UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #11

[bbsaz]

It is very damning.

I hope the jury is focused in today because a few damning things are coming into focus for me.

What are the chances of two separate sets of twins being born at the same hospital --- one is poisoned with insulin, and the other given an unexplained air embolism ? Same in each case.

And both sets of twins suffered unexpected and unexplained collapses, within 24 hours of each other.

Twin E died on Aug 4th, Twin F collapsed on Aug 5th, 2015.

Twin L collapsed on April 9th, 2016, then Twin M collapsed hours later.

Cant KEEP putting it down to coincidence imo

 

[katydid23]

Cant KEEP putting it down to coincidence imo

Nope. And I don't think you can point to fragility or severe prematurity in babies L and M. They both received perfect 10 in APGAR scores with no red flags for health concerns. They were considered healthy and would be going home relatively soon.

And then each one has a sudden unexplained collapse that brings each to the verge of death, needing multiple shots of adrenaline and the crash team for total resuscitation for quite awhile.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I’m not sure but I think at least one set of twins both had events within one week of birth. That first week is according to what I have read the time when they are most at risk of complications. After which I think generally they stabilise. Makes sense I think, immune system takes a little while to activate properly and that’s when they get infections and such and such. Doesn’t need to be a coincidence.

 

[katydid23]

Here is what the defense said about twin babies L and M during opening statements:

Lucy Letby trial - latest: Nurse 'adamant' she's done nothing to harm any of the babies in the case as defence begins

Latest updates on day four of the Lucy Letby trial, with the prosecution showing the court handwritten "confessions" from the nurse in which she allegedly admitted she was "evil", and the defence saying the hospital was "well out of its depth". Letby denies all charges.

news.sky.com

Moving on to Child L and Child M, twin boys who survived.

Defence lawyer Ben Myers KC says "blame is being put on Ms Letby because there is no obvious alternative".

He continues: "The mere fact she is there when something happens is almost being used as an explanation for it happening."

 

[katydid23]

I’m not sure but I think at least one set of twins both had events within one week of birth. That first week is according to what I have read the time when they are most at risk of complications. After which I think generally they stabilise. Makes sense I think, immune system takes a little while to activate properly and that’s when they get infections and such and such. Doesn’t need to be a coincidence.

The 2 sets of twins I am discussing had recognised 'causes' for their collapses. Two of them had insulin poisoning and 2 had air embolisims. There were solid medical tests confirming as such,

So it had nothing to do with their immune systems or complications from mysterious infections.

 

[katydid23]

Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
·

Ben Myers KC, defending, is now questioning Dr Jayaram. He points out that his notes from the time of Child M did not make any reference to 'pink blotches' - he says surely this would be an important detail that should have been recorded


Mr Myers suggests it is 'incompetent' not to have noted the blotches - Dr Jayaram explains at the time many other things were happening and full relevance of blotches wasn't realised

Mr Myers said: 'Details of decolourisation doesn’t appear in notes or statements because it is not what you saw, is it?' Dr Jayaram again rejected the assertion.

Mr Myers went on to claim that Ms Letby had been “a focus of interest” for Dr Jayaram since the death of another child in this case, Child D, in June 2015.
He told the court another senior medic, Dr Stephen Breary, had “flagged” to Dr Jayaram that Ms Letby had been working when a number of infants had collapsed or died in that month. “All eyes were on Ms Letby then”, Mr Myers said. “Clearly yes”, Dr Jayaram said.

Mr Myers said in that case, there is “absolutely no way” he would have failed to record the blotches on Child M. Dr Jayaram again explained: “I recorded what I felt was relevant.”

 

[WaxLyrical]

Hmm I have a tendency to agree with BM here. If “all eyes had been on Letby” for what would appear to be many months, and this fleeting mottling kept occurring and was rare and remarkable, then why on earth was it not noted down. Why would Dr J deem it irrelevant. JMO.

 

[marynnu]

If any of those things above had happened---the unit took in many more premature patients in that 12 months, the unit had large loss of staff or an increase in sickness, etc----the 2 year intensive investigation would likely not have concluded that it was a malicious string of attacks.

I doubt the hospital wanted to conclude they had a serial killer on staff. If they could have shown statistically that it was because of an influx of fragile patients and a lack of skilled staff they would have gladly done so. JMO

IMO the numbers, though startling, aren't as significant as the unexpected & inexpicable nature of these collapses, not to mention the extreme difficulty in resuscitation. If the deaths & collapses were that easy to explain then there would be no court case.

 

[katydid23]

Hmm I have a tendency to agree with BM here. If “all eyes had been on Letby” for what would appear to be many months, and this fleeting mottling kept occurring and was rare and remarkable, then why on earth was it not noted down. Why would Dr J deem it irrelevant. JMO.

I think he attempted to explain it by saying there was a lot going on at the time----that was the 2nd baby with an unexplained total collapse within last 20 hours and they were twins.

That is a lot of intense stress and pressure on the medical team. Most of his notes were probably about which emergency medications and treatments were immediately needed. And he would be jotting down vitals and test results too, and anything else coming to mind to save this baby.

He missed making note of the mottling. I don't think that is an earth shattering mistake for an emergency doctor to make. Both babies were brought back from the brink of death, so I do credit the team with that.

 

[marynnu]

I’m not sure but I think at least one set of twins both had events within one week of birth. That first week is according to what I have read the time when they are most at risk of complications. After which I think generally they stabilise. Makes sense I think, immune system takes a little while to activate properly and that’s when they get infections and such and such. Doesn’t need to be a coincidence.

All my personal view:

Twins L & M were 33+2 weeks. Babies of this gestation are not particularly vulnerable. Their immune systems are well developed and they would have received maternal antibodies. And all babies admitted to NNUs are screened for infection. In addition, in many hospitals babies born at 34 weeks can go to postnatal ward if no problems.

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

Hmm I have a tendency to agree with BM here. If “all eyes had been on Letby” for what would appear to be many months, and this fleeting mottling kept occurring and was rare and remarkable, then why on earth was it not noted down. Why would Dr J deem it irrelevant. JMO.

not realising the relevance of something is not the same as deeming it irrelevant. It sounds like the sudden unexpected collapses were what was flagged up.

"Dr Stephen Breary, had “flagged” to Dr Jayaram that Ms Letby had been working when a number of infants had collapsed or died in that month. "
https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

 

[Tortoise]

“All eyes were on Ms Letby then”, Mr Myers said. “Clearly yes”, Dr Jayaram said.

I have to say this sounds like the kind of pronouncement that defence barristers love to bring out at trial, expecting it will come across that someone has been narrow-minded or tunnel-visioned, but it appears not to have had the desired effect in this case, it is what it is, doctors noticed her presence at unexpected collapses and deaths.

JMO

 

[marynnu]

“All eyes were on Ms Letby then”, Mr Myers said. “Clearly yes”, Dr Jayaram said.

I have to say this sounds like the kind of pronouncement that defence barristers love to bring out at trial, expecting it will come across that someone has been narrow-minded or tunnel-visioned, but it appears not to have had the desired effect in this case, it is what it is, doctors noticed her presence at unexpected collapses and deaths.

JMO

It's all interpretation, isn't it. If she turned out to be guilty and nobody had picked this up they'd be blamed for that too!
What I'd love to know is whether any of her fellow nurses felt concerned. There have been a few possible hints but that's all.

 

[Sweeper2000]

It's all interpretation, isn't it. If she turned out to be guilty and nobody had picked this up they'd be blamed for that too!
What I'd love to know is whether any of her fellow nurses felt concerned. There have been a few possible hints but that's all.

I don’t think they did. I think the bitchy comments probably refer to doubt on her expertise and capability as a icu nurse rather than as being a potential killer.

 

[Tortoise]

I read it slightly differently; to me it seemed as though the implication was that more was being ordered than was actually required. They never actually said what the stock levels were at any given time, just what was ordered. If you don't balance what's in stock in the fridge with what was ordered and what was used or disposed of then the spike in orders is irrelevant.

They gave order figures for three years, just like they did for the rise in deaths and we know that they are saying that LL was responsible for those deaths.

Again, without context, people arrive at different conclusions, and quite reasonably so.

So, in the case of the order levels of insulin we have yet another completely meaningless figure. Clearly, though, the implication is that it points to some nefarious act as it's a prosecution figure and there is no reason to introduce it unless it supports or implies guilt.

I think they are looking at it from what the jury needs to know.

Gosh, two babies had a load of insulin put in their feeds.
Well if she did it, how did she get hold of that much insulin?
Can you buy it? Nope.
Was there enough insulin on the ward for her to have taken that much?
Don't know. They haven't told us. Perhaps there wasn't and that's why they haven't said.
Prosecution - there were four extra bottles of insulin issued to the unit above the previous year's levels.

JMO

 

[GoodDayToYouSir]

Yes, it's as tortoise said, it's one thing to be in the junk drawer or cupboard under the stairs type place where junk just accumulates or you just fling stuff and shut the door but under the bed means, specifically taken upstairs and put under the bed, to me anyway.
I have to confess that when I had an “under the bed” (before I had a bed with storage drawers built underneath the mattress), under the bed was often where I swept stuff . It gave the impression of the room being tidy if you were standing up. Clearly an entirely different impression once you got down on the floor though !

 

[GoodDayToYouSir]

I think they are looking at it from what the jury needs to know.

Gosh, two babies had a load of insulin put in their feeds.
Well if she did it, how did she get hold of that much insulin?
Can you buy it? Nope.
Was there enough insulin on the ward for her to have taken that much?
Don't know. They haven't told us. Perhaps there wasn't and that's why they haven't said.
Prosecution - there were four extra bottles of insulin issued to the unit above the previous year's levels.

JMO

And maybe also to debunk any suggestion that the insulin was put into the bags whilst they were in the pharmacy

 

[magikarpmagikarp]

"im glad we now know at least some detail around what caused suspicions. All consultants sitting around the table suggesting stuff."

I don't fully agree with the wording above.^^^^^
The consultants did not 'cause' the suspicion. The surge in unexplained collapses caused the suspicion.

The suspicion 'caused' the consultants to sit around the table to discuss what they thought could be happening.

Right, in my opinion, this would have most likely been a morbidity and mortality review where the staff are looking at these unexpected deaths and trying to figure out how to prevent more in the future. This is standard practice.

 

[magikarpmagikarp]

I have to confess that when I had an “under the bed” (before I had a bed with storage drawers built underneath the mattress), under the bed was often where I swept stuff . It gave the impression of the room being tidy if you were standing up. Clearly an entirely different impression once you got down on the floor though !

Me too. When I was in my 20s my under the bed was a miasma of forgotten clothes and papers, random shopping bags full of all sorts of tat and crap, etc. I was terribly untidy at the time. There are a lot of things in the evidence that I find shocking or concerning, but the notes under her bed don't in and of themselves signify much to me. Should she have taken them home? Absolutely not. She certainly seems unprofessional in many ways. But can I believe a person could accidentally take papers and then forgotten them under the bed due to untidiness? Absolutely. A benign explanation for what is under her bed doesn't have an impact on the other details of the case, to me, because in my opinion the technical, medical details are quite compelling on their own. JMO.

 

[Tortoise]

It's all interpretation, isn't it. If she turned out to be guilty and nobody had picked this up they'd be blamed for that too!
What I'd love to know is whether any of her fellow nurses felt concerned. There have been a few possible hints but that's all.

Looking at the messages over time I get a slight impression that JJ-K was very astute and you couldn't easily pull the wool over her eyes. I think LL picked up on it and didn't really turn to her as much as time went on.

Jun

LL: "Not the vented baby necessarily, I just feel I need to be in 1, to get the image out of my head. To be in 3 is eating me up. All I can see is him in 1. It probably sounds odd but it's how I feel x"
JJ-K: “It sounds very odd and I’d be complete opposite.
LL: “Well that’s how I feel. I don’t expect people to understand but I know how I feel and how I have dealt with it before. I voiced that so can’t do any more, but people should respect that.”
JJ-K: “I think they do respect it but also trying to help you. Why don’t you go in 1 for a bit?”
LL: "Yeah, I have done a couple of meds in 1. I’ll be fine. Forget I said anything, I will be fine, it's part of the job but just don't feel like there is much team spirit tonight x"
JJ-K: "I am not going to forget but think you're way too hard on yourself."
JJ-K: "Hoping you are going to [be] ok, this is not like you.

Aug

JJ-K: "That’s sad. ‘We’re on a terrible run at the moment. Were you in 1? x"
LL: "Yes. I had him and F x"
JJ-K: "That’s not good, you need a break from it being on your shift. x"
LL: "It's the luck of the drawer (sic) isn’t it, unfortunately. Only three trained, so I ended up having both, whereas just F the other shifts."
JJ-K: "You seem to be having some very bad luck though."

Sep

JJ-K: "How you doing x”
LL: "Had rubbish nights. x"
JJ-K: "Yeah gathered. x"
LL: "Thought someone would have told you x. Nothing else to say really, just hope they are both ok"
JJ-K: "Don't know ins and outs as tried to avoid it, needed a break. Found Thursday horrendous, not really slept since then. Hope you're ok"
LL: "That is understandable, won't tell you anything."
The conversation turned to LL asking which of the team had informed JJ-K about the events of the night-shift for Sept 6-7. After a few guesses, the name 'Ali', in the messages, is said to be correct.


Oct

JJ-K texted LL: How's work?
LL replies that one of the babies she is looking after that night is being transported out that night.

She texted a different nurse about the transfer but also mentioned the mother's dress.

Nov

LL: Baby J went off then had 33-week twins born at home. One vented on handover + a mountain of antibiotics.
JJ-K: Not like baby J but you can’t allow for ones that just come
LL: Baby J fitting may end up tubed
JJ-K: You need some sleep. That’s not like her at all, wonder if something happened
LL: Thinking maybe sepsis. Oh well we can only do our best. Have a good day. In bed now, least I live so close x

a different colleague same night - LL gave more detail -

LL: No. baby J in 2 screened. Had profound desats and just got 32-week twins born at home, one with cleft lip and only 5 staff x

JMO