Thank you very much MsBetsy. I thought it was in a diary. Now I know to search for post it notes. It seems so long ago I couldnt remember. Thank you again.
None of us are seeing everything that the jurors are seeing and hearing each day. The prosecution has been working diligently for many years already, putting together their case, hiring their experts, and witnesses.I’m wondering because it’s still a thing of frustration that nobody has seen anything and there doesn’t seem to be evidence of anything conclusive of LL guilt or innocence. It seems to me that the strongest evidence the prosecution have is the cases of insulin poisoning. It’s seemingly without a doubt that insulin has been present in the body of the babies when it shouldn’t have been. I’m just speculating as I think the prosecutions angle is that the cases are collectively indicative so one bolsters the next and so on. I just remember that LL asked
"Interestingly, at the end of this part of the interview she asked whether the police had access to the TPN bag that she had connected,".
Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders
THE trial of former Countess of Chester Hospital nurse Lucy Letby, who is accused of multiple baby murders, is due to finalise its jury and hear…www.chesterstandard.co.uk
its Notable to me but I’m not sure what to make of it. It’s kind of difficult to make sense of as I cant see why she would ask this if she hadnt requested for the bag to be checked as I think she said she did? It’s so long after the event she wouldn’t have had a reason to think they did. She would have known of any police involvement or suspicion at the time and that would be a reason IMO
it’s kind of incriminating if she didn’t believe she had requested the check.
The interesting part is that she made the association with the TPN bag, imo. If she was told child F had been given insulin he shouldn't have had it could have been administered another way.I’m wondering because it’s still a thing of frustration that nobody has seen anything and there doesn’t seem to be evidence of anything conclusive of LL guilt or innocence. It seems to me that the strongest evidence the prosecution have is the cases of insulin poisoning. It’s seemingly without a doubt that insulin has been present in the body of the babies when it shouldn’t have been. I’m just speculating as I think the prosecutions angle is that the cases are collectively indicative so one bolsters the next and so on. I just remember that LL asked
"Interestingly, at the end of this part of the interview she asked whether the police had access to the TPN bag that she had connected,".
Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders
THE trial of former Countess of Chester Hospital nurse Lucy Letby, who is accused of multiple baby murders, is due to finalise its jury and hear…
its Notable to me but I’m not sure what to make of it. It’s kind of difficult to make sense of as I cant see why she would ask this if she hadnt requested for the bag to be checked as I think she said she did? It’s so long after the event she wouldn’t have had a reason to think they did. She would have known of any police involvement or suspicion at the time and that would be a reason IMO
it’s kind of incriminating if she didn’t believe she had requested the check.
I’m wondering because it’s still a thing of frustration that nobody has seen anything and there doesn’t seem to be evidence of anything conclusive of LL guilt or innocence. It seems to me that the strongest evidence the prosecution have is the cases of insulin poisoning. It’s seemingly without a doubt that insulin has been present in the body of the babies when it shouldn’t have been. I’m just speculating as I think the prosecutions angle is that the cases are collectively indicative so one bolsters the next and so on. I just remember that LL asked
"Interestingly, at the end of this part of the interview she asked whether the police had access to the TPN bag that she had connected,".
Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders
THE trial of former Countess of Chester Hospital nurse Lucy Letby, who is accused of multiple baby murders, is due to finalise its jury and hear…
its Notable to me but I’m not sure what to make of it. It’s kind of difficult to make sense of as I cant see why she would ask this if she hadnt requested for the bag to be checked as I think she said she did? It’s so long after the event she wouldn’t have had a reason to think they did. She would have known of any police involvement or suspicion at the time and that would be a reason IMO
it’s kind of incriminating if she didn’t believe she had requested the check.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The overfeeding couldn't be accidental.
If you go back to what the defence said:what do you think is that “very damning evidence“? I was just thinking of mr Myers saying the “foundation“ evidence is nearly all medical and “he said there was no evidence of her doing harm to any children”
Lucy Letby a 'dedicated' nurse in 'system which has failed', court hears
The nurse's lawyer said her guilt was not a 'done deal'www.dailypost.co.uk
he wouldn’t say that without a reason I think The same I presume as the prosecution wouldn’t build there argument around implausible events.
No need to do your own research outside of trial material. Professor Hindmarsh gave evidence about the different methods of administering insulin. The evidence points to it being in the TPN bag but it is never administered that way, (showing this was most definitely foul play), and it took an expert's analysis of the readings over the whole day to determine that this was the way it was administered. LL is not an expert, she would have known how to give insulin via legitimate applications and she would not have known how to interpret the data with a specific method of application, IMO. Even the doctors at the hospital who handled the results didn't suspect anyone tampered with the TPN bags or they would have no doubt called the police in at that stage. Intravenously just means run through the IV line, it doesn't mean via the TPN feed.That got me thinking, apparently the only two routes of insulin application is intravenously or via injection and the evidence really does point to it being in the tpn bag. I’m just wondering if it’s common knowledge in neonatal nursing that there is only two routes of insulin admin.
“Professor Hindmarsh says it is not possible to give insulin by mouth as it is a large molecule, so cannot be absorbed easily and the protein would be broken down by the acid in the stomach. It could not have been administered via the naso-gastric tube for the same reason.”
Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, November 25
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.northwaleschronicle.co.uk
can’t be transdermal as the molecule is too large to be absorbed by the skin according to what I have read. I thought on the off chance some insulin may have gotten onto the clothes or something else in contact with the babies that caused the fluctuations in blood glucose but apparently not If a babies pores are as similar in function to an adult on which the permeability of insulin on skin is currently thought to be.
“A challenge for transdermal insulin delivery is the inefficient passive insulin absorption through the skin due to the large molecular weight of the protein drug.”
Advances in Transdermal Insulin Delivery
Insulin therapy is necessary to regulate blood glucose levels for people with type 1 diabetes and commonly used in advanced type 2 diabetes. Although subcutaneous insulin administration via hypodermic injection or pump-mediated infusion is the standard ...
I know it’s unlikely but worthy of consideration IMO. Would fit with a hospital that’s chaotic In a uncontrolled way.
i cant find anything that would suggest a neonatal nurse would know there are only two routes of insulin administration. Most of it as in guidelines of management seems to be in treatment but not in feasibility of methods of application.
what do you think is that “very damning evidence“? I was just thinking of mr Myers saying the “foundation“ evidence is nearly all medical and “he said there was no evidence of her doing harm to any children”
Lucy Letby a 'dedicated' nurse in 'system which has failed', court hears
The nurse's lawyer said her guilt was not a 'done deal'
he wouldn’t say that without a reason I think The same I presume as the prosecution wouldn’t build there argument around implausible events.
[snipped for focus]
<respectfully snipped>what do you think is that “very damning evidence“? I was just thinking of mr Myers saying the “foundation“ evidence is nearly all medical and “he said there was no evidence of her doing harm to any children”
Lucy Letby a 'dedicated' nurse in 'system which has failed', court hears
The nurse's lawyer said her guilt was not a 'done deal'
he wouldn’t say that without a reason I think The same I presume as the prosecution wouldn’t build there argument around implausible events.
Yes, I think they've saved a few forests in this trial.I was going back to reads about the opening days of the trial, both prosecution and defense---and saw an interesting snippet:
Oct 13th
2:34am
The judge has arrived in court. Proseuctor Nicholas Johnson KC will resume the prosecution case outline shortly.
Firstly, discussions on the use of iPads that the jury will use are taking place.
The iPads will not have internet access, and have bespoke passwords for each juror, and will only store the evidence in the case for them to access.
Lucy Letby trial recap: Prosecution finishes outlining case, defence gives statement
THE prosecution in the trial of Lucy Letby, accused of murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to…
I thought that ^^^ was good to see that each juror has an iPad full of case evidence to go through.
I wanted to look at the final babies that she was accused of harming, to see what happened, right before they took her off their floor for good.
Babies O, P, and Q.
The prosecution also told of Child O, one of three triplet brothers, who was allegedly murdered.
Child O weighed 2.02kgs, which was good for a premature triplet. He was in good condition and made good progress.
He was stable up to June 23, when he suffered what medical expert Dr Dewi Evans said was a “remarkable deterioration” and died.
7:16am
Child O - murder allegation
Recap: Prosecution continues opening of Lucy Letby trial
The prosecution continues its opening in the trial of Lucy Letby, accused of multiple baby murders at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
Child O and Child P were two of three triplet brothers, the court hears.
Child O weighed 2.02kgs, which was good for a premature triplet. He was in good condition and made good progress.
He was stable up to June 23, when he suffered what Dr Evans said was a “remarkable deterioration” and died.
Between June 15 and June 23, Lucy Letby had been on holiday in Ibiza.
Child O's body was examined after his death and an injury to his liver was found.
Letby was working the day shift on June 23 and was the designated nurse for Child O and P, in room 2, with another child.
The prosecution say this "gave her an open opportunity to sabotage the babies".
The third of the triplets was in room 1, the doctors believing he was the most needy of the triplets.
Letby also had the responsibility of supervising a student nurse that day.
The designated nurse recorded 'no nursing concern - observations normal' for Child O.
There are three records of feeds by Letby, at 8.30am, 10.30am, and 12.30pm - the earliest signed by the student nurse, the latter two signed by etby.
In a note made by the doctor at 1.15pm, there was '1x vomit post feed' with 'abdomen distended'.
Child O was put on to IV fluids as a precaution.
Child O's heart rate was 160-170, blood gases were low, and raised CO2 level.
The doctor recorded the results as 'not normal' for a child breathing on their own and treated for suspected 'NEC'.
It was thought down to Child O's swallowing of air or the passing of a stool earlier.
An x-ray taken at the time showed a moderate amount of gas in the bowel loops throughout the abdomen
Letby noted at 8.35pm - 'reviewed by registrar at 1.15pm - [Child O] had vomited (undigested milk) tachycardic and abdomen distended. NG tube placed on free drainage … 10ml/kg saline bolus given as prescribed along with antibiotics. Placed nil by mouth and abdominal x ray performed. Observations returned to normal”.
Prior to Child O's collapse, a colleague said of Child O: "“he doesn’t look as well now as he did earlier. Do you think we should move him back to [room] 1 to be safe?"
Letby did not agree.[she was designated to be in room 2 at the time]
The prosecution say this echoes the final, fatal collapse of Child I.
Letby had taken Child O's observations at 2.30pm as 100% oxygen saturations and normal breathing rates.
From her phone, she was on Facebook Messenger at the time, and at 2.39pm, the door entry system recorded her coming into the neonatal unit.
Within a few minutes of that, Child O suffered his first collapse.
Letby called for help, having been alone with Child O in room 2 at the time.
Child O's heart rate and saturations had dropped to dangerously low levels. A breathing tube was inserted by the medical staff and he was successfully resuscitated. He was kept on a ventilator.
At 3.49pm, Child O desaturated again. doctors removed the ET and replaced it "as a precaution". Letby's written notes suggest she was the one who called for help.
Child O suffered a further collapse at 4.15pm which required CPR. Those efforts were unsuccessful and Child O died soon after treatment was withdrawn at 5.47pm.
A consultant doctor noted Child O had an area of discoloured skin on the right side of his chest wall which was purpuric.
He noted a rash at 4.30pm, which had gone by 5.15pm, and did not consider it purpura, but unusre what it was or what had caused it.
The doctor was particularly concerned about Child O's death as he was clinically stable before these events, his collapse was so sudden and he did not respond to resuscitation as he should have.
After the shift, Letby sent a series of messages to the doctor on Facebook, and to her colleague. She suggested Child O "had a big tummy overnight but just ballooned after lunch and went from there."
A post-mortem examination found free un-clotted blood in the peritoneal (abdominal)space from a liver injury. There was damage in multiple locations on and in the liver. The blood was found in the peritoneal cavity. He certified death on the basis of natural causes and intra-abdominal bleeding.
He observed that the cause of this bleeding could have been asphyxia, trauma or vigorous resuscitation.
The prosecution say no-one would have thought a nurse would have assaulted a child in the neonatal unit.
Dr Dewi Evans concluded Child O's death was the result of a combination of intravenous air embolus and trauma. The liver injury was not in his view consistent with vigorous CPR. His view was that the liver damage would have occurred before the collapse and contributed to it and was probably the reason for his symptoms through the morning. As for the air in the bowel loops, Dr Evans concluded that that was consistent with excessive air going down via the NGT.
Dr Bohin concluded concluded that together with the chest wall discolouration seen by the doctor that was indicative of air having been injected into Child O's circulation. She agreed that the abdominal distension was due to excess gas via the NGT.
Dr Andreas Marnerides, the reviewing pathologist, thought that the liver injuries were most likely the result of impact type trauma and not the result of CPR.
He thought that the excess air via the NGT was likely to have led to stimulation of the vagal nerve which has an effect on heart rate and would have compromised Child O's breathing.
He could not say whether it was either of these factors in isolation or in combination which caused Child O's death.
He certified the cause of death to be “Inflicted traumatic injury to the liver and profound gastric and intestinal distension following acute excessive injection or infusion of air via a naso-gastric tube” and air embolus.
In police interview, Letby said she had responded to child O's alarm at 1.15pm and found he had vomited.
She responded first at 2.40pm and discovered mottling all over with purple blotches and red rash. She said that his abdomen just kept swelling and suggested thatsometimes babies can gulp air when they are receiving assistance from Optiflow, as Child O was.
A year later, on the anniversary of Child O's death, Letby carried out a search on Facebook on the surname of the child.
SO THIS^^^ WAS THE DEATH OF CHILD O, WHO WAS A TRIPLET. HIS BROTHER, P, WAS MURDERED THE NEXT DAY.
Lucy Letby trial recap: Prosecution finishes outlining case, defence gives statement
THE prosecution in the trial of Lucy Letby, accused of murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to…
2:38am
Child P - murder allegation
The prosecution allege Child P was murdered the following day from brother Child O.
Also, I want to add to this:
