UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #14

[Imogenia]

I suppose it's all easily said in hindsight, in reality, it takes a life time of commitment and dedication to get into one of the most highly rewarding and respected roles in modern society.
They did not have the benefit of all of the information we have heard, after two years of compiling evidence.
From what we have heard so far. I would say the consultant team did the right things many times.
The answer remains to be seen whether the error was among the executive team, the board of trustees or a mixture of both.

It is a highly respected role, but with that comes concomitant responsibility. If their collective intuition was screaming so very loudly they should have gone straight to the police.

They did do the right thing but just did not go far enough.

I seem to remember that medical staff were in danger of losing their post, or did lose them, in the Beverly A case (for not noticing).

If this consultant team did seek advice from psychiatric colleagues, they would have been appraised of that possible consequence.

Incidentally, it is very unlikely that an associate director of nursing would suddenly suspend a nurse of an evening when the director of nursing had not hitherto done so, for the same ‘concerns’.

However, when asked by a consultant if she would be ‘happy’ were something to happen to another baby the next day, she should have thought more about things and phoned the police herself.

Sometimes in this life you have to seize the gauntlet. It’s frightening, but it can be the least worst option.

How else was she supposed to react? She’s not saying she believes anything about this nurse’s guilt or otherwise. The consultant is alleging that there’s a murderer loose, so ...

I bet you anything all of the above wish that they had acted courageously at the time.

 

[Sweeper2000]

She possibly didn't see anything suspicious and other than consultants pointing out a correlation, no other evidence was there to point towards LL.

Even the Feb 2016 high level review into 10 of the cases which looked at things like staff rotas and nursing observations could find no definitive casual cause.

I can’t think we have had any evidence to suggest anyone has really seen anything at this point. It all relies on the medical experts opinions on the med notes. If anyone had seen anything, realistically speaking it would have been the nurses or other staff and as far as we know they haven’t seen anything either even when in the same room and closer to the baby than LL has been recorded as being on one occasion.

I don’t really know how you would approach that with senior staff or from a senior staffs POv.

You would presumably know as well that there was autopsies done in six of the deaths none of which came back with medical experts opinions of unnatural causes and that would be evidence you could present to senior staff.

 

[Becci]

When she eye contacted & smiled at dr b how would she have knew his conversation with the senior management.
She seems oblivious imo to how serious the rumours are.
(LL adds there is a potential job opening on the unit which she believes she might be lined up for.)
maybe that's the reason why she chose to work rather than having time off & the fact she's bought a nice house & needs the work to pay the mortgage perhaps?

me personally i would've been very grateful to be offered time off given the circumstances but everyone's different i guess.

 

[ColourPurple]

Were any of those things what you would expect from someone who has done something wrong and is trying to avoid suspicion? That’s my point. She seems oblivious like she isn’t watching out or trying to play the environment with examples being her failing to realise opportunity and allay suspicion.

your second question is what you would emphasise more? Her trying to avoid suspicion or her alleged desire to kill babies? Which of the two would you anticipate in measurement as being of more valuable than the other? Considering the only motive for The former can be to kill more babies I would think that’s the only reasonable answer. So in short she would want time off so she can kill more babies and avoid consequences.

im assuming none of these babies were so valued that they wouldn’t outweigh her own desire for self preservation.

just out of curiosity is there any mention of face book searches recently? would be a strange thing If they just happened to stop or change.

If guilty, it's the approach she'd used from day one, and as far as she would have been concerned, at that point, it had worked. Nobody had told her they were suspicious. And all Dr B had mentioned was her possibly needing time off after witnessing two deaths in two days. Why would she change anything, when the approach she was using appeared to be working perfectly ?

Of course WE know that the consultants HAD raised concerns, but there's nothing to suggest LL was aware of that. So yes, if guilty, it makes sense that she'd just carry on as she always had. And as her approach so far wouldn't have appeared to her, to have raised suspicions there wouldn't have been any big dilemna about whether to take time off or not. Her not taking time off in the past hadn't raised suspicions so why would she suddenly think it would now?

So, yes IMO, if guilty, going into work the next day would present another opportunity to kill another baby, which is allegedly exactly what she did try to do, with Baby Q.

All IMO

 

[esther43]

It is a highly respected role, but with that comes concomitant responsibility. If their collective intuition was screaming so very loudly they should have gone straight to the police.

They did do the right thing but just did not go far enough.

I seem to remember that medical staff were in danger of losing their post, or did lose them, in the Beverly A case (for not noticing).

If this consultant team did seek advice from psychiatric colleagues, they would have been appraised of that possible consequence.

Incidentally, it is very unlikely that an associate director of nursing would suddenly suspend a nurse of an evening when the director of nursing had not hitherto done so, for the same ‘concerns’.

However, when asked by a consultant if she would be ‘happy’ were something to happen to another baby the next day, she should have thought more about things and phoned the police herself.

Sometimes in this life you have to seize the gauntlet. It’s frightening, but it can be the least worst option.

How else was she supposed to react? She’s not saying she believes anything about this nurse’s guilt or otherwise. The consultant is alleging that there’s a murderer loose, so ...

I bet you anything all of the above wish that they had acted courageously at the time.

I agree that they have a responsibility but I disagree that at least some of these consultants ( if the defendant is guilty) didn't play their relevant part in the investigation. I don't like to hear 'they should have gone to the police' as that almost suggests that that that responsibility was on them, when there is a nursing director, a medical director, a CEO and accountable board. The burden of responsibility sits higher up in the chain, once matters of concern have been deferred.

 

[Cardgame]

Were any of those things what you would expect from someone who has done something wrong and is trying to avoid suspicion? That’s my point. She seems oblivious like she isn’t watching out or trying to play the environment with examples being her failing to realise opportunity and allay suspicion.

your second question is what you would emphasise more? Her trying to avoid suspicion or her alleged desire to kill babies? Which of the two would you anticipate in measurement as being of more valuable than the other? Considering the only motive for The former can be to kill more babies I would think that’s the only reasonable answer. So in short she would want time off so she can kill more babies and avoid consequences.

im assuming none of these babies were so valued that they wouldn’t outweigh her own desire for self preservation.

just out of curiosity is there any mention of face book searches recently? would be a strange thing If they just happened to stop or change.

Psychopaths don't really 'do' consequences though, do they? so questions like 'how did she think she would get away with it?' might actually be answered by.... She didn't think about it. Or at least, not as a more typical person might.

Why wasn't she trying to cover her tracks more?
Maybe grandiosity? Impulsivity? Sheer inability to put herself in other people's shoes, therefore an inability to guess their next move?

If guilty of course. All MOO.

 

[Sweeper2000]

If guilty, it's the approach she'd used from day one, and as far as she would have been concefned, at that point, it had worked. Nobody had told her they were suspcious. And all Dr B had mentioned was her possibly needing time off after witnessing two deaths in two days. Why would she change anything, when the approach she was using appeared to be working perfectly ?

Of course WE know that the consultants HAD raised concerns, but there's nothing to suggest LL was aware of that. So yes, if guilty, it makes sense that she'd just carry on as she always had. And as her approach so far wouldn't have appeared to her, to have raised suspicions there wouldn't have been any big dilemna about whether to take time off or not. Her not taking time off in the past hadn't raised suspicions so why would she suddenly think it would now?

So, yes IMO, if guilty, going into work the next day would present another opportunity to kill another baby, which is allegedly exactly what she did try to do, with Baby Q.

All IMO

Would you think the “act weird and oblivious and do it” approach is used often by manipulative people.?

nobody needs to speak to her about suspicions or eavesdropping them. They are already there. She would know what she has done. It’s why not taking this opportunity with the suggesting doctor matters IMO. She is at least not trying to act like a innocent hurt individual.

 

[WaxLyrical]

I keep thinking back to that message that Dr Choc sent to LL about things feeling safe and well organised when she’s on the ward. And we know she was ambitious in terms of her career.

If guilty, I wonder whether the intention was to use these collapses as a way of furthering her own career, to gain experience and to demonstrate being calm and collected during emergencies and generally being viewed as a safe pair of hands. It’s easier to be the calm one when you know the underlying reason for the collapse and the likely outcome.

She does seem a bit of an odd ball, perhaps lacking in the empathy department. Is it possible that instead of being a ‘straightforward’ killer, she may have somehow justified these actions to herself? That she had some sense of entitlement that she could sabotage and then try to resolve it? And when some of the babies died it was because she was “not good enough to care for them”?

I don’t know, I don’t know how this would fit in with the insulin cases, the targeted multiples etc.

It just seems like the people who knew her really struggled to believe she was capable of this. Many of them have attested to her being competent and caring and an overall good nurse. The idea that she was simultaneously organising house warming parties and betting on the horses while literally murdering babies is a level of sheer psychopathy that doesn’t really fit well with everything else we’ve heard.

This whole case is truly the most bizarre thing. Stranger than fiction indeed.

Obviously this is all my own opinion, and just speculating about possible motive in the event that she is found guilty, which is pointless I know!

 

[notsure]

It seems strange that, as far as we know, none of her close colleagues had any suspicions, even though they were seeing her on a daily basis and could easily have spotted any correlation between her presence and the unexplained deaths. All very puzzling.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Psychopaths don't really 'do' consequences though, do they? so questions like 'how did she think she would get away with it?' might actually be answered by.... She didn't think about it. Or at least, not as a more typical person might.

Why wasn't she trying to cover her tracks more?
Maybe grandiosity? Impulsivity? Sheer inability to put herself in other people's shoes, therefore an inability to guess their next move?

If guilty of course. All MOO.

They will make rather strenuous efforts to conceal their actions though.

 

[Cardgame]

I don't like to hear 'they should have gone to the police' as that almost suggests that that that responsibility was on them

I agree. It also somewhat minimizes the reality of what making an accusation like that would be like, ie terrifying. What they needed was someone higher up to take it seriously and investigate, so that they didn't bear the sole burden of potentially becoming the evil doctor who falsely accused a lovely smiley blonde innocent hard working nurse of being a murderer. IMO.

 

[Cardgame]

Would you think the “act weird and oblivious and do it” approach is used often by manipulative people.?

nobody needs to speak to her about suspicions or eavesdropping them. They are already there. She would know what she has done. It’s why not taking this opportunity with the suggesting doctor matters IMO. She is at least not trying to act like a innocent hurt individual.

Yes that's interesting. Or at least, not that we've heard evidence of so far. Wonder if we will find out about any texts to Dr Choc once she's been removed from the ward?

 

[Dotta]

I keep thinking back to that message that Dr Choc sent to LL about things feeling safe and well organised when she’s on the ward. And we know she was ambitious in terms of her career.

If guilty, I wonder whether the intention was to use these collapses as a way of furthering her own career, to gain experience and to demonstrate being calm and collected during emergencies and generally being viewed as a safe pair of hands. It’s easier to be the calm one when you know the underlying reason for the collapse and the likely outcome.

She does seem a bit of an odd ball, perhaps lacking in the empathy department. Is it possible that instead of being a ‘straightforward’ killer, she may have somehow justified these actions to herself? That she had some sense of entitlement that she could sabotage and then try to resolve it? And when some of the babies died it was because she was “not good enough to care for them”?

I don’t know, I don’t know how this would fit in with the insulin cases, the targeted multiples etc.

It just seems like the people who knew her really struggled to believe she was capable of this. Many of them have attested to her being competent and caring and an overall good nurse. The idea that she was simultaneously organising house warming parties and betting on the horses while literally murdering babies is a level of sheer psychopathy that doesn’t really fit well with everything else we’ve heard.

This whole case is truly the most bizarre thing. Stranger than fiction indeed.

Obviously this is all my own opinion, and just speculating about possible motive in the event that she is found guilty, which is pointless I know!

Wasn't BTK a pillar of local church?

 

[Sweeper2000]

It seems strange that, as far as we know, none of her close colleagues had any suspicions, even though they were seeing her on a daily basis and could easily have spotted any correlation between her presence and the unexplained deaths. All very puzzling.

It would be interesting to hear if her use of language changed around the time of the events, Or her demeanour. No reports of that from her colleagues apparently.

 

[ColourPurple]

Would you think the “act weird and oblivious and do it” approach is used often by manipulative people.?

nobody needs to speak to her about suspicions or eavesdropping them. They are already there. She would know what she has done. It’s why not taking this opportunity with the suggesting doctor matters IMO. She is at least not trying to act like a innocent hurt individual.

She was acting in a way that had worked perfectly so far (as far as she was aware). I think manipulative people use whatever works, and, if guilty, she'd been attacking babies for a year by then and nobody appeared to be suspicious, so as far as she would have been concerned, her approach was working.

All IMO

 

[esther43]

I can’t think we have had any evidence to suggest anyone has really seen anything at this point. It all relies on the medical experts opinions on the med notes. If anyone had seen anything, realistically speaking it would have been the nurses or other staff and as far as we know they haven’t seen anything either even when in the same room and closer to the baby than LL has been recorded as being on one occasion.

I don’t really know how you would approach that with senior staff or from a senior staffs POv.

You would presumably know as well that there was autopsies done in six of the deaths none of which came back with medical experts opinions of unnatural causes and that would be evidence you could present to senior staff.

But perhaps the prosecution will / are arguing that LL was caught in the act by RJ whilst caring for child K.
The DM podcast went into further depth around how LL was found to be 'doing nothing' when he walked in the room. I wasn't convinced by the the written articles but the podcast I felt gave a greater sense of LL being 'caught out'. I imagine it to be like the way a kid might stare at you if caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
For example when discovered by Ravi, she was not seemingly engaged with treating the baby. She was by his account turned with her body facing his, doing nothing much in particular.
Prompting Ravi to take action.

 

[esther43]

It seems strange that, as far as we know, none of her close colleagues had any suspicions, even though they were seeing her on a daily basis and could easily have spotted any correlation between her presence and the unexplained deaths. All very puzzling.

You've heard this line before I'm sure but once the media ban is lifted, a lot more can come out.

 

[esther43]

I agree. It also somewhat minimizes the reality of what making an accusation like that would be like, ie terrifying. What they needed was someone higher up to take it seriously and investigate, so that they didn't bear the sole burden of potentially becoming the evil doctor who falsely accused a lovely smiley blonde innocent hard working nurse of being a murderer. IMO.

Exactly this. That is what they get their three figure pay salary for and if the defendant is guilty then completely unfair of the managers to let the consultants take the responsibility for the deaths and also to expect them to cover them up and deal with 'the situation' when they actually had to work with her caring for patients. It was wholly inappropriate they bounced that one back, not once but four times!

 

[ColourPurple]

I keep thinking back to that message that Dr Choc sent to LL about things feeling safe and well organised when she’s on the ward. And we know she was ambitious in terms of her career.

If guilty, I wonder whether the intention was to use these collapses as a way of furthering her own career, to gain experience and to demonstrate being calm and collected during emergencies and generally being viewed as a safe pair of hands. It’s easier to be the calm one when you know the underlying reason for the collapse and the likely outcome.

She does seem a bit of an odd ball, perhaps lacking in the empathy department. Is it possible that instead of being a ‘straightforward’ killer, she may have somehow justified these actions to herself? That she had some sense of entitlement that she could sabotage and then try to resolve it? And when some of the babies died it was because she was “not good enough to care for them”?

I don’t know, I don’t know how this would fit in with the insulin cases, the targeted multiples etc.

It just seems like the people who knew her really struggled to believe she was capable of this. Many of them have attested to her being competent and caring and an overall good nurse. The idea that she was simultaneously organising house warming parties and betting on the horses while literally murdering babies is a level of sheer psychopathy that doesn’t really fit well with everything else we’ve heard.

This whole case is truly the most bizarre thing. Stranger than fiction indeed.

Obviously this is all my own opinion, and just speculating about possible motive in the event that she is found guilty, which is pointless I know!

If guilty, I don't think we'll ever know the motive or if even LL would know. I'm sure there'll be documentaries and books exploring that , if she's guilty.

I pondered before whether, if guilty, her comments about fate were relevant. Whether in her head she justified things by thinking of herself as somebody who just created the circumstances (by injecting air, adding insulin to etc) and then fate decided whether the baby lived or died.

"
“But then sometimes I think how is it such sick babies get through and others die so suddenly and unexpectedly. Guess it’s how it is meant to be.” She added: “I think there is an element of fate involved. There is a reason for everything.”"


All IMO

Lucy Letby told fellow nurse there was ‘element of fate’ in baby deaths

Nurse Lucy Letby told a colleague there was an “element of fate” in the deaths of babies after allegedly killing three children.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[Imogenia]

I agree that they have a responsibility but I disagree that at least some of these consultants ( if the defendant is guilty) didn't play their relevant part in the investigation. I don't like to hear 'they should have gone to the police' as that almost suggests that that that responsibility was on them, when there is a nursing director, a medical director, a CEO and accountable board. The burden of responsibility sits higher up in the chain, once matters of concern have been deferred.

I know, but somebody somewhere has to act.

Diffusing the moral responsibility, even upwards, means that nobody wants to drink from the poisoned chalice. Then we have delays.

Any citizen can go to the police if a murderer is suspected as being on the loose killing defenceless babies.

Why would anyone at the highest heights of the hospital hierarchy delay calling the police?

Sometimes, it’s not enough to cover one’s back by escalating concerns ‘upstairs’.

There might come a time when any one of us has to take the necessary action (when it’s obvious that others are ‘happy’ with the status quo).

<modsnip>

Certainly enough was going on to call in the police. Even the consultants themselves now regret not doing so.