VERDICT WATCH UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #28

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
10:26am

The courtroom at Manchester Crown Court is filling up with legal teams, members of the public and press, court staff, and Lucy Letby has arrived.
The trial is due to resume at 10.30am.

 
10:31am

The trial judge, Mr Justice James Goss, has entered the courtroom.

10:32am

The 12 members of the jury are now coming into court, and the trial will resume with the judge's closing section of his summing up.

 
10:36am

Before the judge resumes, the jury is presented with a final selection of documents, which are for reference purposes, to add to their jury bundles.

10:40am

The judge now refers to the case of Child Q, a baby boy born on June 22, 2016 at the Countess of Chester Hospital. He weighed 2,076g at birth, and required breathing support - he was taken to the neonatal unit.
There were no signs of infection, the judge says.
Three days later, on June 25, Child Q had a profound desaturation and vomit. the prosecution say this was liquid, and possibly air, being forced down the NGT. They say possible mild NEC would not account for the type of desaturation and recovery. The defence say developing NEC cannot be excluded.

 
10:43am

For June 23-24, Tanya Downes was designated nurse for Child Q. She noted 'coffee ground' style amounts of bile in Child Q. 1.5ml of bile was aspirated at 4am.
The nurse recalled Child Q had to be readmitted in July 2016 with gut problems, at the out-of-hours clinic.

 
Length of Deliberations Predictions

6h - @NeverPersonal
8h 30m - @Phoenix Lazarus
8h 45m - @Sundial
9h - @SusanDonim
9h 30m - @Tortoise
10h 15m - @Diddly1
10h 45m - @Bethan
11h 30m - @Becci
12h 41m - @marynnu
13h 13m - @Luwin
14h 20m - @Becky53
14h 46m - @Marantz4250b
15h 20m - @JosieJo
15h 45m - @katydid23
16h - @Jazmania
17h 30m - @May72031
17h 40m - @Penny68
18h - @GoodDayToYouSir
19h 30m - @MissMarbles
19h 45m - @ScotAng
20h - @Moll
21h 30m - @Kasmeer
22h 22m - @abovethestorm
23h 12m - @Dcflag
24h 10m - @Blondiexoxo
25h - @Sarahlou
28h - @squish
28h 28m - @DianaWW
30h 10m - @WaxLyrical
31h 30m - @Sweeper2000
32h 14m - @Kittybunny
34h - @bbsaz
35h 25m - @Dotta
41h 15m - @Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc
45h 10m - @esther43
58h - @Jw192
75h - @CS2C
80h - @V347


---


:oops:

Thurs 13th July 2pm to 4pm - @Parker Knoll
Thurs 13th July 2.30pm - @Kemug
Thurs 13th July 3.37pm - @Legal
Fri 14th July 12.45pm - @ColourPurple

---


Prize - nothing, zilch, not even pizza!!
 
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue

Various bundles/documents are currently being handed to the jury, which will assist them with their deliberations later today

Judge Goss is now turning to the final count on the indictment, Child Q. He was born in late June 2016 and was "initially stable" after his birth, but jurors heard he deteriorated and needed breathing support shortly after 09:00 on 25 June.

The prosecution said Ms Letby injected air and fluid into the boy's stomach via a nasogastric tube.

A medical expert for the prosecution said vomit found on Child Q was evidence that liquid had been given to him and his respiratory problems were likely caused by the fluid, which placed pressure on his diaphragm and prevented him from breathing.

The defence has said there was no evidence Ms Letby inflicted harm.

The defence has said there was no evidence Ms Letby inflicted harm.
 
10:50am

Child Q was tolerating feeds and there were "intermittent, moderate acidic" aspirates, a sign the milk was being partly digested, by the early hours of June 25.
Blood gas readings showed a drop in pH results, and nurse Samantha O'Brien noted, after the doctor's review, was for the current plan of care to be continued.
She said Child Q had been stable, and the reviewing doctor had no concerns.
Letby, designated nurse for Child Q on the day of June 25, said she was informed Child Q had large aspirates overnight, so he was not in good condition.
At about 9.10am, Child Q's alarm sounded, and he desaturated. Nurse Mary Griffith had been giving cares to another baby in the room with Letby and Child Q, with her back to Child Q.
Shortly after Letby left the room, Child Q's alarm went off. Nurse Griffith was mid-feed and could not go over immediately, and Minna Lappalainen was called over to Child Q, and began Neopuffing the baby.
Nurse Lappalainen recalled the alarm going off and could see Child Q had been sick, with mucus coming out of his mouth. She filled in the apnoea/fit/brady chart, a desat of 68 and brady of 98. "brady 98; desat 68; fit ?; baby found to be very mucousy, clear mucous from nasopharynx oropharynx removed clear fluid +++. O2 via neopuff given post suctioning...NGT used to aspirate stomach by Nurse L Letby"

10:51am

Letby noted: '[0910 Child Q] attended to by SN Lappalainen – he had vomited clear fluid nasally and from mouth, desaturation and bradycardia, mottled ++. Neopuff and suction applied...reg attended. Air++ aspirated from NG Tube'

 
Am I right in saying she is on trial for 7 counts of murder and 15 of attempted murder ? For some reason I thought it was 10 of attempted murder.
 
10:55am

Letby said, in police interview, she had returned to nursery 2 to see Child Q being tended to by nurse Lappalainen. When asked about the air in Child Q's stomach, she said sometimes babies gulp when they vomit, and there could have been a blockage in the bowel.
She said she would not have left room 2 if Child Q was not stable. She denied causing Child Q harm, or leaving the room so she had an alibi from the incident.
In evidence, she said Child Q had a low temperature, and was concerned about that. She said she arranged with nurses Lappalainen and Griffith for when she went to nursery 1 and was there for a few minutes.
For the 9am feed for Child Q, the Oxygen and saturation levels are missing. She said those omissions were "a mistake".
She said the baby in room 1 was an intensive care baby, so she could not have left that baby for too long.
She said she had no part in giving Neopuff after Child Q needed oxygen. She said she was told air++ had been aspirated from the NG Tube. She said the collapse, relatively, was 'not serious'.

 
11:03am

A male doctor was called to the unit. He noted as a result of the Neopuffing, Child Q's saturations returned to 100%. The baby was moved to room 1 and put on CPAP, and given antibiotics as a precaution.
He was presumed, at this time, to have sepsis. A blood test could not give a reason for the vomit, the judge says.
A chest x-ray showed a 'trace of fluid', and 'no suggestion of a large amount of foreign matter' or a sign of infection.
Dr John Gibbs said the collapse did not fit with a baby who was tired.
It was decided to intubuate Child Q and put him on a ventilator.
A female doctor examined Child Q noted the blood gases were acceptable. Child Q was 'very unsettled at times' but there were no signs of concern, she recalled. She saw a sign of respiratory acidosis, and the ventilator settings were changed. Amy Davies said Child Q was restless at times.
On June 26, Child Q showed a loop in the bowel. Arrangements were made to transfer Child Q to Alder Hey Children's Hospital. A consultant there stated in agreed evidence that Child Q had been admitted due to concerns over his deteriorating condition. When assessed, Child Q was stable and his abdomen 'very slightly swollen'.
By the night of June 26, he was assessed as 'very stable', with 'subtle signs of NEC', and was taken off the ventilator by June 27. The decision was made to transfer Child Q back to the Countess of Chester Hospital on June 28.

 




Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue

Judge Goss is reminding the jury of the evidence in this case, he is taking them back over what clinicians said about Child Q - he was assessed to be 'stable' before and subsequent to his collapse


Judge Goss summarises what Child Q's mother said about his health in the years following his discharge from the Countess of Chester. She said he was 'in and out of hospital many times' with 'various infections'.

Clinicians expect Child Q to live a normal lifespan, but have said he will require regular observations
 
34 parents
12 jurors
Five years of police investigation to bring this to trial; police teams and all the expert witnesses
Nine months of intense trial
The accused's parents
The accused's former colleagues
The judge, and court staff
The advocates and their legal teams
The journalists
The accused

I can't begin to imagine the anxieties.
apologies for being irritatingly pedantic but because some of the children in the indictment are/were twins or triplets there won't be 34 parents. It's 28 I think?
Otherwise, spot on.
 
If LL is proved to be not guilty then personally I don't see a need for her to get a new ID as of course it rendered she didn't do anything wrong.

Same with her parents they would be able to get on with their life knowing their daughter was innocent.

Maybe of course they might consider moving, but that would be their choice to do that to maybe feel better in themselves to move.

If LL is guilty of course then I think her parents would then move away without question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
146
Guests online
2,778
Total visitors
2,924

Forum statistics

Threads
602,684
Messages
18,145,186
Members
231,487
Latest member
Chernobyl_Werewolf
Back
Top