On the other hand we have a style of attack entirely inconsistent with anything else that’s alleged. No air, no poisoning, no internal trauma.
It is no surprise that someone who had already, allegedly, attacked 10 babies with 4 other various methods of attack, would then add a new method for the 11th victim.
We have seen evidence already that IF guilty, the defendant likes to use opportunities based upon the patient's illnesses to craft her methods of assault. Babies with prior blood sugar issues receive insulin, while babies with CPAP receive dollops of air by injection.
So a tiny baby with a breathing tube that is giving 100% oxygen support would be very vulnerable to tampering.
I wouldn't rule her out as a suspect just because she used a new method, considering she had already used a large amount of different methods already.
No paper towel keepsake, or any other notes.
That we know of.
No sympathy card. No memory box.
The baby did not die at the Countess. So she could not have been involved in this process.
No initials in her diary. No post it note ramblings.
Not that we know of. There could be many notes that were never located.
No Facebook searching until a matter of weeks before her arrest, suggestive in my view of her being tipped off on which babies are being investigated, rather than her stalking the parents’ grief.
Maybe, but it then raises doubts of her claim she remembers nothing about this baby, if she had been told that she was being investigating, and she began researching her online.
Then she learned she charged with attacking her, and she didn't refresh her memory?
We’ve got her acting seemingly normal when “caught” by Dr J, and not like the rabbit in headlights you’d expect if someone was caught red handed trying to murder a baby.
How was she acting normal? She was standing motionless, doing nothing to help a baby who was desaturating.
Look how she appears in court, while under tremendous pressure. She is unflappable.
Why was she just standing there, and not calling for help at least? Originally she said she was waiting for the child to recover on her own. But since then we have learned that was against protocol for a tiny preemie:
Elizabeth Morgan, Agreed Evidence
For a baby of this gestational age, it would be standard practice for a nurse to take corrective action, carry out checks and call for help if a desaturation was noted.
It would 'not be normal practice' to wait and see if the baby self-corrects, for a baby of this gestational age.
We’ve got inconsistencies in recollections between Dr J and the designated nurse. We’ve got a breathing tube that was so insecure it was able to dislodged multiple times.
If it had dislodged on it's own, why wasn't nurse Letby doing anything about it when she claims she knew the baby was desaturating?
Minutes before LL entered Baby K's room, the breathing tubes were in a good place:
The prosecution is now asking about the time period when Ms Williams left the nursery room to inform the family on what had been happening.
She said she would not have done so if Child K was not satisfactorily stable.
She tells the court, other than being born very premature, there was nothing of concern.
She does not remember asking anyone in particular to look after Child K in her absence.
Elizabeth Morgan, Agreed Evidence
The court now hears an agreed statement from Elizabeth Morgan, who says in her experience, it is very unlikely a nurse would leave the nursery of a baby if the baby's ET tube was not settled in a position and the baby was settled.
Baby K is just not the open and shut case for me as it seems to be for everyone else. JMO.
It may not be an open and shut case, but there are a lot of very suspicious things that point to Nurse Letby, in my opinion.
The Baby was settled, with the breathing tube in place, as the designated nurse left the unit. Five minutes later, LL is standing by cot side, just as Baby K is desaturating because of a dislodged tube. And she is breaking protocol by not calling for help and beginning to help her.
I don't think it matters if there was a handover sheet or a post-it-note found afterwards. Or if Dr J and the designated nurse both remember if they had a conversation about it or not, afterwards. None of that changes the fact that the very same pattern, seen in the previous incidents is seen here.
Once the designated nurse and/or the parents of a settled baby leaves the room, Nurse LL steps into the room, allegedly, and minutes later the baby has a sudden, unexplained collapse. This happened about 22 times in that q12 month span.
