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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
10:47am

The questions now move on to Child P.
Mr Myers confirms what Dr Evans had written for his three reports concerning Child P, involving complications to the pnuemothorax.
Dr Evans said his view was that he could not explain, at the time of the first report, any other cause for why resuscitation was not successful.

10:48am

Dr Evans confirms he could come up with no 'natural cause' for Child P's death.

 






Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue


Court is currently being shown an X-ray of Child O and Dr Evans is pointing out to the jury where the liver is - he says 'if you are an experienced CPR neonatal doctor' you know where to place thumb/finger to carry out resus

Mr Myers says it's 'entirely possible in the course of vigorous chest compressions over several minutes that the liver can sustain damage' Dr Evans says 'I've never seen it'

We're now moving on to Child O's brother, Child P. Dr Evans previously said he was at a 'loss to explain' his deterioration
 
10:54am

Mr Myers asks about the 'splinting' of the diaphragm Dr Evans had written about in his report for Child P.
He says in a following report, 'it is necessary to scrutinise the night care from June 23/24'.
Dr Evans said it was the 'option at the time'. He says there was excess air in the x-ray from the night before which destabilised the baby, and meant he was unable to take feeds properly.
He says in light of evidence given by local staff over the past few days, additional air was given to Child P during the morning of June 24 which splintered the diaphragm and caused the collapse.
He says there were two events - excess given prior to the x-ray, which destabiised the baby, and further air into the stomach on the morning of June 24.
He says that is a "more accurate way of explaining the events".

 
10:58am

Dr Evans says the most recent of his reports is from 2019, and he has since had a far better understanding of the clinical sequence of events as a result of the trial in 2023.
He said he was "more concerned" from his evidence at the time about the night care, when Child P was not taking feeds and had a bradycardiac event.
He adds he does not believe Child P would have collapsed without an additional administration of air in the morning.
Mr Myers says Dr Evans has "shunted" the sequence to the point where Lucy Letby was on duty for that day shift on June 24. Dr Evans denies this, saying if he was wanting to put Letby in the frame, he would have included events from the June 23 day shift, when Letby was also on duty.

11:00am

Dr Evans says an "extra dollop" of air would have been administered just before 9.40am on June 24.
He says Child P could have been suffering the consequences of an administration of air from the previous night by the following morning, but that would have been insufficient to cause a collapse, not without a further administration of air.

 


Dan O'Donoghue

We're now moving on to Child O's brother, Child P. Dr Evans previously said he was at a 'loss to explain' his deterioration

Dr Evans says in his view, an 'additional amount of air was given to this baby during the morning of 24 June and this additional air is what splintered the diaphragm and caused the collapse'

The expert says he believes air was injected on the evening of 23 June, before Child P had an X-ray which showed excess air in the bowel and then again the following morning
 
11:01am

Mr Myers says Dr Evans is "coming up with ideas and theories" rather than relying on the medical evidence available. Dr Evans says that is "incorrect".
Mr Myers says Dr Evans has "invented an extra dollop of air".
Dr Evans says he is satisfied, from a clinical perspective, about the additional administration of air on the morning of June 24.
He says it is not a "guess" but a "clinical assessment".

 
10:54am

Mr Myers asks about the 'splinting' of the diaphragm Dr Evans had written about in his report for Child P.
He says in a following report, 'it is necessary to scrutinise the night care from June 23/24'.
Dr Evans said it was the 'option at the time'. He says there was excess air in the x-ray from the night before which destabilised the baby, and meant he was unable to take feeds properly.
He says in light of evidence given by local staff over the past few days, additional air was given to Child P during the morning of June 24 which splintered the diaphragm and caused the collapse.
He says there were two events - excess given prior to the x-ray, which destabiised the baby, and further air into the stomach on the morning of June 24.
He says that is a "more accurate way of explaining the events".

I find aspects of the prosecution’s preparation for this case absolutely baffling.

Surely when dr evans and bohin were writing their most recent reports (ie after they had first reviewed all the medical evidence for the cases ), they were then given information about what staff on duty say happened .

How is it that dr evans is hearing things over the past few days from staff for the very first time ; things which significantly impact the opinion he forms? I just don’t understand it
 

Dan O'Donoghue
We're now moving on to Child O's brother, Child P. Dr Evans previously said he was at a 'loss to explain' his deterioration

Dr Evans says in his view, an 'additional amount of air was given to this baby during the morning of 24 June and this additional air is what splintered the diaphragm and caused the collapse'

The expert says he believes air was injected on the evening of 23 June, before Child P had an X-ray which showed excess air in the bowel and then again the following morning
So is he saying air was injected on evening of 23 June when LL had finished her shift , but that there was another injection which was fatal the following morning when LL was on shift ?
 
11:08am

A blood gas result for Child P is shown to the court from June 23, showing 'normal gas readings'.
Dr Evans says an administration of air would not necessarily lead to a baby "crashing". It would lead to them not tolerating milk.
Observations for Child P are shown for the night of June 23.
Dr Evans says there is more to a baby than a pair of lungs, there is also the stomach and intestines. The 'first administration of air' did not affect the breathing, he tells the court, but led to Child P being unable to feed. The 'second administration of air' the following morning caused splinting of the diaphragm, he says.

 
11:16am

Mr Myers repeats that Dr Evans has 'invented a theory' of a dollop of air to get it 'over the line'.
Dr Evans denies this.

 
Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue


Mr Myers accuses Dr Evans of trying to fit his evidence to when Ms Letby was on shift. He says he 'cannot be accused of putting anyone in the frame' as his evidence also relates to the night shift before Ms Letby was working

Mr Myers accuses Dr Evans of 'investing' an 'extra dollop of air to take your theory over the line' (the extra air relates to Dr Evans' view that air was injected on morning of 24 June) He responds: 'I haven't invented any dollops'

Dr Sandie Bohin is now in the witness box, she was approached to review Dr Evans' findings
 
11:19am

That concludes Dr Evans's evidence for Child P.
Dr Sandie Bohin is now called to give evidence.
Prosecutor Nicholas Johnson KC says Dr Bohin has completed a total of five reports for Child P.

 
It's hard to see where Mr Myers is coming from.

LL called the doctor to review baby P at 9.30am because he had stopped breathing, desaturated, and his abdomen was becoming distended and mottled. How that is Dr Evans inventing a dollop of air to fit his evidence with when LL was on shift seems ridiculous to me.
 
It's hard to see where Mr Myers is coming from.

LL called the doctor to review baby P at 9.30am because he had stopped breathing, desaturated, and his abdomen was becoming distended and mottled. How that is Dr Evans inventing a dollop of air to fit his evidence with when LL was on shift seems ridiculous to me.
Is it that dr evans says there was air injected the night before when LL wasn’t on shift; therefore , based on that , LL couldn’t have caused the death . But by then saying that the air from the previous night wasn’t so bad, and saying that there was actually another “dollop “ in the morning when LL was on shift, dr evans brings it back round to LL being a murderer (allegedly )
 
I keep coming back to the below text, in particular the bolded part. I don't know why but I have this niggling feeling it fits what prosecution believe is her MO. There's been several references to her parents and childhood. Thinking out loud is all.

Letby replied: “Cockington is gorgeous!! We always go there for afternoon tea. Dad was offered a job in Paignton many moons ago, could have been a very different childhood growing up by the sea. Looking forward to going back.

 
It's hard to see where Mr Myers is coming from.

LL called the doctor to review baby P at 9.30am because he had stopped breathing, desaturated, and his abdomen was becoming distended and mottled. How that is Dr Evans inventing a dollop of air to fit his evidence with when LL was on shift seems ridiculous to me.
Also, dr evans really does has the most extraordinary phrasing of any medical expert I have heard. “A dollop of air “ sounds like something child would say .
 
LL was still on shift when the X ray showing the accumulation of air in the bowel was taken on June 23
Thanks very much .

So what is dr evans referring to when he says the following:

“Mr Myers accuses Dr Evans of trying to fit his evidence to when Ms Letby was on shift. He says he 'cannot be accused of putting anyone in the frame' as his evidence also relates to the night shift before Ms Letby was working”

What evidence is he pointing to which doesn’t implicate LL?
 
It's hard to see where Mr Myers is coming from.

LL called the doctor to review baby P at 9.30am because he had stopped breathing, desaturated, and his abdomen was becoming distended and mottled. How that is Dr Evans inventing a dollop of air to fit his evidence with when LL was on shift seems ridiculous to me.

Surely the point of theories is to 'invent' them based on evidence, then test how valid they are against the facts. And there is surely nothing wrong with changing the theory when more information comes to light. I suppose Mr. Myers is just doing his job though!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
107
Guests online
2,786
Total visitors
2,893

Forum statistics

Threads
602,658
Messages
18,144,548
Members
231,472
Latest member
Momo1
Back
Top