSED nurse Lucy Letby told a colleague she “wanted to cry” after a baby in her care had collapsed, her trial has heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[Sweeper2000]

But the point of what you referred wasn’t about *how someone* has died.

I am not exploring the difference between stab wounds vs air embolism: it was to highlight whether someone’s presence indicates they have done something wrong. I used my scenario to explain how a persons presence (or lack thereof) can still hold people accountable for a crime, irregardless of how a crime is committed.

Whilst I appreciate that you say; “if someone is in the room watching someone else and the latter individual is accused of something, the accused is present but without opportunity.”

I feel this is also a view that could be challenged. There are plenty of crimes committed where another person is in the same room/place, and crimes can and still do occur even with others in the room “supposedly supervised or being watched. Some instances can and do take seconds if someone is deliberately trying to cause harm.

However, in regards to the trial, witness testimonies have already given evidence that they don’t know where she was stood (baby N), or at the computer (baby M) or having gone on their break (as with other nurses testimonies), parents leaving for food/for the night etc. No-one has stated in the evidence they are in a room *watching* the accused so it can’t be her etc.
Just because she was (or wasn’t) present, doesn’t mean very much especially when we consider what happened with the insulin cases.
IMO

yeh only thing is, can it be established that any crime has actually taken place? In the case of baby n collapse at 7.15 im not sure. That’s the difference here, we have medical experts looking at notes and diagnosing accordingly. What we don’t have is concrete evidence that a crime has taken place at all and then looking for evidence to say who done what. its not like murder mystery at all.

in baby m case I am not sure the process involved to allegedly deliver the AE would take seconds. Seemed more complex jmo though. Not sure about the equipment used. Mg has also refrained from saying she noticed ll near the baby In the necessary time frame which IMO means she didn’t go near it, otherwise mg would have noticed and said that.

jmo

 

[Tortoise]

15 -23 June she was in Ibiza according to the opening statement.

She told the doctor she was going to Devon for almost two weeks.

Wonder what's going on there.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Furthering my point about mg being more likely to administer the antibiotics. Not only is she the dn but she has also not at any point as far as I know asked ll to attend to baby m whilst being on the computer Or asked ll for help in any way. She is only a few metres away so obviously would prioritise care of a icu baby whom she is the dn for.

jmo

 

[Sweeper2000]

Yes you're right, her testimony today directly contradicts the prosecution opening speech where she said she had her back turned and the alarm didn't go off. Now she says LL and her were talking, the alarm went off, and LL went over to the baby. That's weird, I hope they ask her why she has presumably changed her testimony.

I’m not sure her testimony has changed. She and ll could still very well be talking and she could have her back turned at the same time.

I can understand why people think it’s changed but what your getting now is the filler to the killer that is supposed to be the prosecutions opening. The alarm thing is interesting though but do you think she meant there was no pause between the alarm sounding before and then ll went over? so ll goes over almost simultaneously as the alarm goes off?

one of those situations that’s difficult to fill the gaps I think. It’s only a matter of seconds and your asking allot to have anyone recall such minute details with great accuracy.

 

[Knitty]

Thread is closed. Please continue at Thread #13