UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
It's the wee hours here on west coast Canada and this very tired Admin is heading to bed.

Please remember to post respectfully and in accordance with sub judice so that our morning Mods don't have a big cleanup to do when they arrive in another few hours.

1665568337669.png

Good Night everyone.
 
I do get what you are saying but I reckon that doing stuff you've been repeatedly trained not to do is a lot more common than many people would appreciate. You just have to look at what's come out recently regarding the highly offensive and probably illegal messages in the WhatsApp group of ex-Met officers. Same happened with Wayne Couzens and his mates and they were serving. No, it's not the same kind of situation but it goes to show that professional people doing unethical things is not rare. The more minor stuff I think is probably very common.
This is a good example of those in positions of responsibility not playing by the rules, but I think it's important to note that many of the perpetrators were punished for their actions, losing their jobs and/or facing criminal charges (leaving WC aside as his offending was another level). These consequences reflect the seriousness of this type of behaviour. Plus, the comments in the WhatsApp groups demonstrated a complete lack of respect and empathy for the victims. The question is does LL accessing the patients' parents' social media also reflect a similar lack of respect and empathy for her patients?
 
This is a good example of those in positions of responsibility not playing by the rules, but I think it's important to note that many of the perpetrators were punished for their actions, losing their jobs and/or facing criminal charges (leaving WC aside as his offending was another level). These consequences reflect the seriousness of this type of behaviour. Plus, the comments in the WhatsApp groups demonstrated a complete lack of respect and empathy for the victims. The question is does LL accessing the patients' parents' social media also reflect a similar lack of respect and empathy for her patients?
Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. It's not really directly related to her guilt (or not) though.
 
10:56am

The designated nurse 'could not recall' if she had taken a break during the shift, but there would have been times she would have gone out of the room to get a drink or retrieve something from a cupboard.
Letby was looking after a child in room 2.
Child H suffered "two sudden and unexpected episodes of profound desaturation at 12.55am and 3.30am."

10:58am

The registrar responded to the emergency calls and on one occasion, saw Letby administering treatment, and took the history from her, assuming she was the designated nurse.
The nurse noted 'pink tinged secretions' around Child H's mouth.
The prosecution say this was a similar finding to that found on three other babies in the case so far.

 
Evidence of FB searches/social media use/SMS etc in the context of this trial, is only concerned with LL's reasons and whether or not it supports that there had been criminal intent, either before or during the alleged offences.

The moral and ethical debate surrounding SM use and what is acceptable/unacceptable relative to professional standards could be viewed as a distraction as it is not being tested in the court.
Yes, I'm aware, thank you. This was specifically to reply to a post on the ethical and moral debate that was happening on the thread where many posters commented on how they have done similar or could understand..
 
TODAY’s PROCEEDINGS


10:35am

Child H - attempted murder allegation (twice)
Child H was born in September 2015 and had breathing difficulties shortly after birth.
She was transferred to neonatal unit nursery room 1.

10:37am

Independent experts say there was an "unacceptable delay" in tubating her and administering a protein which helps the lungs, which the prosecution say means the case is complicated by "sub-optimal treatment" at the hospital.
Additionally, Child H "was put on a ventilator she was not paralysed; she was also left with butterfly needles in her chest for prolonged periods which may have punctured her lung tissues and contributed to further punctured lungs."

10:44am

The prosecution say Letby attempted to kill Child H on September 26 at 3.24am, and on September 27 at 12.55am.
Mr Johnson said Child H had previously deteriorated on the night of September 23 and required ventilator support and intubation, followed later by oxygen support.
The court hears Child H responded to intervening treatment, but desaturations were "frequent" and "significant".
Mr Johnson said all but two events could be explained medically and responded to with routine resuscitative measures.
The two events - in the early hours of September 26 and 27, were "uncharacteristic" and required CPR.

"she was not paralysed" is a strange comment.

IMO
 
11:04am

The nurse noted a 'profound desaturation' - a "profound drop in Child H's blood", despite air going into the lungs and carbon dioxide coming out.
Both collapses at 12.55am and 3.30am had "no known cause".
Child H was transferred to Arrowe Park Hospital at 5.25am, and was stabilised en route in the ambulance.
Her mother, who was with her spoke of a "dramatic improvement" as soon as Child H got to the hospital.
Child H returned to the Countess of Chester Hospital and the rest of her time was uneventful before being discharged.
The court hears she had not suffered any permanent consequences.

11:06am

The prosecution says medical expert Dr Dewi Evans said there was "no obvious explanation" for Child H's deterioration in those two early-morning collapses.
Dr Sandie Bohin "expressed concern" at those events, and the collapses "were more significant than the others, for which there are obvious clear medical explanations".
She was also "critical of the way the chest drains were inserted and managed".

 
Pros: "Lucy Letby wasn't baby H's designated nurse on the night of the 2nd attack. A doctor saw her giving oxygen and assumed she was the baby’s nurse. He took the medical history from her..
... We suggest that is a pretty good indication of who it was that “discovered” that baby H was having problems" (2/2)

Pros: Baby H was transferred to another hospital (Arrowe Park). She stabilised in the ambulance taking her from one hospital to the other. Her mother speaks of her dramatic improvement as soon as she got there and the medical records bear this out.

Pros: "Mercifully, baby H has not suffered any permanent consequences from the events of her first 2 weeks of life. It is a notable fact that the removal of children from
@TheCountessNHS
(and the sphere of influence of Lucy Letby) they often suddenly, remarkably recovered".

 
11:09am

Letby was interviewed in 2018 by police. She confirmed she had remembered Child H because she had chest drains - which the court hears are a fairly rare thing these days.
For the second incident, Letby said she had not been the designated nurse so assumed she had not been caring for Child H.
She identified her signatures on two medicine administrations.
In 2019, she identified her signature on more documents. In this interview, she told police she had not been the designated nurse but had been giving her treatment at the time Child H collapsed.

11:11am

On October 5, 2015, the prosecution say Letby searched for the mum of Child H, the father of Children E and F, and the mother of Child I. It was her day off.
Mr Johnson said: "We say this has to be looked in the context of everything else.
"We say it is more than an innocent coincidence that once Child H was moved out of the Countess of Chester Hospital she had no further problems."

 
I assume if not paralysed it makes it harder to ventilate and thus could lead to lower oxygen levels
I'm guessing that it's perhaps the fact you should be paralysed/sedated if placed on a vent?
Then the prosecution should be making this clear as it sets in people's minds the word "paralised" which most people not medically trained may well associate with negative connotations.

Perhaps they did though as the reporting is unlikely to be a word-for-word account.
 
11:12am

Child I - murder allegation
Child I was born in Liverpool Women's Hospital, premature, on August 2015.


11:13am

The prosecution say Letby made four attempts to kill Child I, succeeding on the fourth attempt.


11:14am

Child I was born, weighing 2lbs 2oz, but in good condition. She was intubated and ventilated, then supported by CPAP, and fed through a nasogastric tube.
In the first few weeks, she had "a few problems", but "all were resolved".




 
The prosecution is now moving onto the case of baby I, a little girl born prematurely at 27 weeks, who weighed 2lb 2oz. Although she was so little, she was born in good condition and did very well from the beginning.

Pros: "Baby I's case is an extreme example even by the standards of this case. There were four separate occasions on which we allege Lucy Letby tried to kill her. Baby I was resilient, but ultimately at the fourth attempt Lucy Letby succeeded in killing her".

Court hears that Lucy Letby first tried to murder baby I within a week of trying to kill two other babies.

 
I thought that. I fail to see its relevance.

My basic understanding is that intubation is an invasive procedure....i.e. inserting a tube into a patient's trachea. The natural body responses, e.g. gag reflex, cough reflex will fight the presence of the tube making insertion difficult/impossible and cause the patient significant distress, therefore sedation/paralytic drugs are required.

Maybe one of the medical bods can confirm or tell me to "move on"!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
86
Guests online
1,916
Total visitors
2,002

Forum statistics

Threads
600,149
Messages
18,104,661
Members
230,991
Latest member
lyle.person1
Back
Top