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

[Dotta]

Re Defence experts

This is the issue that will resolve itself within coming months.

No need to die on that hill.

If only other issues were so straightforward.

Moo

 

[Tortoise]

I think that would have been confrontational and thus unnecessary. However, him not saying that he would is very different to him saying that he wouldn't.

Confrontational in what way?

Barristers are renowned for being confrontational, but I don't see stating a fact of bringing an expert witness as fitting that description.

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

I think that would have been confrontational and thus unnecessary. However, him not saying that he would is very different to him saying that he wouldn't.

How on earth would saying they've got their own medical experts to testify confrontational? It's a trial..

 

[mart321]

Not sure on LL's tactics here. She says she can't remember these specific babies but looks up the families months later numerous times and also texts her colleagues how much their deaths have upset her.

We still have absolutely no idea of LL as a person?
Is she cold and calculated, or emotional and overbearing?

Is she capable and professional or prone to mistakes and poor at her job?

Considering she had been a nurse for a few years and had no doubt seen her fair share of bad times working in the neonatal ward I don't understand her apparent level of upset when she's texting her colleagues.


Could this possibly be a tactic to throw suspicion away from her?

 

[Tortoise]

Catching up on the Tweets from BBC journo


https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

Expert medical witness Dr Sandie Bohin, who prepared a report reviewing the death of Child D, is now giving evidence

Looking at Child D's first collapse on a morning in June 2015, Dr Bohin says she would be "surprised if an infection alone could cause that catastrophic a collapse"

Dr Bohin says Child D was in 'good condition at birth', asked to explain her collapse 12mins after being born the medic says this could be down to the infant being held incorrectly by the child's parents

'No disrespect to the parents, but new parents are not very confident about the way they hold babies, they can put the babies chin on the chest and have head flop forward, that can collapse windpipe', she said

'I cannot tell whether this was a clinical collapse because of illness, or mechanical blockage because of unusual position of the head', she added. Child D recovered from that initial collapse 12mins in and was placed on the neonatal unit

Dr Bohin said despite having pneumonia at birth, Child D was 'improving' and was 'stable'. She said there was 'nothing to indicate that death was imminent'

Asked what her conclusion was on the cause of her fatal collapse, she told jurors 'Taking into account the suddenness of the collapses and quick recovery, I was clear that this was not the infection, I was looking at something else and that had to be unusual, something odd'

She added: '(Child D) had air administered to her and that was the cause of the collapses'. The medic said this was administered either through the UVC line or the cannula in her hand.

Ben Myers KC, defending, is pressing Dr Bohin on her diagnosis. He noted that she had been searching for something 'unusual'. 'Are you just trying to find any evidence to support your air embolus conclusion?', he said. Dr Bohin: 'No, absolutely not.'

Mr Myers is now asking the medic 'what basis' she has for her conclusions as he points to research on air embolis which is based largely on experiments on rabbits, dogs and piglets. She says 'that’s the only method of research we have'

We're now back. Dr Bohin is continuing to face questions from Ms Letby's defence barrister Ben Myers KC

Mr Myers asks Dr Bohin if she has 'sought to minimise certain facts that show how unwell (Child D) was' 'No I have not', Dr Bohin says

Mr Myers said the whole clinical picture showed Child D was 'very unwell' upon birth, Dr Bohin does not agree. Describing the moment when the infant required resuscitation 12mins into her life, she says that was 'an event' that needed 'some intervention'

Mr Myers quotes evidence from Child D's mother, who told jurors last week: 'I had her, skin to skin, she didn’t really have any movement, she was quite limp, she didn’t have a good colour and she seemed to struggle to breath' Mr Myers says that shows Child D was 'very poorly'

Dr Bohin says that is the 'interpretation of a very worried mother'

Mr Myers again says asks Dr Bohin if she is trying to minimise the poor health of Child D. She says 'I'm not trying to minimise anything, my duty to the court is to look at all the evidence in an impartial way'



Prosecutor Nicholas Johnson KC has just read a summary of Ms Letby's police interviews in 2018 and 2019 which related to the death of Child D. In those interviews Ms Letby "denied administering air" into the bloodstream of Child D.

"She maintained that she did not do anything deliberately to (Child D)", Mr Johnson said. Ms Letby also told police in those interviews that she "could not remember" carrying out Facebook searches for the parents of Child D in the days after her death

Court has adjourned for the day, back Monday.

 

[Tortoise]

Regarding the SIDS question -

Professor Arthurs clarified when he was giving evidence for baby A;

He said such a finding is not found in cases of 'natural causes' death in babies. Trapped air such as this, Prof Arthurs explains, could be found in cases such as road traffic accidents, or infection such as sepsis - overwhelming infection in the organs of the body, or "very occasionally" outside of hospital in 'sudden unexpected death in infants'.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, October 21

 

[obelix71]

Confrontational in what way?

Barristers are renowned for being confrontational, but I don't see stating a fact of bringing an expert witness as fitting that description.

When they need to be, yes. But not in the opening. That does not play well with juries. In opening arguments, defence barristers need to get juries to like them. By mentioning defence witnesses, Myers would have created the image of confrontation i.e. prosecution experts versus defence experts. That is where the confrontational aspect is. No need to mention it. Doesn't mean he won't/can't call them.

 

[obelix71]

How on earth would saying they've got their own medical experts to testify confrontational? It's a trial..

In opening arguments, defence barristers need to get juries to like them. By mentioning defence witnesses, Myers would have created the image of confrontation i.e. prosecution experts versus defence experts. That is where the confrontational aspect is. No need to mention it. Doesn't mean he won't/can't call them.

 

[JosieJo]

Yep. She found the case so traumatic she took time off work, told a colleague she couldn't stop crying over it to the extent colleague suggested she see a counsellor. Searches the dad 4 months later.

But can't remember the child. Tbh it's this bizarre inconsistency that just makes it look bad.

I agree ...it also says she had acess to the child's notes during the interview...even if you didn't remember the baby straight away you should get some recollection..especially it having effected her so much

 

[Dcflag]

2:26pm

Dr Bohin says the lack of antibiotics at one stage was a 'blip' in the care Child D had received, but she presented as a 'well' baby throughout June 21.
Mr Myers says about the decision to take Child D off CPAP, after the second collapse, there would be a 'low threshold to intervene' if there were further desaturations.
He says Child D desaturated again, and says that would have been a moment to increase ventilation support.
Dr Bohin: "Not necessarily."
She said the doctor would have noted the overall clinical picture for Child D.
Dr Bohin is asked if the decision to feed Child D was a 'bad decision'.
She replies it was not a bad decision as the clinical position was stable.
Mr Myers says the decision to take Child D off CPAP was a bad one.
Dr Bohin says, given the clinical parameters, the decision to take Child D off CPAP was a right one to make.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, November 11

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

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

Surely even LL must be wondering what on earth? The baby is doing well, reduce breathing support, clear baby is still needing effort to breathe without cpap. Put it back on. They’ve said several times that they will use cpap to minimise the baby having to use effort and get tired when having laboured breathing. So it’s likely that when baby’s are showing clinically well signs they will attempt to remove cpap as many times as necessary until the baby has a positive response. The same with feeding. Good clinical signs = attempt a feed. Not tolerated? Back to square one and try again at a later stage.

Isn’t this all very good and normal practice?

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

I agree ...it also says she had acess to the child's notes during the interview...even if you didn't remember the baby straight away you should get some recollection..especially it having effected her so much

Exactly, or say you don’t remember an exact facebook search you could say well i don’t remember that specifically but I do sometimes search parents to see how they’re coping/getting on. But oh no i don’t remember ever searching for any of them ever.. sure

 

[Dcflag]

I disagree. Myers can hardly say "my experts are right and theirs are wrong". That would not be credible. His may not be right, and thus theirs might not be either. That to me is a strong message.

No but he could show that there a potential the prosecution witnesses have come to new conclusions on reviewing each other’s reports as he’s been asking them by having his own defence witnesses to give a plausibility to a different cause of death.

His issue will always be however that no matter who he finds, they will never be able to say definitively that AE isn’t a possible a cause. Because the fact is, it is.

 

[Dotta]

Exactly, or say you don’t remember an exact facebook search you could say well i don’t remember that specifically but I do sometimes search parents to see how they’re coping/getting on. But oh no i don’t remember ever searching for any of them ever.. sure

It looks like distancing herself from it all.

What does it mean in psychology?
There are many answers.

Moo

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

It looks like distancing herself from it all.

What does it mean in psychology?
There are many answers.

Moo

Ironically I actually have a masters in psychology, but I just work a desk job lol. I don’t really like to speculate on people’s psychology too much however. We may never get the full answers here

 

[merrypason]

I think that would have been confrontational and thus unnecessary. However, him not saying that he would is very different to him saying that he wouldn't.

But whatever his experts have to say would have been shared with the prosecution's experts. That's how it works in this country. He can't do a 'Ta da, gotcha' at the last minute.

So everything you can hear the prosecution and their experts saying now is based on what they also know of the defence's theories. And just like Myers mentioned the 1989 study a few times, if he had other studies or other evidence, he'd be using it now to cross examine these experts.

But he isn't.

 

[Tortoise]

The prosecution was originally going to have three medical expert witnesses who agreed on the air embolus conclusion.

"He [Dr Evans] said he was the first to come up with a diagnosis of an air embolus, and this had been agreed by a peer review by Dr Sandie Bohin, plus by a medical expert who began to peer review his reports but sadly, before completing the review, became seriously unwell and died."

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Tuesday, October 25

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

But whatever his experts have to say would have been shared with the prosecution's experts. That's how it works in this country. He can't do a 'Ta da, gotcha' at the last minute.

So everything you can hear the prosecution and their experts saying now is based on what they also know of the defence's theories. And just like Myers mentioned the 1989 study a few times, if he had other studies or other evidence, he'd be using it now to cross examine these experts.

But he isn't.

Yes we don’t get our Perry Mason moments unfortunately

 

[Tortoise]

But whatever his experts have to say would have been shared with the prosecution's experts. That's how it works in this country. He can't do a 'Ta da, gotcha' at the last minute.

So everything you can hear the prosecution and their experts saying now is based on what they also know of the defence's theories. And just like Myers mentioned the 1989 study a few times, if he had other studies or other evidence, he'd be using it now to cross examine these experts.

But he isn't.

Exactly. That's why we've heard Dr Evans say -

"Dr Evans says, under questioning by Mr Myers, he would be happy to hear of an alternative explanation from a medical perspective for Child B, but he is happy with the conclusion he has made for Child B, that she had had an air embolus."

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Tuesday, October 25

It becomes pretty obvious that there isn't another viable explanation that has been put to him.

 

[Dotta]

Ironically I actually have a masters in psychology, but I just work a desk job lol. I don’t really like to speculate on people’s psychology too much however. We may never get the full answers here

That is why I wrote "there are many answers".
But they are connected, mind you.
With the word "trauma".

 

[squish]

Exactly, I just don't understand why you'd lie.

There's nothing illegal with saying yes it upset me a lot and I wanted to see how the parents were doing/it stuck with me emotionally etc. Unprofessional? Sure. But not illegal, so why lie and say you don't remember not only the babies but also any of the facebook searches.

It makes her look really bad, as if she knew she had nefarious reasons for searching, and couldn’t think of an innocent reason.

I think that shows how far removed her thought process is from normal people, to not even be able to imagine why regular people might have a nosey on Facebook.