UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #10

[katydid23]

I guess they are not in court today? Or no reporters anyway?

 

[Dotta]

I guess they are not in court today? Or no reporters anyway?

"The sound of silence" is the only answer my friend.
But "Don't give up"

 

[marynnu]

I guess they are not in court today? Or no reporters anyway?

Lucy Letby: Baby girl had two unexplained seizures within 30 minutes

A BABY girl allegedly harmed by nurse Lucy Letby suffered two unexplained seizures within 30 minutes, a court heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[Becky53]

dbm as already posted

 

[Becky53]

A baby girl who was allegedly attacked by nurse Lucy Letby was making "steady and encouraging progress" before she collapsed, a court has heard.

Lucy Letby: Baby making progress before collapse, trial hears

Medical tests showed "nothing to explain" why a baby deteriorated, Lucy Letby's trial hears.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Becci]

Lucy Letby: Baby girl had two unexplained seizures within 30 minutes

A BABY girl allegedly harmed by nurse Lucy Letby suffered two unexplained seizures within 30 minutes, a court heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[Becci]

Lucy Letby: Baby girl had two unexplained seizures within 30 minutes

A BABY girl allegedly harmed by nurse Lucy Letby suffered two unexplained seizures within 30 minutes, a court heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

Sorry my inet must b lagging. This already got posted

 

[Dotta]

Thank you girls for posts!
Always alert for all of us

 

[WaxLyrical]

Interesting this is the first we’re hearing about the admission rate being unusually high during the 2015/16 period.

 

[Marantz4250b]

The Prosecution have LL's admission of guilt.

Yes, the note.

"I did it. I'm evil"

was written by her own hand and voluntarily.

Then why are they bothering with a trial?

 

[Tortoise]

No doubt I’m being dense, but could someone please explain to me what the significance is of whether dr Neame’s notes were made at 5:55am or 5am? I don’t understand what point Myers is trying to make there …

Hi, sorry for the delayed response to a post from days ago, I've been away for the weekend and just catching up.

From what I can see, LL wrote a retrospective note after the end of her shift recording for 5am baby I's abdomen was 'more distended' with 'discolouration spreading'. This would have been 5 minutes before she administered medication at 5.05am.

At 5.55am Dr Neame noted he was asked by LL to review baby I as her oxygen requirements had increased and he noted abdomen distended with 'unusual mottling'. He ordered an urgent x-ray.

My guess is that it's the prosecution's case that LL timed her retrospective note to before the IV meds were administered, and the mottling happened as a result of air injected with that, so the defence says Dr Neame's note at 5.55am could have referred to 5am, to agree with LL's note, in which case it would have been before the meds.

 

[Dotta]

Then why are they bothering with a trial?

Because she denies the charges and they have to prove them.

And the note was private.
Did she lie to herself?

JMO

 

[Marantz4250b]

Because she denies the charges and they have to prove them.

And the note was private.
Did she lie to herself?

The point I was making was that you are stating quite unequivocally that the note is her admission of guilt.

That is not an established fact!

Indeed, the note has not even been introduced into evidence yet, as far as I am aware.

 

[Tortoise]

The point I was making was that you are stating quite unequivocally that the note is her admission of guilt.

That is not an established fact!

Indeed, the note has not even been introduced into evidence yet, as far as I am aware.

It's marked as opinion. Just as others have expressed their opinions that it's not a confession. IMO

 

[Dotta]

The point I was making was that you are stating quite unequivocally that the note is her admission of guilt.

That is not an established fact!

Indeed, the note has not even been introduced into evidence yet, as far as I am aware.

Oh, we can argue till the end of time
(or longer)

I say things.
You say things.

I saw a note in media written by LL with words "I am evil. I did this."

You say it is not confession.

OK.
We are quits.

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

Confused about this comment ' Child I was always going to be transferred out on Oct 15th. Does anyone know if this was a planned transfer?

No it wasn't planned before that date.

"on October 15th the decision was taken to transfer her out of the Countess for more specialised care at Arrowe Park."
Mail Podcast The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 14: Baby I, “Our daughter could go from perfectly fine to nearly dying in seconds." - The Mail.

I think the comment could mean that she was going to be transferred by that stage whether or not she improved, or the doctors thought she had NEC, because of the collapses.

JMO

 

[marynnu]

No it wasn't planned before that date.

"on October 15th the decision was taken to transfer her out of the Countess for more specialised care at Arrowe Park."
Mail Podcast The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 14: Baby I, “Our daughter could go from perfectly fine to nearly dying in seconds." - The Mail.

I think the comment could mean that she was going to be transferred by that stage whether or not she improved, or the doctors thought she had NEC, because of the collapses.

JMO

My personal feeling is that "always" is an error - I'm not aware that such arrangements ever exist in neonatal care, and it makes no sense.

 

[katydid23]

Lucy Letby: Baby making progress before collapse, trial hears

Medical tests showed "nothing to explain" why a baby deteriorated, Lucy Letby's trial hears.

www.bbc.com

Dr John Gibbs, a consultant paediatrician, said Child J had been making "steady, acceptable and encouraging progress".
He added that within two-and-a-half weeks, Child J had moved on to bottle feeds and was "fine" and without any respiratory complications.

"It was a challenge managing Child J's stomas because we rarely had babies with a stoma needing recycling feeds [at the Countess of Chester Hospital]," he said.

He added this was discussed with the neonatal team at Alder Hey Children's Hospital, who dealt with stomas "fairly frequently", and they "were satisfied with her progress".
But in the early hours of 27 November 2015, Child J suffered seizures and four desaturations with her heart rate also dropping on the third and fourth occasion, the court heard.

"Both occurring together is of more concern than one occurring by itself," Dr Gibbs told the court.
Dr Stephen Brearey, who reviewed medical tests carried out that day, said "nothing explained" why the infant had collapsed.
"She [Child J] normalised very quickly over the course of the day and all the investigations we had undertaken couldn't identify why she had the desaturations or explain why she had a seizure.
"I do know hypoxia causes seizures so that would be possibly the most likely cause.

"There remains the question why was [Child J] hypoxic when two or three weeks beforehand she had been breathing normally in air and there was no suggestion of infection.
"In fact, we stopped antibiotics 36 hours after starting them because there was no evidence of infection in the blood tests and she remained well for weeks afterwards."

 

[mewmew]

I’ve been following this thread on and off but haven’t commented; just wanted to say thanks to all who are posting as this trial ensues. I have an extremely hard time following this trial (as I’m sure many do), it’s just so painful to read of these precious babies getting better and then “collapsing” and in some cases passing away. Even more painful to think that it could’ve been intentional. My heart just breaks for these families and these sweet babies. Thank you to the sleuthers brave enough to keep us informed on this important trial.

 

[Tortoise]

My personal feeling is that "always" is an error - I'm not aware that such arrangements ever exist in neonatal care, and it makes no sense.

I think even if we take out the word 'always' the sentence is strange, and it would make sense if we knew what she was explaining or answering. I also think it would be unlikely that a reporter would insert a word that she didn't say, and if anything he would be more likely to miss words when trying to keep up with live reporting, IMO.

One angle that I think we are missing, with the lack of reporting last week, is that the defence would claim she wasn't in as good condition as doctors noted she was, the day following the alleged second and third attacks, and the transfer to Arrowe is evidence of that. Their narrative is bound to be that she wasn't a naturally well baby, the prosecution's narrative is that the recoveries showed this wasn't disease process or infection. They sent her with suspicion of NEC after the two cardiac arrests, even though she had improved, because they didn't understand what caused them, and she came back 2 days later.

JMO