UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #5

[JosieJo]

I tend to agree with this but I don't think that it's clear why she said it in this case. To be fair, we don't know the specific questions put to her and her precise answers.

On the matter of the FB searches; again I'd still like to know the specific questions put to her and, importantly, when they were put to her. I can't recall whether the prosecution has said anything on the latter point but, if I were guessing, I'd think that those questions were likely put to her on the second arrest or possibly late on in the first arrest. They would have only seized her devices at the time of the first arrest so would they have had enough time to examine them and to decide what questions to ask as regards them during the first arrest?

I can accept that she may have lied in relation to those questions but I don't think it automatically follows that that is an indication of guilt. Were it me in that situation then I could well imagine lying about such things under the stress of a police interview because it looks dodgy and possibly unethical. If she is just the type of person who needs answers and can't just let things drop then I can well understand why she made those searches.

I agree these things ...and the note are just things added by the prosecution to try and add to their version of events

I'm quite a black and white person

I dont think we will ever know why she said these things or indeed wrote her notes.

To me the case will suceed if the prosecution can show a great number of these collapses were caused by foul play and she was the only person in the room with the babies just prior...sheer numbers and her presence alone will be enough

 

[Dotta]

I agree these things ...and the note are just things added by the prosecution to try and add to their version of events

I'm quite a black and white person

I dont think we will ever know why she said these things or indeed wrote her notes.

To me the case will suceed if the prosecution can show a great number of these collapses were caused by foul play and she was the only person in the room with the babies just prior...sheer numbers and her presence alone will be enough

I agree.
After all, we are either praised or punished for our deeds - not thoughts.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Personally "if" a person had chose to use the method of air embolism as a way of causing harm ..if questioned by the police you may try to distance yourself from knowing "exactly" what it is ...that may be a first reaction..in a panic just realising the police may know exactly the method you took...you are not saying no outright ...but also not offering on a plate that you know everything about it.

Other possible distancing tactics might be saying you don't remember searching for the parents.. when in reality most might say I have searched parents many times as I wonder how they are but I can't remember specific names

Yeh that’s pretty spot on. Fitting with the AE Theory. I’m not entirely sure though both seem like pretty whopping gross lies to tell, considering the circumstances. LL must be smart enough to know they would look at her internet searches and that an embolism would without a doubt be something she should know. How could she expect to get away with that? She suggested in one case baby A and B that she was trying to find out how B was doing but didn’t particularly recall the search.

 

[Ruby12345]

It’s quite obvious to me what happened here.

Could you spell it out for us please?

 

[MsBetsy]

Could you spell it out for us please?

Not the OP, but that might be hard to do considering TOS. Going by what we've heard so far from the medical experts, somebody killed and/or attempted to kill those babies. Some were attacked 3 or 4 times!

I'm sure when the medical experts testify, they will go into a lot more detail so the jury will understand. I think they will be crucial to this case. At that point it may become clearer to us as to who is responsible for these horrific crimes. And, considering all of the evidence, that only one person could have done it. Imo

 

[Ruby12345]

Not the OP, but that might be hard to do considering TOS. Going by what we've heard so far from the medical experts, somebody killed and/or attempted to kill those babies. Some were attacked 3 or 4 times!

I'm sure when the medical experts testify, they will go into a lot more detail so the jury will understand. I think they will be crucial to this case. At that point it may become clearer to us as to who is responsible for these horrific crimes. And, considering all of the evidence, that only one person could have done it. Imo

Ok I see. I thought he might be saying the opposite considering the earlier example of a line being inserted incorrectly causing an air embolism.

 

[squish]

Yes, and no. You can understand them refusing an autopsy, they would just want their poor little baby to rest in peace.

Oh I totally agree, I’m not judging them at all. They weren’t to know, and it’s totally understandable that they didn’t want their baby pulled about any more.

 

[truecrimedoc94]

Not the OP, but that might be hard to do considering TOS. Going by what we've heard so far from the medical experts, somebody killed and/or attempted to kill those babies. Some were attacked 3 or 4 times!

I'm sure when the medical experts testify, they will go into a lot more detail so the jury will understand. I think they will be crucial to this case. At that point it may become clearer to us as to who is responsible for these horrific crimes. And, considering all of the evidence, that only one person could have done it. Imo

To clarify I am all for reasonable doubt and her getting a fair trial but I do not think this was iatrogenic, I think this was intentional instillation of air into these babies lines.

 

[Tortoise]

I’m excited to follow along and hopefully provide some clarity for everyone! I have been doing research on this all morning because it is medically fascinating in the worst way possible. I have found several reports of air within the CNS in front of the spinal cord itself. I cannot rationalize how this would happen from CPAP belly alone…CPAP belly is something that should never happen with adequate respiratory therapists and doctor/nurse supervision. The air within the great vessels of the heart is so eerie it gave me chills when I read it. It’s quite obvious to me what happened here. And again, my own anecdotal evidence with the skin rash I witnessed in my own patient. I will look more into this on Monday when I have full access to the medical library at work.

Hi and welcome.

Are you aware that the specialist from GOSH gave the following testimony? (BBM) -

"Dr Owen Arthurs, professor of radiology at Great Ormond Street Hospital, guided the jury through an image displayed on a screen at Manchester Crown Court.

He showed them pockets of gas in the infant's stomach and heart. Both were normal.

But the doctor then pointed out a third accumulation of gas – in a line just in front of the spine, running from the stomach to just beyond the heart.

'That is an unusual find,' said Dr Arthurs."


Lucy Letby trial: Emotional nurse felt final heartbeat of newborn twin 'murdered', court hears

Do you think it makes a difference that this was post mortem imagery, concerning the heart specifically?

 

[Sweeper2000]

Interesting I’ve just been doing a bit of digging. For those who don’t know, what’s going through the court’s at the moment is purely the prosecution’s case with the prosecutions witnesses and the defence comes after in a “few months time”. Really would be ahead to say much if anything but will be interesting to see who the defence bring as witnesses. All they can do at the moment is question the prosecution’s witnesses.

 

[Anxala]

What if she'd not though - or was just brushing people off with curt replies? That could easily be seen in a bad light.

I'm pleased we've seen these messages because, in my view, it paints her as being totally normal. I'd imagine that conversations like these happen between nurses every day of the week. They also tend to overturn the suggestion that she's uncaring, especially towards the parents. She seems very caring towards them in those messages and I do see why she had a look for them on FB. It seems perfectly reasonable to me regardless of whether it was ethical or not.

^ It's an interesting and pertinent point.

No one can survive long term in such an intense and precarious environment without over time developing a 'thick skin'. A thick skin is a survival tool, something that allows a person to continue to effectively do the job they do. It doesn't mean they care less. Nurses aren't angels - although it seems some assume and want them to be? They're professionals doing their job and prone to exactly the same self-preserving emotions, actions and frustrations that those of us not in the 'caring' professions see as our normal and absolute right when things go wrong at our work.

They're people, just like us. They shouldn't be held to an unrealistic standard because of the job they do.

 

[Dotta]

^ It's an interesting and pertinent point.

No one can survive long term in such an intense and precarious environment without over time developing a 'thick skin'. A thick skin is a survival tool, something that allows a person to continue to effectively do the job they do. It doesn't mean they care less. Nurses aren't angels - although it seems some assume and want them to be? They're professionals doing their job and prone to exactly the same self-preserving emotions, actions and frustrations that those of us not in the 'caring' professions see as our normal and absolute right when things go wrong at our work.

They're people, just like us. They shouldn't be held to an unrealistic standard because of the job they do.

Does it mean that basic human responses like:
tact, empathy, sympathy should be abandoned?

In case of "burnout" one should seek another job or help of a specialist - for the sake of patients and their families.

But, most importantly - for oneself!

Moo

 

[kittythehare]

Does it mean that basic human responses like:
tact, empathy, sympathy should be abandoned?

In case of "burnout" one should seek another job or help of a specialist - for the sake of patients and their families.

But, most importantly - for oneself!

Moo

Well, I worked the 'deep end' for 30 years.
It made me more rather than less human.

 

[Dotta]

Well, I worked the 'deep end' for 30 years.
It made me more rather than less human.

Thank you for this post!

Can you imagine a tiny Dotta living in a hospital incubator for over a month?
Yes, it was me - barely hanging on.

But here I am - bursting with life and kicking

Thanks to AMAZING hospital staff.

My poor parents were treated with utmost respect and kindness.

And all barely alive little babies in incubators were fiercely protected, helped and treated with utmost professionalism by ALL doctors and nurses.

Mum told me there was even a nurse/ Catholic nun who used to pray at each incubator at night.

I owe this hospital my life and I am forever grateful.
I always donate to whatever hospital charity whenever I can.

This case is close to my heart.
I cry for these babies

 

[kittythehare]

Thank you for this post!

Can you imagine a tiny Dotta living in a hospital incubator for over a month?
Yes, it was me - barely hanging on.

But here I am - bursting with life and kicking

Thanks to AMAZING hospital staff.

My poor parents were treated with utmost respect and kindness.

And all barely alive little babies in incubators were fiercely protected, helped and treated with utmost professionalism by ALL doctors and nurses.

Mum told me there was even a nurse/ Catholic nun who used to pray at each incubator at night.

I owe this hospital my life and I am forever grateful.
I always donate to whatever hospital charity whenever I can.

This case is close to my heart.
I cry for these babies

Thanks.
It's about love or it's about nothing.

 

[Eloise]

^ It's an interesting and pertinent point.

No one can survive long term in such an intense and precarious environment without over time developing a 'thick skin'. A thick skin is a survival tool, something that allows a person to continue to effectively do the job they do. It doesn't mean they care less. Nurses aren't angels - although it seems some assume and want them to be? They're professionals doing their job and prone to exactly the same self-preserving emotions, actions and frustrations that those of us not in the 'caring' professions see as our normal and absolute right when things go wrong at our work.

They're people, just like us. They shouldn't be held to an unrealistic standard because of the job they do.

Yes, when talking to your fellow staff. You can be blunt, or use gallows humour, and that would be normal.

Being tactless and blunt with patients and the parents of patients is very different and wouldn't ever be acceptable. Certainly goes against what I've experienced in hospitals both as staff and as a patient. Of course everyone can have a bad day, but it seems like she might have had many more than just one bad day WRT the interactions she is alleged to have had with families.

 

[Jules2021]

Hi all, not been on here for a few days. I skip a lot of posts now when the medical details get heavy. To think before the trial started I actually contemplated going to court but now I realise how naive I was about how harrowing it'd be. Yeh what was I thinking, no one would choose to be in that court room.

<modsnip: sub judice>

Does anyone remember who the person was LL asked about the surviving twin parents? She supposedly said "they look like mum" or something, and asked how the parents were doing now. Was it a fellow nurse who knew the family? Just thinking she's taking a risk doing what she allegedly did when a friend knows the family and could get suspicious. Or is that possibly how she picked some victims? She can then keep up with the families a bit via mutual friends? I wonder if she asked this person a lot about the parents after that first time, but prosecution probably would've said.

I know we have some possible motives coming out now (attention, drama etc.-which I'm starting to see is a possibility now we know more about her) but as for how she actually chose the victims she did, does anyone have any other theories? I'm leaning towards the attention and support she got (or expected to get) from colleagues when she'd had a "run of bad luck" almost as if she's the victim. And/or an unhealthy obsession with the families.

Also what about the condition of the babies? How many were allegedly attacked that were really sick vs the ones with a good prognosis?

 

[squish]

Hi all, not been on here for a few days. I skip a lot of posts now when the medical details get heavy. To think before the trial started I actually contemplated going to court but now I realise how naive I was about how harrowing it'd be. Yeh what was I thinking, no one would choose to be in that court room.

<modsnip: sub judice>

Does anyone remember who the person was LL asked about the surviving twin parents? She supposedly said "they look like mum" or something, and asked how the parents were doing now. Was it a fellow nurse who knew the family? Just thinking she's taking a risk doing what she allegedly did when a friend knows the family and could get suspicious. Or is that possibly how she picked some victims? She can then keep up with the families a bit via mutual friends? I wonder if she asked this person a lot about the parents after that first time, but prosecution probably would've said.

I know we have some possible motives coming out now (attention, drama etc.-which I'm starting to see is a possibility now we know more about her) but as for how she actually chose the victims she did, does anyone have any other theories? I'm leaning towards the attention and support she got (or expected to get) from colleagues when she'd had a "run of bad luck" almost as if she's the victim. And/or an unhealthy obsession with the families.

Also what about the condition of the babies? How many were allegedly attacked that were really sick vs the ones with a good prognosis?

My personal suspicion is that her alleged victim selection sometimes had something to do with the Facebook searches.

For example, she could have tried to judge which families would be non-confrontational and not prone to feeling suspicion, to avoid difficulties for herself. Or possibly, babies whose parents use Facebook a lot, so that regular updates on their tragedies could be enjoyed.

 

[Dotta]

My personal suspicion is that her alleged victim selection sometimes had something to do with the Facebook searches.

For example, she could have tried to judge which families would be non-confrontational and not prone to feeling suspicion, to avoid difficulties for herself. Or possibly, babies whose parents use Facebook a lot, so that regular updates on their tragedies could be enjoyed.

It seems to me the babies were (allegedly) carefully chosen.

Because - why would some of them be attacked several times?

One would think if the attempt was not successful, the (alleged) perp should move on and choose another.

But no - the attempts were repeated to the bitter end.

Moo

 

[Sweeper2000]

I’m just wondering at why it is speculated that this trial will last 6 months? That’s allot of stuff to talk about. If it’s all or 98% circumstantial that leaves allot of gaps when presumably there should be something else much more indicative and allot of obvious deception especially considering she was suspected for some time. The way the evidence unfolds suggests the units seniors didn’t suspect anyone that’s why they downgraded the unit to level 2 after the investigation of the hospital and LL started. They must have been keeping tabs and if they were and still didn’t notice anything, what does that suggest”

Allot of inconsistencies so far aside from AE, that’s the strongest evidence so far. That AE was the most likely cause of the collapses and we have nothing that strongly suggests LL was the cause of the proposed AE. We also have nothing to suggest LL is “a bad egg”. I also think there are large inconsistencies with method, some being intravenous AE, some being Stomach AE and two being suspected insulin poisoning. Can anyone explain or hypothesise why there wouldn’t be a string of consistency across the cases involving LL being in direct and prolonged contact specifically before but also perhaps during and after the collapses? Also why if AE is “nearly always fatal” it isn’t in some of these cases? I might suggest there are too few instances of LL acting strangely and the one example of falsified medical notes goes against her covering her tracks IMO. She would have falsified notes more often I’m confident in that, doing it just once depending on how blatantly it was done suggests she wasn’t but the one example given could much more easily be mistakes rather than deception. In short allot points to AE but very very little points to LL.

All my own opinion.