UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #27

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADMIN NOTE:

This is a trial thread to discuss the trial only. It is not a general discussion thread.

Although WS is based in the USA, we do try to manage the various discussions according to laws of other countries.

As this trial is in the UK, the case is under sub judice so please stick to discussing the trial content without posting anything that violates the following principles:

Basically anything that may prejudice the accused’s right to a fair trial
Any suggestion, opinion, or direct accusation that the accused is either guilty OR innocent
(i.e. the accused cannot be called "the killer"; use "the accused", "the alleged killer", or "the defendant")
A defendant’s previous history of any offences is off limits
Scandalizing the court (disparaging judges, lawyers, any officer of the Court) is off limits
Broadcasting anything about proceedings which happen in the jury's absence is off limits
Any non compliance with an Order of the court is off limits

Note in the event of an Appeal subsequent to verdict:

Appeals are usually heard by senior judges who are not likely to be influenced by the media, therefore responsible comment is usually considered acceptable once a trial has concluded, regardless of if there is going to be an appeal.


Reference: UK Contempt of Court Act 1981
 
ADMIN NOTE:

Please remember that WS copyright rules and copyright law require that images have a link to the original source to give credit to the source.

Also, Mods not only have to edit the OP to remove unsourced pics, they then have have to go through all subsequent pages and posts to edit where the post has been requoted by others. OR we can remove the entire post and all responses and response to responses.

All we ask is that members ensure a link is provided. It takes only a moment for the members but takes WS staff a lot of time to fix if the link is not included.
 
2:44pm

Mr Myers refers to handover sheets.
He says it is "not difficult" to see why Letby would have handover sheets in the first place. He says the issue is why she would keep them in such quantities. He adds if that is evidence of her intention to kill.
He says Letby's position is she "didn't throw things away". He says Letby had a "habit" of retaining pieces of paper. He says Letby was 'collecting' in the style of 'accumulating', not as in "collecting stamps".
Letby had said, in cross-examination, she accumulated the paperwork, not its contents.
Mr Myers asks if the jury don't think this accumulation is "random", what is the prosecution's case for them? He says if Letby had handover sheets and only handover sheets relating to babies on the indictment, that would be significant, but a total of 257 handover were found, with 21 relating to babies on the indictment - "less than 10 per cent". He says there are no handover sheets for Child A, C or D.

2:47pm

Mr Myers says for the 21 handover notes relating to babies on the indictment, '9 or 10' do not refer to dates on which events for the babies happened.
He says "they don't do what they should do if the prosecution are right".

 
@MrDanDonoghue
·
He says the questioning of Ms Letby about this doctor was 'belittling' and was designed to 'undermine' her



Of course he is trying to 'undermine' her. That is his job.

"lessen the effectiveness, power, or ability of, especially gradually or insidiously.
"this could undermine years of hard work"

If he believes she is guilty of the allegations, he should be working to undermine her
 
2:44pm

Mr Myers refers to handover sheets.
He says it is "not difficult" to see why Letby would have handover sheets in the first place. He says the issue is why she would keep them in such quantities. He adds if that is evidence of her intention to kill.
He says Letby's position is she "didn't throw things away". He says Letby had a "habit" of retaining pieces of paper. He says Letby was 'collecting' in the style of 'accumulating', not as in "collecting stamps".
Letby had said, in cross-examination, she accumulated the paperwork, not its contents.
Mr Myers asks if the jury don't think this accumulation is "random", what is the prosecution's case for them? He says if Letby had handover sheets and only handover sheets relating to babies on the indictment, that would be significant, but a total of 257 handover were found, with 21 relating to babies on the indictment - "less than 10 per cent". He says there are no handover sheets for Child A, C or D.

2:47pm

Mr Myers says for the 21 handover notes relating to babies on the indictment, '9 or 10' do not refer to dates on which events for the babies happened.
He says "they don't do what they should do if the prosecution are right".

Let's overlook that they were together in selected bags under the bed shall we.
 
2:48pm

He says they do show someone who hangs on to paper "compulsively".
He refers to the shredder, and what Letby didn't shred. He says if Letby had thought there would be a police investigation - as written on one of her notes - she would have shredded the handover notes.

 
2:51pm

Mr Myers refers to the subject of 'experts'.
He says the prosecution medical evidence is 'central' to their case. He says it is crucial to show the jury that there is no medical cause for the collapses of babies, and that substandard medical performance is ruled out, and that the alleged harmful acts took place.

 
2:55pm

Mr Myers says experts should be assessed as other witnesses. He says they don't decide the case, and their assistance is needed to explain how the babies collapsed.
He says the jurors should take their evidence into account, but "you don't have to accept them".
He says there are 'certain features which are important', that the witnesses in their field "must be an expert" and the "expert is an expert on their topic", and that was something, he said, was recognised by Prof Sally Kinsey, an expert in haematology, who "acknowledged frankly" she was "not an expert" on air embolus.

 
2:48pm

He says they do show someone who hangs on to paper "compulsively".
He refers to the shredder, and what Letby didn't shred. He says if Letby had thought there would be a police investigation - as written on one of her notes - she would have shredded the handover notes.

Unless she really really wanted them.
 
2:55pm

Mr Myers says experts should be assessed as other witnesses. He says they don't decide the case, and their assistance is needed to explain how the babies collapsed.
He says the jurors should take their evidence into account, but "you don't have to accept them".
He says there are 'certain features which are important', that the witnesses in their field "must be an expert" and the "expert is an expert on their topic", and that was something, he said, was recognised by Prof Sally Kinsey, an expert in haematology, who "acknowledged frankly" she was "not an expert" on air embolus.


Translation- "I couldn't find a single medical expert to support my arguments"

JMO
 
2:59pm

Mr Myers says theories on air embolus were cited by one expert in 'pigs and rabbits', not neonates.
He says expert evidence should be 'independent and objective', 'neutral - just stating it as it is', and 'not an advocate for one side or the other'. He asks if Dr Dewi Evans, Dr Sandie Bohin and Dr Andreas Marnerides gave impartial, objective evidence.
He says if the experts do not come out to that, it is "game over for their opinion on that topic".

 
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
Dan O'Donoghue

Mr Myers turns to the Facebook searches for parents in this case - he says there are many searches for parents of children unconnected to this case among many others. He says Ms Letby is 'somebody who looks up people very readily' on social media

On the handover sheets found at her home, Mr Myers says 257 handover sheets were found - 21 relate to babies on this indictment – 'it's a pretty small proportion...most do not link to what's alleged here'
 
3:01pm

The judge, Mr Justice James Goss, brings the jury's attention to a matter raised in their absence earlier today. He refers to a matter of the chart presented earlier today, to a list of events and which staff were on duty, presented in court on screens.
The judge says he and the jury had 24 events listed on their bundle of evidence, whereas the screen had 25 events listed. The 25th event was irrelevant to the point raised by Mr Myers, and was from an earlier version of that document.

 
2:59pm

Mr Myers says theories on air embolus were cited by one expert in 'pigs and rabbits', not neonates.

IIRC, the expert said the research was compiled on pigs and rabbits because air embolisms in neonates is extremely rare---unless one is in COCH in 2015/16 apparently
He says expert evidence should be 'independent and objective', 'neutral - just stating it as it is', and 'not an advocate for one side or the other'. He asks if Dr Dewi Evans, Dr Sandie Bohin and Dr Andreas Marnerides gave impartial, objective evidence.
He says if the experts do not come out to that, it is "game over for their opinion on that topic".

 
3:01pm

The judge, Mr Justice James Goss, brings the jury's attention to a matter raised in their absence earlier today. He refers to a matter of the chart presented earlier today, to a list of events and which staff were on duty, presented in court on screens.
The judge says he and the jury had 24 events listed on their bundle of evidence, whereas the screen had 25 events listed. The 25th event was irrelevant to the point raised by Mr Myers, and was from an earlier version of that document.

Oh oh, was BM trying to use that incorrect version of the document purposely? Maybe for confusion or to make a point about the 25th event, which was dropped?
 
Oh oh, was BM trying to use that incorrect version of the document purposely? Maybe for confusion or to make a point about the 25th event, which was dropped?
The revelation that she would go on the ward off shift without leaving a record of checking in, made any references to other harm when she was off shift less relevant anyway . IMO
 
3:15pm

The trial is resuming after a short break.
Mr Myers continues to give the closing speech.
He says, in reference to Child Q, he had omitted a reference from Dr Evans's report on Child Q vomitting. He says he accepts that was a mistake.
He says Dr Evans had been criticised "in scathing terms" by a court of appeal judge. He says Dr Evans is the prosecution's 'lead expert', and the prosecution not referring to that criticism in the closing speech is "appalling", and his evidence 'underpins' their case.
He says Dr Evans is 'not a neonatologist - and that matters'.

3:20pm

He says Dr Evans hasn't got current clinical practice, and "a good deal of his knowledge is historic" and he is "an expert at being an expert", and "his focus is on that, and not in clinical practice".
Mr Myers said Dr Evans had accepted his principal role in recent years was of being an expert, and attended a course on having to 'avoid pitfalls'.
Mr Myers: "We say he should have been taking a lot more notes at that course".
Dr Evans said he had called himself a medical independent witness, not as an expert, and he had come to assist the court on challenging medical issues.
Mr Myers: "There you have it from the horse's mouth. He is meant to be an expert."
"You may think that frank assessment was more revealing than you can imagine."
He says Dr Evans's evidence is the starting point for the other experts. "He has led the way on medical opinion."

 
Last edited:
Any idea why she didn’t search for them?
None for L through Q? Interesting....L was on April 9, 2016 and Q was June 23rd 2016. So that just means she didn't look any of the babies parents up in the final three months?

Maybe she was beginning to fear that others were already getting suspicious so she was distracted by it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
215
Guests online
925
Total visitors
1,140

Forum statistics

Threads
598,301
Messages
18,079,115
Members
230,600
Latest member
rzoof
Back
Top