UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #25

[GoodDayToYouSir]

She was unable to explain any of that in her own defense on the stand. She was adamant she didn't want the arrest videos shown, then eventually admitted she lied. When asked why she lied to the jury, she said she didn't know.

If she always wore her leisure suit as pyjamas, she would have said so. It would have still been dishonest, because presumably the trauma of being taken away in your pyjamas is the humiliation that you look indecent, and the lack of empathy from police. That wouldn't be the case if you were actually wearing outside clothes, even if slept in.

If she put the leisure suit on over the nightie, she would have said so. She was unable to say any of that, because the very clear picture she deliberately painted was that of a frightened, shocked young woman humiliatingly dragged out of her house at 6am in her pyjamas.

PS - anyone know wtf a "leisure suit" is? Is this what posh people call a tracksuit?

The pyjamas stuff boggles my mind.

So LL says she has ptsd from her arrest when she was taken away from her house in pjs at 6am. NJ produces evidence that she was in fact in a Lee cooper tracksuit. As soon as I read that, I immediately came up with 3 things LL could have said in response to NJ which would have helped her:

- the police came to my home at 6am unannounced. I was in my pjs but on reflection, yes, they let me get changed before they took me away. But one of the clearest memories I have of that day is when I opened the door to them when I was in my pjs and thereafter, I was so upset that I mixed up the details.
- the police came to my home at 6am unannounced. I was in my Lee cooper tracksuit which I do sleep in, so that’s why I said pjs.
- yes, I made a mistake about being in my pjs. But that detail isn’t important . I was explaining that I have ptsd . The ptsd is due to the fact that the police showed up unannounced at my home at 6am and arrested me. The experience is being arrested is what caused the ptsd. Whether or not I was in pjs wasn’t important - it’s not like you get ptsd if you are arrested in your pjs, but don’t get ptsd if you are arrested in a 3 piece suit. It is the experience of being arrested (for the first time in your life ) for something you didn’t do that causes the trauma .

The prosecution have presented us with the image of a very manipulative , forward planning individual, so much so that if guilty, she managed to allegedly lie so convincingly that she wasn’t removed from the ward for over a year. It’s difficult to square that with the person who apparently can’t come up with a valid counter to the pjs revelation. Someone so good at allegedly lying, who has had years to think about what she would say when she’s on the stand, would surely be able to do better than that.

Whether guilty or innocent, LL is an absolutely bag of contradictions. I think that’s part of what makes this case so difficult to wrap one’s head around. IMO .

 

[Sundial]

Maybe it is not possible to apply sane and rational explanations to that which is not sane or rational?

Those notes do remind me of the tropes psychological horror movies rely on. The perfectly innocent seeming upstanding person, often in a trusted position and with whom LE have been liaising, shock horror slowly transpires to be 'the one' and the penny slowly starts to drop. Followed by the 'big reveal' where they discover a secret room (lair) filled with completely deranged scraps of paper, writing on the wall, and photographs pinned up.

In this instance we have the 'paper collection', the notes, the dishonesty, Facebook searches, and the illicit affair reveal.

Edited to include FB - the modern equivalent of photographs pinned up LOL

To be honest with all the;

Shredder
Pyjamas
Leisure/tracksuit wear
Affair/dates
Fb searching
Handovers
Sewerage
Cigarettes
(I’m sure I’ve missed loads of other stuff!)

It makes for some very peculiar storytelling; Jackanory or bedtime hour gone quite wrong.

Allegedly, if guilty etc
JMO

 

[Tortoise]

The pyjamas stuff boggles my mind.

So LL says she has ptsd from her arrest when she was taken away from her house in pjs at 6am. NJ produces evidence that she was in fact in a Lee cooper tracksuit. As soon as I read that, I immediately came up with 3 things LL could have said in response to NJ which would have helped her:

- the police came to my home at 6am unannounced. I was in my pjs but on reflection, yes, they let me get changed before they took me away. But one of the clearest memories I have of that day is when I opened the door to them when I was in my pjs and thereafter, I was so upset that I mixed up the details.
- the police came to my home at 6am unannounced. I was in my Lee cooper tracksuit which I do sleep in, so that’s why I said pjs.
- yes, I made a mistake about being in my pjs. But that detail isn’t important . I was explaining that I have ptsd . The ptsd is due to the fact that the police showed up unannounced at my home at 6am and arrested me. The experience is being arrested is what caused the ptsd. Whether or not I was in pjs wasn’t important - it’s not like you get ptsd if you are arrested in your pjs, but don’t get ptsd if you are arrested in a 3 piece suit. It is the experience of being arrested (for the first time in your life ) for something you didn’t do that causes the trauma .

The prosecution have presented us with the image of a very manipulative , forward planning individual, so much so that if guilty, she managed to allegedly lie so convincingly that she wasn’t removed from the ward for over a year. It’s difficult to square that with the person who apparently can’t come up with a valid counter to the pjs revelation. Someone so good at allegedly lying, who has had years to think about what she would say when she’s on the stand, would surely be able to do better than that.

Whether guilty or innocent, LL is an absolutely bag of contradictions. I think that’s part of what makes this case so difficult to wrap one’s head around. IMO .

She didn't admit her lies until after NJ told her he had videos.

It leads one to the conclusion she didn't know they had videos of her arrests when she persisted in her lies. A bit like not realising the police would be photographing her whole house (IMO) when she denied having a shredder.

It's not comparable to advanced planning of alleged attacks that she can choose to do at opportune moments when others have gone or are concentrating on another task, in an environment which operates on trust, and where she has advantage over totally unsuspecting colleagues and parents.

MOO

 

[Tortoise]

LL sounded annoyed at Mel on the night baby C died. Also, from messages it sounds like Mel’s request to go into room 1 was granted which may have made LL jealous when hers wasn’t. Here’s another text from that night, mentioning Mel again…

LL: "Not the vented baby necessarily. I just feel I need to be in 1 to get the image out of my head, Mel has said the same and [colleague] let her go. Being in 3 is eating me up, all I can see is him in 1"

From messages it’s clear LL did have some kind of axe to grind with Mel, whether it was a falling out or not it’s pretty obvious she had a problem with her IMO.

I wonder who the other colleagues were that LL seemed to have a problem with, and which collapses they were either the designated nurse for or on shift for? I think Sophie Ellis is another nurse LL took a dislike to. She was on shift for 4 collapses, Mel for 7. Could working with people she didn’t like have angered her if guilty?

MOO

I know Mel Taylor got her band 6 in 2015. That could have been a source of jealousy, if LL was jealous that is.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Yeah but that's why i keep an open mind i guess. Nobody suspects the perp!!
She could be a victim of this type of thing but it's obviously just my opinion.
It's a right tough case & one that probably could never be proved without a confession imo

Yep - that would be the even one step further movie trope. The set up meaning there's yet another person sitting behind the horror, creating the illusion of her being the perp... eek. Maybe that's why I had initially kept my mind open to the scapegoat theory.

However, back in reality, things like the hundreds of patient notes in bags under her bed. Since she didn't say 'I've never seen those before in my life and they were planted' then I'm guessing this is no Hollywood production but the sad mechanisms of some desperately sick person, if guilty.

 

[Becci]

Yep - that would be the even one step further movie trope. The set up meaning there's yet another person sitting behind the horror, creating the illusion of her being the perp... eek. Maybe that's why I had initially kept my mind open to the scapegoat theory.

However, back in reality, things like the hundreds of patient notes in bags under her bed. Since she didn't say 'I've never seen those before in my life and they were planted' then I'm guessing this is no Hollywood production but the sad mechanisms of some desperately sick person, if guilty.

That would be the biggest gaslight ever known. Doesn't bare thinking about.

 

[Becky53]

Re conjuctivitis

If the condition is viral then a person should stay isolated not to infect others - especially tiny babies.

If it is allergic, then no need to isolate but still it is hard to concentrate on work with tearing, itchy, swollen eyes.

So I can somehow understand LL about being uneasy.
We cannot come to work when ill in my place in case of infecting pupils and other staff.

JMO

Agreed - it was just to show how in one message she was moaning and then in another asking how the colleague was.

My eldest got sent home from school once with conjunctivitis he was around 6 years old and was told not to send him back in until cleared. Another child of mine had it and I rang in school to say he wouldn’t be in and was told it didn‘t matter and he could go in - he was gutted.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I have a funny feeling that any evidence regarding Letby’s psychological state has been legally argued and decided that it would prejudice the jury in a positive or negative way. If she’s found guilty it’ll come out in sentencing. It’s highly unlikely a GP diagnosed her with PTSD, so she’s had some level of evaluation and found fit for triaL. She’s also not legally insane or the case would be very different.

This is true. She's been medicated, labelled with at least PTSD and also found fit to stand trial.

Altho that's a very strange diagnosis *if* she's guilty. Although she could be having the symptoms of PTSD - depression, anxiety, ruminating, being triggered, having nightmares, flashbacks, etc - I think that's called being troubled by guilt and shame plus the anxiety of being held to account for one's crimes, aka having a conscience. Does suchlike comprise a PTSD diagnosis unless it's qualified by 'traumatised by suddenly and unexpectedly facing harsh consequences of own behaviour'?

I get that she's not been declared unfit or insane but it's that chicken and egg situation whereby a happy healthy rational person with their whole life in front of them would and could never do what she's alleged to have, ergo, cannot be sane (hypothetical not directly stated about LL). JMO

 

[Tortoise]

Letby blames raw sewage on nursery floor for baby deaths​

Nick Johnson, for the prosecution, begins - following a four day break in proceedings - by asking Letby "whether or not there is anything you have said that you wish to review in the light of the time you have had to think about it?"
She replies: "No."
He then moves on to the case of Child E. He asks Letby if she believes his death was the result of incompetence in the neonatal unit.
She says: "Collectively the doctors could have acted sooner to react to his bleeding issue."
"When are you suggesting that something that wasn't done should have been?" Mr Johnson asks.
Letby says: "Once Child E was profusely bleeding after 10pm, maybe a blood transfusion could have been given sooner, maybe that would have made a difference."
She says she attributes this mistake to the "medical team collectively".
Letby then says it is an "important factor to note there were often plumbing issues within the unit".
Letby is asked what this has to do with the death of Child E - or any of the children involved.
She says there was "raw sewage coming out of the sinks and running onto the floor in the intensive care unit".
She says this could have had an effect as well as staff being unable to properly wash their hands.

Lucy Letby trial: Facebook searches of nurse accused of murdering babies read out in court


Gotta love the way she says 'properly' there. Like they would have still washed their hands in it, but not properly.

I can't believe Mr Myers didn't delve into this further with her! Or maybe it's one he wanted to forget about. I doubt he's got the maintenance guy on his witness list.

MOO

 

[Lammergeier]

The prosecution have presented us with the image of a very manipulative , forward planning individual, so much so that if guilty, she managed to allegedly lie so convincingly that she wasn’t removed from the ward for over a year. It’s difficult to square that with the person who apparently can’t come up with a valid counter to the pjs revelation. Someone so good at allegedly lying, who has had years to think about what she would say when she’s on the stand, would surely be able to do better than that.

Whether guilty or innocent, LL is an absolutely bag of contradictions. I think that’s part of what makes this case so difficult to wrap one’s head around. IMO .

There are manipulation tactics which don’t require any smarts, they just rely on baffling people so much that they lose the ability to engage rationally - e.g. when under pressure come up with a ridiculous, irrelevant and distracting idea to throw everyone off (sewage in the sinks, doctor not washing hands), gaslight people into thinking you’re smart and great by repeatedly saying you are, etc. These tend to work with unsuspecting people but the lawyers are doing a great job simply not engaging with her at that level, so she ends up looking stupid. I reckon if they responded in the way a normal person assuming good faith would, she’d have everyone’s head spinning! Totally agree with you though, there are so many times I’ve wondered why she doesn’t just say something bloody NORMAL on the stand! and it’s so hard to reconcile her demeanour up there with her texting and her post-it breakdowns. Ultimately I have to conclude she’s not a very smart cookie, even when it comes to the medical answers she gives - they’re chatgpt-style bloviating with the rights words but no actual content.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Agreed - it was just to show how in one message she was moaning and then in another asking how the colleague was.

My eldest got sent home from school once with conjunctivitis he was around 6 years old and was told not to send him back in until cleared. Another child of mine had it and I rang in school to say he wouldn’t be in and was told it didn‘t matter and he could go in - he was gutted.

Triangulation - victim - persecutor - rescuer - and all that goes with it. Sits firmly in the playground of emotional manipulation games played by controlling, coercive, dishonest, manipulative (and also childish) people.

 

[GoodDayToYouSir]

There are manipulation tactics which don’t require any smarts, they just rely on baffling people so much that they lose the ability to engage rationally - e.g. when under pressure come up with a ridiculous, irrelevant and distracting idea to throw everyone off (sewage in the sinks, doctor not washing hands), gaslight people into thinking you’re smart and great by repeatedly saying you are, etc. These tend to work with unsuspecting people but the lawyers are doing a great job simply not engaging with her at that level, so she ends up looking stupid. I reckon if they responded in the way a normal person assuming good faith would, she’d have everyone’s head spinning! Totally agree with you though, there are so many times I’ve wondered why she doesn’t just say something bloody NORMAL on the stand! and it’s so hard to reconcile her demeanour up there with her texting and her post-it breakdowns. Ultimately I have to conclude she’s not a very smart cookie, even when it comes to the medical answers she gives - they’re chatgpt-style bloviating with the rights words but no actual content.

I think it also highlights a difference between the US and UK legal systems.

In the US, my understanding is that lawyers can fully prep witnesses before their testimony (including defendants ), almost to the point that it becomes a dress rehearsal . They go through all possible questions with their lawyers and come up with answers .

In the UK , they aren’t allowed to do that (which is as it should be IMO). So LL is basically on her own on the stand , which I think explains some of the times she has said something which contradicts what her defence has said .

 

[Blondiexoxo]

@Tortoise your timeline you put together showing the pattern of Facebook searches and the collapses is brilliant. It shows how in some instances LL was searching for the parents of babies who would go on to die along with the parents of babies who had already died.

It’s also very damning how pretty much every attack corresponds with a Facebook search. And she is searching the parents of baby I in between attacks. I recall them saying there were some victims she didn’t have handover notes for. I wonder if the ones she searched are all ones she had notes for?

Did she have notes for baby O as I notice she only searched Facebook for the surname? It’s asif she didn’t know the first name of baby O’s parents. She also didn’t search for the parents of babies N M L P (obviously P is the same parents as O) and Q.

Were babies L M N O P and Q the ones she didn’t have handover notes for? Would be interesting to find out.

ETA - I’ve just realised it is the last 6 babies she didn’t Facebook search the parents (O was a search for the surname only so I’m guessing she didn’t know the first name of either parent at the time). Going to try and find out if she did infact take handover notes for those last 6 babies….

MOO

 

[Becky53]

Kind of off topic but did anyone else notice how quickly Sky live reporting “shut up shop” when prosecution had concluded on Friday?

Will be interesting on Wed to see who remains to report and how much info is given.

jmo

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Kind of off topic but did anyone else notice how quickly Sky live reporting “shut up shop” when prosecution had concluded on Friday?

Will be interesting on Wed to see who remains to report and how much info is given.

jmo

Yes they didn’t report any of BM’s redirect! It just stopped once NJ was done. I thought it was stendge at the time, but then thought maybe it’s because we didn’t learn any new information from BM’s redirect, LL fave the same answers she’d given NJ and it was so quick and vague. Should still have been reported though IMO.

I just know that when a verdict is reached the whole world and his wife will be reporting on it, everyone will be sharing links on social media about it and all the details not realising the case has gone on since last October. Annoys me a bit when cases only get media attention when a verdict is reached. It will be all over the news no matter what the verdict is IMO

 

[Blondiexoxo]

There was the paper towel for baby M’s resus found in LL’s home (wouldn’t have contained parents names though)

There was a handover sheet for baby Q found in her home, however I’m wondering if she didn’t conduct a search for baby Q because of how questions started to be asked immediately following this collapse. If guilty she may have panicked and consciously decided not to search anymore.

Then she didn’t conduct any more searches until a full year later, before her first arrest, maybe she thought the coast was clear by then if guilty. She may have wrongly assumed that it was all calming down and that nothing would come of it by June 2017 when she searched for baby O’s surname on the anniversary of his death… curiosity may have got the better of her IMO.
Then April 2018 was baby K’s parents, this wasn’t long before her first arrest, which IMO she was not expecting as 2 years after her redeployment it might have seemed to her as though if the police were going to arrest her they would have done so by now.
All MOO

 

[Blondiexoxo]

After looking at Tortoise’s timeline, I think it’s almost undeniable IMO at this point that the handover sheets were being used to search up parents of victims.

From what I can see she didn’t have a handover sheet for baby L M N O P found in her home. Coincidentally these are the parents she didn’t search Facebook for (I’m including O and P because she only searched the surname on the year anniversary of O’s death and obviously didn’t know the first name of their parents)

The ensuing suspicion immediately after baby Q’s death resulting in her being asked not to come into work then the redeployment IMO makes sense as to why she didn’t Facebook search baby Q’s parents as she did have a handover sheet for baby Q.

This timeline is very effective I hope NJ has something like this to show the jury in his closing arguments

ETA - I also notice how she searched for baby E & F’s mother much more than the parents of any other babies in the case. If guilty, could she have been looking to see if their mother posted anything on Facebook about the incident where she found baby E screaming and bleeding and was told to leave by LL?

MOO

 

[Tortoise]

After looking at Tortoise’s timeline, I think it’s almost undeniable IMO at this point that the handover sheets were being used to search up parents of victims.

From what I can see she didn’t have a handover sheet for baby L M N O P found in her home. Coincidentally these are the parents she didn’t search Facebook for (I’m including O and P because she only searched the surname on the year anniversary of O’s death and obviously didn’t know the first name of their parents)

The ensuing suspicion immediately after baby Q’s death resulting in her being asked not to come into work then the redeployment IMO makes sense as to why she didn’t Facebook search baby Q’s parents as she did have a handover sheet for baby Q.

This timeline is very effective I hope NJ has something like this to show the jury in his closing arguments

ETA - I also notice how she searched for baby E & F’s mother much more than the parents of any other babies in the case. If guilty, could she have been looking to see if their mother posted anything on Facebook about the incident where she found baby E screaming and bleeding and was told to leave by LL?

MOO

She didn't have handover sheets for four of the babies, A, C, D and K.

This info was given in the podcast -
The Trial of Lucy Letby: Episode 29, Arrested - The Mail

 

[marynnu]

She didn't have handover sheets for four of the babies, A, C, D and K.

This info was given in the podcast -
The Trial of Lucy Letby: Episode 29, Arrested - The Mail

I suspect there was never a handover sheet for Baby K as she was only at the Countess for a matter of hours.

 

[katydid23]

Yes they didn’t report any of BM’s redirect! It just stopped once NJ was done. I thought it was stendge at the time, but then thought maybe it’s because we didn’t learn any new information from BM’s redirect, LL fave the same answers she’d given NJ and it was so quick and vague. Should still have been reported though IMO.

I just know that when a verdict is reached the whole world and his wife will be reporting on it, everyone will be sharing links on social media about it and all the details not realising the case has gone on since last October. Annoys me a bit when cases only get media attention when a verdict is reached. It will be all over the news no matter what the verdict is IMO

O Donahughe for the BBC stopped reporting as soon as NJ stepped down as well. I kept waiting for him to say something about Meyers redirect but he never did.