UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #6

[Tortoise]

https://twitter.com/MerseyHack

Mr Myers refers to Dr Evans saying D was “recovering” from pneumonia, and suggests that she still had the “potential to become quite unwell.” Dr Evans says “She was in a neonatal unit , the best place on the planet for her.”

When asked by Mr Myers again about her potential to become unwell, Dr Evans says “The potential is there, which is why she was on a neonatal unit.”

 

[Tortoise]

https://twitter.com/MerseyHack

Mr Myers suggests Dr Evans doesn’t want to accept problems with [D’s] respiration because that would “undermine” his conclusion that D died from an air embolus. Dr Evans says “No.”

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

https://twitter.com/MerseyHack

Mr Myers suggests Dr Evans doesn’t want to accept problems with [D’s] respiration because that would “undermine” his conclusion that D died from an air embolus. Dr Evans says “No.”

It might be just me but this line of questioning seems quite juvenile?

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

Some more of today's testimony

Lucy Letby trial: Colleague ‘had sleepless nights’ over neo-natal unit incidents

A SENIOR nurse had “sleepless nights” over incidents at the Countess of Chester Hospital neo-natal unit where her colleague Lucy Letby is…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

It might be just me but this line of questioning seems quite juvenile?

Agreed. He tried this before and I think he came off quite badly, wonder what the jury think

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

I know its part of the whole judicial process but a non-medical, non-clinical attorney questioning professional doctors and consultant specialists over their medical opinions seem a moot point. Like I said, I know its part of the process but it just feels so awkward.

 

[MissMarbles]

Some more of today's testimony

Lucy Letby trial: Colleague ‘had sleepless nights’ over neo-natal unit incidents

A SENIOR nurse had “sleepless nights” over incidents at the Countess of Chester Hospital neo-natal unit where her colleague Lucy Letby is…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

A reminder just how much these type of events can affect the people involved. It must be so sad and stressful.

 

[JosieJo]

I can totally understand the defence have to try and show that the babies "may" have been susceptible to collapse
But I just cannot see how he will get past the numerous Dr's, Nurses and expert witnesses for multiple babies who state the babies were not expected to collapse so suddenly.
Also the unusual skin discolouration that comes and goes that no one has ever seen before

 

[Tortoise]

Myers has said repeatedly to witnesses that they were all discussing this unusual rash at the time, as if to undermine their individual recollections. He's kind of making a point for the prosecution with this.

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

Myers has said repeatedly to witnesses that they were all discussing this unusual rash at the time, as if to undermine their individual recollections. He's kind of making a point for the prosecution with this.

Yes, 'You're remembering this because everyone else also remembers it' is hardly the slam dunk he wants.

Anyone who has seen this rash has said it's stuck with them as so odd, unusual etc. Not LL

 

[Tortoise]

I'm wondering if that's it for the cross-examination.

It seems to be a bit lacking in substance.

 

[Interested_Party]

I'm wondering if that's it for the cross-examination.

It seems to be a bit lacking in substance.

Agreed, although I don’t think the criticisms of Mr Myers are well-grounded. The evidence emerging is overwhelming and the only option he has going forward is 1. Undermine the conclusions of Dr Evans (who so far has been pretty steadfast) and 2. Start to develop an alternative version of events focusing on the overall performance of the unit and then drilling down on 1 or 2 of the less clear-cut cases (one has to assume they will offer their own expert testimony).

As an aside, I appreciate all of the work which has gone into these threads although 1 or 2 posters might consider being more circumspect and refrain from offering opinion as fact (the discussion on the note is a case in point).

 

[Music2022]

4. The presence [at post mortem] of air in D’s blood vessels.

The prosecution didn’t expand on this. Sounds like a big deal if that’s air is the cause of death. Why isn’t here more about it? You’d think they would expand whether it can appear in the blood vessels for any other reason other than injection. I get that air in the stomach can be cpap belly but what about air in the vessels. And how much air. Maybe we aren’t getting the whole picture from the reporting but feels like the prosecution aren’t stressing enough the medical findings for cause of death and when the air would’ve been injected, how much etc.. a lot of info is missing in the reporting anyway.

 

[Jazmania]

The prosecution didn’t expand on this. Sounds like a big deal if that’s air is the cause of death. Why isn’t here more about it? You’d think they would expand whether it can appear in the blood vessels for any other reason other than injection. I get that air in the stomach can be cpap belly but what about air in the vessels. And how much air. Maybe we aren’t getting the whole picture from the reporting but feels like the prosecution aren’t stressing enough the medical findings for cause of death and when the air would’ve been injected, how much etc.. a lot of info is missing in the reporting anyway.

Hopefully they will get the radiologist back to provide more information on the gas in the blood vessels on the x ray.

I think a previous expert said that depending on the size of the baby a teaspoon of air would be fatal

 

[Music2022]

Hopefully they will get the radiologist back to provide more information on the gas in the blood vessels on the x ray.

I think a previous expert said that depending on the size of the baby a teaspoon of air would be fatal

You must be right it will be the radiologist’s testimony. Is it after all the babies cases and before the defences turn?
There were three collapses they didn’t even say when the injection supposedly happened and how many injections.

 

[kittythehare]

They had the mother testifying to it being LL on the phone, and then discussing how mortified Dr Brunton was.

But because no medical staff can remember conclusively who it was, they can't make more of it. As it doesn't directly impact baby D's outcome.

Unless the DM is right and it was actually another nurse on the call (haven't seen any other outlet mention this) - all the jury know is the mother saw LL on the phone and Dr Brunton was mortified that it was the wrong call to the parents of A & B. Which is damaging as an insinuation for LL. And one for the defence to tackle on damage control.

Did anybody check whether the hospital has a handbook for employees explaining how things work as well as policies and procedures? It could answer the intricacies of the phone system?

 

[Tortoise]

Agreed, although I don’t think the criticisms of Mr Myers are well-grounded. The evidence emerging is overwhelming and the only option he has going forward is to 1. Undermine the conclusions of Dr Evans (who so far has been pretty steadfast) and 2. Start to develop an alternative version of events focusing on the overall performance the unit and then drilling down on 1 or 2 of the less clear-cut cases (one has to assume they will offer their own expert testimony).

RSBM.

I don't know, if you lose the jury on just one of the cases (I'm not suggesting he has, but if that happens) it removes one of the most onerous tasks the jury has (at the end), which is deciding whether the accused is morally capable of such an act, when deliberating the remaining cases. Obviously each case must stand on its own merits, but that mystifying aspect would no longer be a barrier. In my opinion of course.

 

[covid2020]

The doctors thinking he was speaking to a colleague only to find it was the parent of another patient child suggests the place was a bit of a shambles.
Myers is also right to question Dr. Watson firmly. Watson is unlikely to recant and say he is wrong in his theories.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

It might be just me but this line of questioning seems quite juvenile?

I don't see it that way.

It's the defence's obligation to raise every single issue and go through every permutation that could mean LL is wrongly accused. People can be high on ego and pride - especially medical doctors - 'is it possible you were mistaken?' is one question and the next question is 'is it possible if you are mistaken, you would not wish to back down?' - it's a valid question and the hope is to point out to someone that not wanting to lose face is a solid reason why professionals hate to change their minds. Also it can lead to the 'reasonable doubt' argument.

 

[cuecard]

I’ve tried to keep a really open mind with this case given the nature of it and I’m not coming to any concrete conclusion yet but I don’t know, I feel like LL and her defence have come across as weaker so far in this trial. Just my opinion of course and have no problem if others view it differently.