UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #26

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
2:00pm

Mr Myers says he will refer to 'brief looks' at Lucy Letby, the person she was and is, and documents, and the subject of 'experts', this afternoon.

2:05pm

He says who Letby is, and was, is at the "heart of this case". He says she had "never been in trouble before".
He says the jury will have formed an impression from her giving evidence of a "serious" person.
A photo of a noticeboard from her home, taken at the time of her arrest, "is a good snapshot of who she is, and was". The noticeboard includes a photo of Letby smiling.
The noticeboard photo isn't conclusive but "isn't unimportant" - "this is the person we were dealing with at that time".
He refers to the "commitment" Letby did in training to care for "hundreds and hundreds" of babies.
He says it is "important of the type of person she is".
He says it makes the allegations "all the more unlikely", and medical professionals had spoken "highly" of Letby. He says nurse Christopher Booth agreed she was 'conscientious and excellent', and it was "not unusual" for her to work overtime. He agreed she was a "hard worker". He agreed she would be "upset" by the events which unfolded, as it was a "harrowing time".

2:08pm

He says it does not automatically make someone a murderer because of their behaviour after a baby has died, that it can be a misjudgment, although that was how it was presented by the prosecution.
Mr Myers says Letby was "committed to her work" and evidence showed "how much she wanted to work". He says she was "young, keen, flexible".
He cites agreed evidence from one of Letby's nursing colleagues: "I also remember...we had massive staffing issues, where people were coming in and doing extra shifts. It was mainly Lucy [being a band 5 nurse]. Lucy was young, living in halls, saving up to buy a house, single, willing to do extra work shifts..."
Mr Myers says that would explain Letby's increased presence on the neonatal unit.

 
I find it utterly mind boggling how he is legally, in a court of law, allowed to thrash the prosecutions evidence-backed-up case whilst providing zero evidence himself that backs up what he’s saying?

I hope the judge is allowed to clearly allowed to point this out to the jury in summing up. If what he’s saying is correct, where is the evidence to prove it? He brought in one person. A plumber.
 
The thing's he's missing is that it's not always possible for every case to appear on every list. For example the list of babies who were allegedly attacked right after their parents left during daytime hours. Any babies where the parents didn't leave their babies alone during daytime hours while LL was on shift, couldn't appear on that list.

In those cases that opportunity wasn't there but they may appear on another list like the list of babies allegedly attacked when designated nurses had just gone on a break on a night shift. Or they may appear on no list at all if another random new opportunity presented itself. All if guilty.

Dismissing a list as irrelevant just because not every baby appeared on it is madness IMO

JMO, if guilty.
yes, or she might have been the designated nurse for a baby and so wouldn't be on the list of cases where the designated nurse left the room.
 
2:12pm

Mr Myers cites evidence from Eirian Powell, ward manager, in which he says she talked about Letby's importance on the unit, and said Letby was an "exceptionally good nurse" and had "known her since she was a student".
She said Letby was "very upset" when she was removed from the unit. Mr Myers says that upset was "no act". He says Ms Powell said Letby was "distraught".
Ms Powell said Letby was distraught as 'she thought she caused the deaths of the children'. Mr Myers says there is no doubt Letby was "very upset at the time" and this was "genuine distress".

 
Poor showing for me so far. There’s lots of things here he could’ve brought up with the witnesses and didn’t. So now we’re just taking his word for it in regards to these general shortages and mistakes that are now suddenly contributing factors. Why did he not question the experts about ethers other harm events? Is it because they could give a sensible answer to explain them?
I think I know why he didn't bring them up individually during his case presentation. I think it would have been obvious they were not incidents which belonged on the spreadsheet. They were not total collapses requiring emergency aid due to severe desaturation.

I have not finished researching all of them yet, so I will continue ---but Child C's 'incident' on June 12th, which he highlighted, does not fit in with the cases shown on the spreadsheet.

And I have my doubts about the others but I will check them out and post the prior testimonies here.
 
2:15pm

Mr Myers refers to the 'striking' notes. He says they demonstrate the "anguish caused to Lucy Letby by what was happening".
He refers to the 'not good enough' note. He says Letby wrote that not to the court, not to the police, but to herself, plainly "showing how she feels".
He says that was "utterly consistent" of Letby being distraught about being taken off the unit.
He says Letby wasn't 'pretending to need anti-depressants' for years, and wasn't 'pretending to be suicidal'; "the impact was immense".

2:19pm

He refers to the social media evidence.
He asks what did the evidence give a false impression of - "that she dared to have a social life [in those two years before her arrest]?"
Mr Myers says Letby, in cross-examination, had agreed she would go to the races, and have 'fizz', and go on family holidays.
He says the photos show Letby having a "conventional social life".
He says photos like that rarely show what is going on inside.
He says there is nothing shown from the social life which runs contrary to the distress she was suffering.
He tells the jury: "If you look in the dock [at Lucy Letby], you can see the effect of years of this."

 
Last edited:
The thing's he's missing is that it's not always possible for every case to appear on every list. For example the list of babies who were allegedly attacked right after their parents left during daytime hours. Any babies where the parents didn't leave their babies alone during daytime hours while LL was on shift, couldn't appear on that list.

In those cases that opportunity wasn't there but they may appear on another list like the list of babies allegedly attacked when designated nurses had just gone on a break on a night shift. Or they may appear on no list at all if another random new opportunity presented itself. All if guilty.

Dismissing a list as irrelevant just because not every baby appeared on it is madness IMO

JMO, if guilty.
"Dismissing a list as irrelevant just because not every baby appeared on it is madness IMO"


It is gaslighting, IMO. It is purposely twisting the facts to make it appear as though the previous lists of patterns are actually incorrect and not valid.

Which is how gaslighting works---it is a method of trying to convince someone that their logical and rationally held beliefs are actually false and erroneous, which shakes them to the core. And makes them doubt their critical thinking skills.
 
2:24pm

Mr Myers refers to the documents, such as the neonatal schedule, which have 'limits to what they show', as they "only show activity". He says they cannot pin down a nurse's time at a precise time, at a particular location.
He says the computer-timed prescriptions are not 'definitely precise.' He says the times are often made "retrospectively".
The review does not mention how long an activity takes - which can vary, Mr Myers adds.
He says the schedule provides a guide to timings, and does not show what somebody is doing when there is no record.
He says it shows that nurses may be shown to do more than one activity at a time. He adds many of the events have someone to assist, and says other nurses assist colleagues.
He says when that has been the case for Letby, she has been treated in "the most prejudicial way possible".

 
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue

We're back after a break for lunch. Mr Myers is on his feet, he's saying over the next few hours he will take a look at Ms Letby and the person she is/was and the issue of experts in this case

He says 'you’ll have to form an opinion of her…you will have formed an impression from her evidence…maybe quite a serious character, some people are frothy extroverts not everybody is'

Mr Myers says Ms Letby, as has been attested by witnesses in this case, was an 'exemplary nurse' who cared for hundreds of babies over the years

Mr Myers says a big part of the Crown's case is that Ms Letby was always present at these events - he quotes evidence from another nurse who said Ms Letby was 'was young, living in halls, saving to buy a house' and was single so was flexible and eager to work overtime

Mr Myers refers to the note found in Ms Letby's home - he says this is headed with the words 'not good enough' He says this shows 'plainly how she feels'. 'They show a very distressed woman in a state of anguish'

Mr Myers references the evidence produced by the prosecution from Ms Letby's phone/social media in the years following June 2016 but preceding her arrest. Nick Johnson KC said the pictures on there show someone 'on the razz' having a good time

Mr Myers dismissed this, saying they show someone living a fairly conventional life - holiday with their parents, out occasionally with friends. He said they 'don't show what is going on on the inside'
 
2:30pm

He refers to the subject of the text messages, which are "normal".
She was a "young professional woman with a life", and the messages contain "social activity and banter".
He says only when "you start with a presumption of guilt" can be taken as different.
He refers to the 'go commando' message. He says a young woman, being cross-examined, being "humiliated" about something 'completely unrelated to what we were talking about', in front of the public, in front of her mum and dad, was inappropriate.
He says "You saw me raise to my feet more than once" about the style of questioning, and the comment about 'running out on your boyfriend [doctor colleague]' was inappropriate.
He adds the messaging was "unremarkable". He says the basis of Letby being 'bored' was used as the basis of an allegation she went out to kill a baby.
He says "others were doing it at work" [text messaging in the workplace]. He cites four work colleagues who did so, and they were "normal...what you might expect".
He says there is "work, gossip, there is winning at the Grand National, there is salsa dancing...normal things."

 
I find it utterly mind boggling how he is legally, in a court of law, allowed to thrash the prosecutions evidence-backed-up case whilst providing zero evidence himself that backs up what he’s saying?

I hope the judge is allowed to clearly allowed to point this out to the jury in summing up. If what he’s saying is correct, where is the evidence to prove it? He brought in one person. A plumber.

I agree. And he's bringing in extraneous info such as 'look at photos of my client having fun with friends' which bear no relation to the matter at hand.

I honestly can't see how it's lawful to submit those type of suggestions at this stage and they're irrelevant deflections. This case is costing a huge amount of money to the public purse and must surely be taking a massive toll on everyone involved.

Even the plumber being brought, there was no suggestion that any child had been harmed, injured, or died due to poor sanitation or bacteria that relates to dirty water or sewage. So what was the point? To prove that LL doesn't outright lie all day every day about everything? It still proved she seriously exaggerated and tried to deflect to an irrelevant issue when speaking to the death of babies.

JMO MOO
 
Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue

We're back after a break for lunch. Mr Myers is on his feet, he's saying over the next few hours he will take a look at Ms Letby and the person she is/was and the issue of experts in this case

He says 'you’ll have to form an opinion of her…you will have formed an impression from her evidence…maybe quite a serious character, some people are frothy extroverts not everybody is'

Mr Myers says Ms Letby, as has been attested by witnesses in this case, was an 'exemplary nurse' who cared for hundreds of babies over the years

Mr Myers says a big part of the Crown's case is that Ms Letby was always present at these events - he quotes evidence from another nurse who said Ms Letby was 'was young, living in halls, saving to buy a house' and was single so was flexible and eager to work overtime

Mr Myers refers to the note found in Ms Letby's home - he says this is headed with the words 'not good enough' He says this shows 'plainly how she feels'. 'They show a very distressed woman in a state of anguish'

Mr Myers references the evidence produced by the prosecution from Ms Letby's phone/social media in the years following June 2016 but preceding her arrest. Nick Johnson KC said the pictures on there show someone 'on the razz' having a good time

Mr Myers dismissed this, saying they show someone living a fairly conventional life - holiday with their parents, out occasionally with friends. He said they 'don't show what is going on on the inside'
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
7m

Mr Myers references the messaging in this case (between Ms Letby and her colleagues/friends) he says they are 'unremarkable' and 'utterly normal'

He picks up on prosecutor Nick Johnson KC quizzing the nurse about a comment in one message - in which a colleague joked with Ms Letby about 'going commando' in work with a doctor she allegedly 'had a crush on'

Mr Myers asks the jury to reflect on a 'young woman being cross examined in that way' he says she has been 'humiliated in here', that the Crown were 'having a laugh about it…in front of everybody sitting in here, in front of her mum and dad' - 'we say completely unnecessary'

He says the questioning of Ms Letby about this doctor was 'belittling' and was designed to 'undermine' her
 
He refers to the 'go commando' message. He says a young woman, being cross-examined, being "humiliated" about something 'completely unrelated to what we were talking about', in front of the public, in front of her mum and dad, was inappropriate.
How ridiculous. If he truly thought this then maybe he should have asked her parents to step outside. She's 33 not 13.

JMO
 
How ridiculous. If he truly thought this then maybe he should have asked her parents to step outside. She's 33 not 13.

JMO

Also quite frankly the horror and shame of being accused of murdering the tiniest most vulnerable little beings on this planet in front of the whole world surely outweighs the humiliation of a bit of flirty texting being discussed in front of one's parents?

I mean let's get a bit of perspective here. JMO MOO
 
2:35pm

Mr Myers refers to Facebook searches.
He says those familiar with social media will look up people for all sorts of reasons at any time of the day or night. He says it may be "no more than a handful of keys".
He says the prosecution identified a number of messages, and there were more messages than that, Mr Myers says.
He says the jury may agree Letby was a regular user of Facebook, and "rattle through searches".
He says the prosecution draw the jury's attention to the searches for parents, in connection with the allegations. He says that would be a pattern in line with the theory.
He says some of the parents names of babies on the indictment are missing from the Facebook searches. He says there are no searches for the parents of Child L-Q.
He says the searches by Letby also demonstrate an interest for parents of babies not on the indictment.
Mr Myers says that is "important", and Letby is seen as somebody who looks up names regularly.

2:38pm

He says of Letby's 2,318 Facebook searches, "only 31" related to parents' names on the indictment.
Mr Myers says Letby has not searched for things on 'air embolus', or 'forcing in air', or any 'fascination with what's alleged here'.
He says there is no evidence found Letby Googled 'haemophilia' following a conversation between a colleague nd Letby on Child N.

2:39pm

Mr Myers refers to the 2015 and 2016 diaries found at Letby's home. He says there is nothing in the 2015 diary which is relevant to the indictment.
He asks, if the diaries are relevant, why there is no reference to Child A-K in them.

 
Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
·
7m

Mr Myers references the messaging in this case (between Ms Letby and her colleagues/friends) he says they are 'unremarkable' and 'utterly normal'

He picks up on prosecutor Nick Johnson KC quizzing the nurse about a comment in one message - in which a colleague joked with Ms Letby about 'going commando' in work with a doctor she allegedly 'had a crush on'

Mr Myers asks the jury to reflect on a 'young woman being cross examined in that way' he says she has been 'humiliated in here', that the Crown were 'having a laugh about it…in front of everybody sitting in here, in front of her mum and dad' - 'we say completely unnecessary'

He says the questioning of Ms Letby about this doctor was 'belittling' and was designed to 'undermine' her
Am I the only one finding it annoying that he is making her a victim over the silly commando reference in front of her parents?

There is a whole room full of broken, grief stricken parents there right now, spending 8 months already, on this quest ----and Meyers is going to admonish NJ for laughing about the 'go commando' texts? And make it all about poor humiliated Nurse Letby being mistreated by NJ?
 
He says some of the parents names of babies on the indictment are missing from the Facebook searches. He says there are no searches for the parents of Child L-Q.
Any idea why she didn’t search for them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: IDK
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
195
Guests online
1,831
Total visitors
2,026

Forum statistics

Threads
605,569
Messages
18,189,117
Members
233,443
Latest member
Don7777
Back
Top