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

[ColourPurple]

Timeline of concerns being raised

June 2015: Brearley investigates and escalates to Director of Nursing his concern of LLs association to events. Brierly even says himself "No, not lovely Lucy"

Oct 15: Dr Ravi says from then on they had real concerns about LL and raised it with Director of Nursing

Feb 2016: Liverpool Womens investigate and report sent to Director of Nursing.

Feb 2016: Dr Ravi Jarayam raises concerns again to D of N and Medical Director. Ask for meeting but didnt hear back for 3mths ie May 16

24th June: Brearley asks Karen Rees to suspend LL, KR says no

30th June 16: Dr J emails his concerns after the consultant meeting day before

I'm wondering whether the Liverpool women's review in February 2016 is AFTER, and in response to, Dr J raising his concerns, re Baby K.

 

[magikarpmagikarp]

Not where I worked!

Oops, I should have said it's been part of the recommendation! Not the same thing is clinical practice.

 

[esther43]

Unsurprisingly, it turns out that Karen Rees also scooped an award from CoC in 2017

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

WpP7SsNgvrQ&s=19

 

[Sweeper2000]

Why would she be looking out for, or attaching any signficance to somebody asking if she needed time off ? It's a perfectly normal thing for somebody to ask her. It wouldn't set alarm bells ringing for anybody , guilty or innocent. So her reacting the same way she has to all the other deaths by carrying on working, is what I would expect. Why would she change anything.

And if guilty, why have the day off when a day in work is another opportunity to allegedly try to kill another baby. Can't do that if you're sat at home. And it's exactly what she's accused of doing ... going back in the next day and allegedly trying to kill another baby.

Now contrast her reaction to a Dr B asking her if she needed time off,after Baby P's death( doesn't want time off and allegedly attacks Baby Q the very next day) ... to her reaction to Dr G questioning her colleague about LL's actions in relation to Baby Q. THEN she reacts differently, THEN she sounds like, if guilty, she may have realised that DR G could be suspicious and asks a colleague (Dr NiceGuy?) whether she needs to be worried. And there are no alleged attacks in the three shifts after that, before she's moved to clerical duties.


IMO

well obviously if she has done something wrong and is trying to look out for signs that they are on to her and trying to manipulate the scene she will scrutinise her interactions with people and look to make an image by playing the mind of who she speaks to. At this point nobody needs to ring any alarm bells, they would already be ringing like tinnitus.

The point of that strategy is to pre empt any problems before they arise ie to control the narrative. You can only use information for gain in this context in advance, no point her trying to stop an investigation once it’s started, better to stop the problem happening beforehand by using information obtained by fishing for info. Her coming back into work is believe it or not is against what the senior has said to her or suggested so I think all in all it would less suspicious to obey her senior. It’s also opportunity to manipulate by pretending to need time off ie poor innocent me. It’s also opportunity to have time off full stop.

 

[ColourPurple]

And when you put it like that, it does make sense. There is something about LL's relationship with Dr choc that makes me think it could be a case of 'keep your friends close but your enemies closer'
Was she using him to get a feel for 'what the drs thoought' ? She was letting him fill in blanks in clinical pictures, bowing down to his superior knowledge base when he was pointing out things I suspect she knew already.
Was there a genuine attraction there on her part I wonder.

It's an interesting one isn't it. There doesn't appear to be anything sexual. What she seems to be getting from the relationship is attention, kindness, sympathy, support, flattery and hugs, which are all things you might get from friendship, but then she also gets an insight into what he, and maybe other doctors are thinking about the causes of the collapses, along with feedback on things like whether she should be worried about Dr G's questions.

 

[Dotta]

Unsurprisingly, it turns out that Karen Rees also scooped an award from CoC in 2017

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

WpP7SsNgvrQ&s=19

The most important reward for a medic is a happy patient going home.
JMO

 

[esther43]

I'm wondering whether the Liverpool women's review in February 2016 is AFTER, and in response to, Dr J raising his concerns, re Baby K.

Oh, this is interesting. I must have missed this about Liverpool womens sending a report? When was that referenced?

 

[marynnu]

Oops, I should have said it's been part of the recommendation! Not the same thing is clinical practice.

Ah yes, the good old recommendation!

 

[esther43]

I have myself never known of any medical consultant who would make a senior nurse the first (or only) point of contact in a grave situation that they reason will only get worse, much worse.

Consultants would (in my experience) always tell the medical director first, even if only keeping them in the loop confidentially and informally, at that initial point.

I don’t see the medical director keeping it to themselves either.

I don’t see any medical consultant simply taking ‘No’ from any nurse in a situation where they are certain that they are right, and the nurse, irrespective of how senior, is grievously wrong.

In fact, such is the nature of the medical fraternity, I would be quite astonished if highly suspicious medical consultants did not (confidentially) run their thoughts (and why they are thinking these) by those who they knew (from medical school days) now in the psychiatric, preferably forensic, fields.

I have known doctors seek confidential professional and legal advice from their defence organisations about much less serious matters than this.

This is the sort of nerve-wracking, once in a lifetime, situation where one, if going to disclose, does not disclose suspicions in a half-hearted way. They should have been advised to go to the police. If they were so sure that someone was deliberately killing babies, they should have gone en masse to the nearest station.

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.

 

[ColourPurple]

well obviously if she has done something wrong and is trying to look out for signs that they are on to her and trying to manipulate the scene she will scrutinise her interactions with people and look to make an image by playing the mind of who she speaks to. At this point nobody needs to ring any alarm bells, they would already be ringing like tinnitus.

The point of that strategy is to pre empt any problems before they arise ie to control the narrative. You can only use information for gain in this context in advance, no point her trying to stop an investigation once it’s started, better to stop the problem happening beforehand by using information obtained by fishing for info. Her coming back into work is believe it or not is against what the senior has said to her or suggested so I think all in all it would less suspicious to obey her senior. It’s also opportunity to manipulate by pretending to need time off ie poor innocent me. It’s also opportunity to have time off full stop.

Why change what she's done all along though? Her senior told her they didn't think she should go back into room 1 after Baby A. That didn't stop her going back into room 1.. and allegedly trying to kill Baby B. Her senior suggested Baby O be moved to room 1, that didn't stop LL saying no, and then allegedly killing him. Why would her response to Dr B asking her if she needed time off be any different? In fact it appears to have followed much the same pattern... she said no and then allegedly tried to kill Baby Q.

And again, if she's guilty, and was allegedly killling babies, why would she want time off from the place where she could kill more babies?

IMO

 

[Marantz4250b]

This is what I find so bizarre. If guilty, it suggests a level of 'nerve' on her part that borders on, well, the ridiculous. Almost to a farcical degree in that if this were a dark tv drama, we'd be collectively eye-rolling and saying, nope, not real life, no one could do what she's doing and expect to avoid detection. She was - colleagues on a break, in another room, attending to another baby notwithstanding - operating in plain sight imo and yet doesn't seem, based on what we've heard of her general behaviour, to have had the slightest idea that she could be under suspicion!

It's bizarre.

Yep, agreed. Everything I've ever read or heard about this case is just so utterly off the charts I wonder whether I'm dreaming it sometimes!

 

[Dotta]

Yep, agreed. Everything I've ever read or heard about this case is just so utterly off the charts I wonder whether I'm dreaming it sometimes!

Wake me up from this nightmare please!

 

[ColourPurple]

Oh, this is interesting. I must have missed this about Liverpool womens sending a report? When was that referenced?

We only heard about the review today , in this article

Despite the concerns of consultants on the unit, there were no obvious 'red flags' being raised either outside the trust or within it.

They eventually decided to bring in a colleague from the Liverpool Women's Hospital to carry out a review in February 2016.

Once that report had been completed the consultants and Ms Powell had sought a meeting with senior executives, including the director of nursing and the director of safety and quality.

Dr Brearey said there was not a single case in the February review that had highlighted a lack of staff.

Senior hospital executive ignored warnings about killer Lucy Letby

Karen Rees, a duty executive in urgent care in June 2016, insisted there was no evidence against Letby, and refused to take her off duty until the unexplained death of a triplet was investigated.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Marantz4250b]

Similar to Beverley Allitt perhaps? I know we have to be cautious about drawing parallels, but her behaviour strikes me as quite reckless. IMO.

I've never thought there was any similarity. BA was certainly reckless in what she did but when it came down to it I don't think she was remotely bothered when she was caught. LL appears to be the exact opposite.

IMO, obviously.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Just out of curiosity does anyone actually think Karen rees has done anything wrong?

she presumably is well aware of the legislation and sequence of actions in cases of suspect goings on ie negligence or other. We can see the interactions. I also don’t think we have heard of any actions regarding how this has been treated by senior staff so might entail the proper routes have been followed. No disciplinary action for anyone as of yet so might be everything was actually in line with current practice.

 

[marynnu]

I've never thought there was any similarity. BA was certainly reckless in what she did but when it came down to it I don't think she was remotely bothered when she was caught. LL appears to be the exact opposite.

IMO, obviously.

Fair enough. I was really only referring to acting in such a way that it was likely to attract attention, at the very least - with LL in the last 3 incidents.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Why change what she's done all along though? Her senior told her they didn't think she should go back into room 1 after Baby A. That didn't stop her going back into room 1.. and allegedly trying to kill Baby B. Her senior suggested Baby O be moved to room 1, that didn't stop LL saying no, and then allegedly killing him. Why would her response to Dr B asking her if she needed time off be any different? In fact it appears to have followed much the same pattern... she said no and then allegedly tried to kill Baby Q.

And again, if she's guilty, and was allegedly killling babies, why would she want time off from the place where she could kill more babies?

IMO

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.

 

[esther43]

Just out of curiosity does anyone actually think Karen rees has done anything wrong?

she presumably is well aware of the legislation and sequence of actions in cases of suspect goings on ie negligence or other. We can see the interactions. I also don’t think we have heard of any actions regarding how this has been treated by senior staff so might entail the proper routes have been followed. No disciplinary action for anyone as of yet so might be everything was actually in line with current practice.

Not sure. It seems that at this point in time Dr B was in shock, it might not have been his most balanced conversation. She could have took it that he was upset over triplets mama being so upset. I'm still not clear when Ravi made the link to air embolism. was the consultant meeting before or after events were escalated to Karen gees?
Or was it, that after the convo with Karen, they had the consultant chat and decided to take harder action against senior management?

 

[LorriB]

Just out of curiosity does anyone actually think Karen rees has done anything wrong?

she presumably is well aware of the legislation and sequence of actions in cases of suspect goings on ie negligence or other. We can see the interactions. I also don’t think we have heard of any actions regarding how this has been treated by senior staff so might entail the proper routes have been followed. No disciplinary action for anyone as of yet so might be everything was actually in line with current practice.

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.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Not sure. It seems that at this point in time Dr B was in shock, it might not have been his most balanced conversation. She could have took it that he was upset over triplets mama being so upset. I'm still not clear when Ravi made the link to air embolism. was the consultant meeting before or after events were escalated to Karen gees?
Or was it, that after the convo with Karen, they had the consultant chat and decided to take harder action against senior management?

I think there was the link made to AE preceding these recent twins. But I think it’s mentioned KR was aware of their concerns at this point anyway. Tbh I think concerns were raised a few times and the most recent events are the point where the consultants are presenting a solid front and saying “do something“.