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

[Parker Knoll]

Hi I haven’t seen any updates at all today I’ve been super extremely stressed :/ how did the defence do? Can anyone give a short summary?

Ermmmmm … On today the jury is out !
No not really ! - confused word salad is how I read today or try bizarre.
JMO

 

[Dcflag]

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".

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, June 26 - defence closing speech

The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more, is…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

Perhaps there’s just no such thing as an expect in air embolus in neonates..

I also find it odd he’s discussed how her reaction show she was distraught at being removed from her job and the ward. That’s not really in dispute. Lots of guilty people also become distraught for lots of different reasons. From being caught, to feeling guilt. Sure as he says the presumption should be innocence, but I don’t know that her distress should really go either way.

As for starting on dr evans.. why didn’t he just find his own expert neonatologist if he had such a problem with it. Is he seriously suggesting other professional and highly educated expert witnesses were led by dr evans and weren’t capable of their own critical analysis and independent opinions?

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Repeatedly bringing up that LL searched for parents of babies not on the indictment, had handover notes for babies not on the indictment… all that does for me anyway IMO is make me wonder if guilty could there have been many more incidents that just didn’t have the evidence for charges?

Trashing Dr Evans leaves a bad taste in my mouth IMO, it’s not asif BM has any experts of his own who’ve presented a conflicting opinion…

Poor LL was so embarrassed about having to discuss the phrase ‘go commando’ infront of her parents that she obviously just had to lie and pretend she didn’t know what it was. IMO BM just basically undermined her entire testimony because I’m left wondering ‘what else was she too ashamed to admit infront of her parents?’ MOO

Perhaps LL’s habit of throwing people under the bus has rubbed off on BM…

MOO

 

[notsure]

The way the defence has started so vehemently makes me think there might not actually be a lot of undisclosed bad stuff about LL to come out later when the trial is over (as some of us thought might happen, if found guilty). Otherwise, how could Mr. Myers go in so strong in her defence? JMO

 

[Parker Knoll]

Because they are drinking literally in the last chance saloon.
It’s now or never.
JMO

 

[Dotta]

Poor LL was so embarrassed about having to discuss the phrase ‘go commando’ infront of her parents that she obviously just had to lie and pretend she didn’t know what it was.

That happens when someone is busy hanging out with a married man (with kids) and chatting about "blooming flowers in Cockington" (or whatever the name is) till wee hours.

Too late to be suddenly embarrassed

JMO

 

[CS2C]

That Cockington comment always creases me up.

Dr White Knight at his finest.

 

[notsure]

That Cockington comment always creases me up.

Dr White Knight at his finest.

Me too! Does the place actually exist, or is it some kind of code?

 

[Parker Knoll]

It’s actually a place.
FYI I have never been !

 

[Dotta]

Thank Goodness I'm going to be very busy till the end of the week!
So I will probably only be on time for Judge's summing up.

 

[Becci]

Because they are drinking literally in the last chance saloon.
It’s now or never.
JMO

Reminds me of a bingo scratchcard haha

 

[Parker Knoll]

This trial will NEVER end Dotta

 

[Becci]

I wonder how many babies were on the unit that year compared to the years before/after.
Has that been shown on a chart or anything pls?

 

[dalsglen]

BM and LL must get on like a house on fire. Everyone else is rubbish and wrong, they're both right. The egos in their meetings must be horrendous.

 

[katydid23]

Repeatedly bringing up that LL searched for parents of babies not on the indictment, had handover notes for babies not on the indictment… all that does for me anyway IMO is make me wonder if guilty could there have been many more incidents that just didn’t have the evidence for charges?

Trashing Dr Evans leaves a bad taste in my mouth IMO, it’s not asif BM has any experts of his own who’ve presented a conflicting opinion…

Poor LL was so embarrassed about having to discuss the phrase ‘go commando’ infront of her parents that she obviously just had to lie and pretend she didn’t know what it was. IMO BM just basically undermined her entire testimony because I’m left wondering ‘what else was she too ashamed to admit infront of her parents?’ MOO

Perhaps LL’s habit of throwing people under the bus has rubbed off on BM…

MOO

I think she may have used the handover notes to help her decide which baby will be the next victim?

She could get a clear idea of who was going to be in what room, who was their designated nurse, what their illnesses were,
etc etc.

 

[notsure]

IMO, one of the defence's strengths is that nobody has come up with any credible motivation for the alleged offences. Also, Myers said today that LL had never been in any trouble before. I must admit, he presents quite a difficult dilemma.

 

[Dcflag]

IMO, one of the defence's strengths is that nobody has come up with any credible motivation for the alleged offences. Also, Myers said today that LL had never been in any trouble before. I must admit, he presents quite a difficult dilemma.

I’m not sure that I agree it’s that relevant to be honest. Having not been in trouble before (as in with the law) doesn’t mean there hasn’t potentially been problematic instances in her life whether during school years, in work in general. I do feel like it’s quite clear she can be volatile in her relationships with people and it does come across like she latched onto one person and jumped over to the next one (for example dr ventress to dr choc). The prosecution are also making the argument that she reacts to emotional events, where she’s either upset or angry or felt any kind of wrongdoing against her.

I also feel like it’s very very difficult to ascertain any prior events. Let’s assume she’s guilty for the purpose of this point, you can’t ever look back on her previous years as a care provider and say with certainty she never maliciously caused hurt to anyone. Things like (perhaps for example) reducing feeds but recording the “correct” amounts, purposely causing babies to cry/any physical methods that don’t leave marks, leaving babies to self correct for too long, delaying cares etc There’s lots of incidents that can seem natural that could also be sabotage without the intent to kill that could pre date the charges that we’d never know about. I’m just not sure you could assume that baby a is for sure her first rodeo.

(MOO)

 

[marynnu]

Me too! Does the place actually exist, or is it some kind of code?

At least it wasn't Upperthong.

 

[Tortoise]

IMO, one of the defence's strengths is that nobody has come up with any credible motivation for the alleged offences. Also, Myers said today that LL had never been in any trouble before. I must admit, he presents quite a difficult dilemma.

I wouldn't expect anyone but the killer themselves to know what motivated serial killings. Who could come up with one and prove they were right?

If the babies were murdered and attacked (and poisoning non-accidental) then the shifts show it had to be LL or the other nurse, and the other nurse is not on trial.

JMO

 

[Dotta]

I’m not sure that I agree it’s that relevant to be honest. Having not been in trouble before (as in with the law) doesn’t mean there hasn’t potentially been problematic instances in her life whether during school years, in work in general. I do feel like it’s quite clear she can be volatile in her relationships with people and it does come across like she latched onto one person and jumped over to the next one (for example dr ventress to dr choc). The prosecution are also making the argument that she reacts to emotional events, where she’s either upset or angry or felt any kind of wrongdoing against her.

I also feel like it’s very very difficult to ascertain any prior events. Let’s assume she’s guilty for the purpose of this point, you can’t ever look back on her previous years as a care provider and say with certainty she never maliciously caused hurt to anyone. Things like (perhaps for example) reducing feeds but recording the “correct” amounts, purposely causing babies to cry/any physical methods that don’t leave marks, leaving babies to self correct for too long, delaying cares etc There’s lots of incidents that can seem natural that could also be sabotage without the intent to kill that could pre date the charges that we’d never know about. I’m just not sure you could assume that baby a is for sure her first rodeo.

(MOO)

Besides,
at CoCh she was for the first time in her life "free".

Free from parents' supervision,
free from mentors' eyes
(which was the case while studying and training).

She was a qualified nurse, trusted by both colleagues and patients' parents.

Free to indulge herself at last.

If guilty of course.

PS
The Judge told the Jury not to worry their heads about motive/s.

JMO