UK - Lucy Letby - Post-Conviction Statutory Inquiry

  • #881
What do you all think of this then

Page 2 of 2 - minutes of meeting with Cheshire Police 5th May 2017

"The nurse has been working at COCH for approximately 8 years full time, she is a Cheshire resident, and a single parent. The staff member has since placed a grievance against COCH. There has been no formal investigation of misconduct and no motive identified. There are no mental health issues known and nothing has been highlighted by occupational health. There are no management issues.

AP — IH to provide personal details of the nurse, and to look at safeguarding referral as single parent."
 
  • #882
Tony Chambers opening statement was played on the radio the other day. It was the usual rubbish to the effect of ...heart goes out to the families, we're sorry for what happened and the decisions I took... and then ended it with the words ...in good faith.. or similar!

It's just a massive exercise in minimising anything they've done to contribute or inflame this whole sorry mess. A total lack of responsibility. Some of these people, imo, come over as utter narcissists, quite honestly. Arrogant and self serving.

As I said the other day - the only thing that will go any way to preventing things like this is real and severe criminal penalties for negligent or reckless behavior in management positions in public service. Along with that, you should need to be licensed to be employed in a management position in public employment.
I’ve noticed that none of these Leadership Clowns or Anti-consultant nurses, ever says “I’m sorry for what happened to your baby
They all acknowledge the families, but don’t seem to mention the babies … the babies’ suffering & death is just not directly mentioned in the “apologies”
Tell me I’m wrong …
 
  • #883
  • #884
What do you all think of this then

Page 2 of 2 - minutes of meeting with Cheshire Police 5th May 2017

"The nurse has been working at COCH for approximately 8 years full time, she is a Cheshire resident, and a single parent. The staff member has since placed a grievance against COCH. There has been no formal investigation of misconduct and no motive identified. There are no mental health issues known and nothing has been highlighted by occupational health. There are no management issues.

AP — IH to provide personal details of the nurse, and to look at safeguarding referral as single parent."
What on earth? Is that just not correct or what on earth or is it not about Lucy? Or what on earth. It can't be surely. No wayyyy no wayyyyyy no wayyyyy

Eta. No wayyyyy
 
  • #885
What on earth? Is that just not correct or what on earth or is it not about Lucy? Or what on earth. It can't be surely. No wayyyy no wayyyyyy no wayyyyy

Eta. No wayyyyy
Has to be about her. There was no other nurse moved from nights to days (also in the minutes) and took out a grievance etc.

It's possible she lied about it. I would say that is in keeping with her character.
 
  • #886
Has to be about her. There was no other nurse moved from nights to days (also in the minutes) and took out a grievance etc.

It's possible she lied about it. I would say that is in keeping with her character.
I'm in two minds. Legally would the child be allowed to be mentioned in the media if she had one? I don't think so. If she did lie would the people taking those notes not be privy to that info and the lie exposed within those notes? No wayyyyyy did this entire thing just get pushed to new levels of no wayyyyy
 
  • #887
I'm in two minds. Legally would the child be allowed to be mentioned in the media if she had one? I don't think so. If she did lie would the people taking those notes not be privy to that info and the lie exposed within those notes? No wayyyyyy did this entire thing just get pushed to new levels of no wayyyyy
I would say if she did lie about it, they hadn't found out she lied at the time of that meeting, because the follow up action was Harvey to look into safeguarding a potential child of a potential murderer.
 
  • #888
Has to be about her. There was no other nurse moved from nights to days (also in the minutes) and took out a grievance etc.

It's possible she lied about it. I would say that is in keeping with her character.
I can't fit that information in. I can't place it as being true but I also can't believe that they wouldn't know its a lie.
 
  • #889
I would say if she did lie about it, they hadn't found out she lied at the time of that meeting, because the follow up action was Harvey to look into safeguarding a potential child of a potential murderer.
I can definitely see her lying about it and it fits with her lies in the past. It would certainly add to the "I'm not the type to kill babies" presentation but it's also impossible to believe its not true. Would this not have been bought up in court? By NJ? That's the biggest lie you could tell and speaks more of someone who is truly desperate and that's their last ditch attempt. "I'm a mother and I wouldn't hurt a child".
 
  • #890
I can definitely see her lying about it and it fits with her lies in the past. It would certainly add to the "I'm not the type to kill babies" presentation but it's also impossible to believe its not true. Would this not have been bought up in court? By NJ? That's the biggest lie you could tell and speaks more of someone who is truly desperate and that's their last ditch attempt. "I'm a mother and I wouldn't hurt a child".
I think her team would fight for that kind of information to be kept out of her trial as prejudicial.

It's not a crime and it's not evidence she murdered. No one wants a jury swayed into a guilty verdict because she was also a compulsive liar. Demonstrable lies during her testimony to the jury are another thing entirely.

I was wearing pyjamas. Do you want to see the video? No. I was wearing pyjamas.
I didn't have a shredder.
I was isolated. Drinking jugs of alcohol with my mates every night.
 
  • #891
I bet there's so much more about her than we know from trial, which can't be revealed because of data protection laws, or while Hummingbird is ongoing.
 
  • #892
I bet there's so much more about her than we know from trial, which can't be revealed because of data protection laws, or while Hummingbird is ongoing.
I'm wondering if we can or cannot verify it. I'm looking at any media articles about her living situation and the words they use. If we can find any that say "She lived alone" or "she moved into the house by herself" anything like that might give us a clue. Or if they just say "She owned the house" or anything that is obviously designed to move around whether or not she lived alone. I can think of one thing that shows she wasn't in a rush to get home was when doc choc offered her his car which means she walking which may mean she didn't have any priorities although this doesn't mean anything really. Her parents or carers might have looked after the bub assuming the age.

Can anyone think of seeing any information that states she lived alone?
 
  • #893
  • #894
She’s a mother to smudge and tigger so in her eyes she’s a single mother full stop !
More bloody BS
She’s couldn’t lie straight in bed that one.
 
  • #895
Ahhh …. The shredder !
Gone but NEVER forgotten :- )
 
  • #896
I'm wondering if we can or cannot verify it. I'm looking at any media articles about her living situation and the words they use. If we can find any that say "She lived alone" or "she moved into the house by herself" anything like that might give us a clue. Or if they just say "She owned the house" or anything that is obviously designed to move around whether or not she lived alone. I can think of one thing that shows she wasn't in a rush to get home was when doc choc offered her his car which means she walking which may mean she didn't have any priorities although this doesn't mean anything really. Her parents or carers might have looked after the bub assuming the age.

Can anyone think of seeing any information that states she lived alone?

I think that in that "pouring out note" she wrote "I'll never get married, never will have kids." So it looks like she may be lying. On the other hand, if she was not and was a single mother, this makes the note less meaningful.

In general, this is why one needs to know if it is true or not, because of what she writes on that note.

By itself, whether she is a single mom or not has as much relevance to the case as how many candies Dr. A left for her.
 
  • #897
Eta. I got that post all wrong. Says it all actually.

"The note, covered in dense handwriting, shows sentences including: "Overwhelming fear I panic I'll never have children or marry, I'll never have a family' and 'I don't deserve to live' and 'Why me?'"


However this does still pose the question of how she wrote that post it note either very close to or before the time that the other note ie possible referal to child services as "single parent" was made and that it isn't some clerical error?

The post it note was written in 2016 whilst in the patient safety office? Wait no way. The meeting discussing the single parent status was in May 2017 and was with the police. I find that almost impossible to think then that either it isn't true or that she lied but then this wasn't communicated. It would seem at the point that Ian harvey had that meeting with the police that her background living situation was known as fact. No mh issues, no signals from occupational health and Ian harvey is talking to the police. Surely they would at that point be able to say "we know without doubt she has a child"? Isn't it also true that the lie of never having a child wouldn't be prompted by NJ? There's a big bit of contradictory info there isn't there? I can't believe that her having a kid wouldn't be known by the court? Was it ever addressed?

@Tortoise how confident are you that her having a kid wouldn't have been allowed in court?

It's about ten months between the suspension from clinical to when IH had that meeting with the police so there is the potential but I just can't see how that wouldn't have been known. I was going to say I can't see her doing it but she's a baby killer.

You really think she thought it was a good idea to pop one out whilst she could? Last orders so to speak. The last post on the bugle. "Time gentlemen please".
 
Last edited:
  • #898
  • #899
What do you all think of this then

Page 2 of 2 - minutes of meeting with Cheshire Police 5th May 2017

"The nurse has been working at COCH for approximately 8 years full time, she is a Cheshire resident, and a single parent.

This is quite extraordinary, in that it's clearly and surely not an error. This is a police report. You don't get to claim to be a single parent without proof that you are one. And surely also, it would have been corrected by now if wrong? And/or used in her trial if correct and the case?

I really don't know what to think.

ETA. If a single parent, who was looking after this child while LL worked pretty much every hour she was asked to work? The cats?
 
Last edited:
  • #900
.
People were initially questioning what made her suddenly start killing and assaulting babies out of the blue in 2015. Given what is now coming out, it seems evident that she was doing it a lot earlier. Personally, I think she was at it from shortly after she qualified.
I agree. The Inquiry has mentioned the number of tubes dislodging during her placement shifts at Liverpool women’s hospital. I think the only thing that changed in June 2015 was her method as she’d just finished her long line training. I also wouldn’t be surprised if before then she usually targeted babies who were expected to die and so their deaths didn’t raise any suspicions. One of the doctors mentioned a strange incident a couple of weeks before Baby A so it will be interesting to see if that turns out to be another attack.
 
Last edited:

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
130
Guests online
1,945
Total visitors
2,075

Forum statistics

Threads
633,590
Messages
18,644,695
Members
243,603
Latest member
thaya
Back
Top