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

[katydid23]

According to what I have read there is an option to actually remove the bubble mechanically but I think that assumes you know what it is. Involves actually putting something in and drawing the gas bubble out of the vessel. Wouldn’t see why that wouldn’t work with a solid blockage.

I think the problem is that the bubble creates dire circumstances like the collapse----which creates cardiac arrest, desaturation, and puts victim on the verge of death. So no time or chance to remove the bubble mechanically until rescus
is done and successful.

 

[DinerMite]

"He said potential causes were infection or necrotising enterocolitis (NEC), a common bowel disorder in premature-born babies."

Interesting that a prosecution called expert considers NEC as a potential cause.

I think IF the defense did have experts it would be similar to this where embolism/air is still a possibility and as we know in many cases the babies didn't have NEC. Process of elimination maybe...It also shows transparency and that there isnt a bias against her. Smart move by prosecution IMO but maybe I'm reading into it too much.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I think the problem is that the bubble creates dire circumstances like the collapse----which creates cardiac arrest, desaturation, and puts victim on the verge of death. So no time or chance to remove the bubble mechanically until rescus
is done and successful.

exactly how dire though?

 

[katydid23]

Lucy Letby trial: ‘Unusual’ amount of gas detected in baby

AN “unusual” amount of gas was detected in a baby just hours after his brother was allegedly murdered by nurse Lucy Letby, a court heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

snipped for copyright

[...]

Dr Arthurs came to the same conclusions regarding an X-ray of Child O, captured hours before his death.

He said: “This shows a lots of gas in his stomach, small and large bowel. This is more than what would be expected in a normal baby.”

Dr Arthurs agreed with Ben Myers KC, defending, that another possible explanation for Child P’s dilation was an “unidentifiable cause”.

[...]

Ahead of the shift a doctor, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, messaged Letby: “Are you OK? It’s rubbish not to sleep well in the middle of 3 long days. Hope your day goes OK.”

Letby replied: “Hmm maybe. I’ll be watching them both (Child P and the surviving triplet) like a hawk.

“I’m OK. Just don’t want to be here really. Hoping I may get the new admissions.”

Maybe she was ,allegedly, 'watching them like a hawk.' Hawks tend to watch their prey from above and then suddenly pounce when the coast is clear. Weird that she used that analogy.

 

[JosieJo]

"He said potential causes were infection or necrotising enterocolitis (NEC), a common bowel disorder in premature-born babies."

Interesting that a prosecution called expert considers NEC as a potential cause.

My impression was these are potential causes based on the x Ray's...but through tests the day of death and post mortem infection and NEC were found not to be present

 

[katydid23]

My impression was these are potential causes based on the x Ray's...but through tests the day of death and post mortem infection and NEC were found not to be present

That was my impression too, that later tests ruled out that possible diagnosis.

 

[marynnu]

Maybe she was ,allegedly, 'watching them like a hawk.' Hawks tend to watch their prey from above and then suddenly pounce when the coast is clear. Weird that she used that analogy.

It's just an everyday expression though.

 

[Imogenia]

Maybe she was ,allegedly, 'watching them like a hawk.' Hawks tend to watch their prey from above and then suddenly pounce when the coast is clear. Weird that she used that analogy.

I think it’s a very good idea to examine all words used very carefully. The subconscious or unconscious choice of words or phrases can be very illuminating.

If guilty she may have been disclosing strong hints (unconsciously partly wanting to be stopped, perhaps).

Everyone in this sad scenario (if she is guilty) would have been unconsciously picking up ‘vibes’, including Dr Chocolate.

MOO

 

[esther43]

Beverley Allitt was not very bright and blatantly mentally ill, so it didn’t take long at all for her to mess up. She was compulsively attention seeking by causing catastrophes, with little thought to her victims and only very short term planning.

Whereas Lucy Letby seems intelligent (or at least not dim), hardworking and superficially appears very normal. If guilty, her methods have been far more varied, sneaky and well planned. If guilty, her purpose would have been to harm the babies for fun, whereas for Allitt, the harm to the children was incidental to her extreme attention seeking.

 

[Imogenia]

I noticed this too.
Previously said student was “glued to her” (which I’ve actually heard others who mentor say similar things; one went on to elaborate one of her students even followed her to the loo!). A student needing reassurance or is unsure is not necessarily unusual.
That said, could it be possible even the student might have picked up something wasn’t right (as did the nursing colleague who said LL undermined her over moving one of the triplets)?

Then… LL is mentioning not having the student because she wasnt in the right frame of mind. Which is really odd because she didn’t want to take time off, and previously appears to point out she’s fine, doesn’t need counselling etc; really odd imo.

I agree. Some students are very perceptive indeed. A person (if guilty) might let down their guard momentarily, and a facial expression could be ‘clocked’ by an astute student. Some have very relevant previous life experiences or professions, (a lot of students are older nowadays). Some would have no problems in assessing atmospheres, eliciting or overhearing snippets, and potentially thinking the unthinkable, (as safe guarders are supposed to be able to do). It could well be a general feeling that something just was not right, as you say.

 

[esther43]

Just still totally struggling with motive. I often think if she was capable of it, her parents would know. There would be signs in her as a child, like hurting animals, harming younger children, extremely manipulative behaviour, so as to deflect attention away from 'being bad'
I just want to know if her own mother saw that same look on her face as it is alleged RJ saw, when he walked in on her with child K.
Do you think as a parent, you'd know?

 

[Cardgame]

Just still totally struggling with motive. I often think if she was capable of it, her parents would know. There would be signs in her as a child, like hurting animals, harming younger children, extremely manipulative behaviour, so as to deflect attention away from 'being bad'
I just want to know if her own mother saw that same look on her face as it is alleged RJ saw, when he walked in on her with child K.
Do you think as a parent, you'd know?

There are lots of cases of criminals whose parents covered for them, they may have seen the signs but be in denial etc etc.

I bet they wouldn't believe it, even if they saw the signs. And it's also possible that if they did believe it, they would still cover for her.

IMO. Anything is possible

 

[Cardgame]

I think it’s a very good idea to examine all words used very carefully. The subconscious or unconscious choice of words or phrases can be very illuminating.

If guilty she may have been disclosing strong hints (unconsciously partly wanting to be stopped, perhaps).

Everyone in this sad scenario (if she is guilty) would have been unconsciously picking up ‘vibes’, including Dr Chocolate.

MOO

I agree.

And what's interesting about the phrase is it tunes into this nurse-speak about the babies 'behaving' or 'being angels' as though newborn babies have agency.

Usually someone or something you 'watch like a hawk' is someone you expect to catch out doing something 'naughty'.

Makes me wonder, if guilty, if she was administering little punishments to the babies. Or to the parents via the babies.

 

[notsure]

Just still totally struggling with motive. I often think if she was capable of it, her parents would know. There would be signs in her as a child, like hurting animals, harming younger children, extremely manipulative behaviour, so as to deflect attention away from 'being bad'
I just want to know if her own mother saw that same look on her face as it is alleged RJ saw, when he walked in on her with child K.
Do you think as a parent, you'd know?

I'd like to say yes, I would know, but... we can never know what goes on in another person's mind, even our own children. I would imagine it is quite unusual, though, even in the world of serial killers, for absolutely nobody to have had any feeling that there was something wrong with that person.

 

[esther43]

I agree.

And what's interesting about the phrase is it tunes into this nurse-speak about the babies 'behaving' or 'being angels' as though newborn babies have agency.

Usually someone or something you 'watch like a hawk' is someone you expect to catch out doing something 'naughty'.

Makes me wonder, if guilty, if she was administering little punishments to the babies. Or to the parents via the babies.

Very true that the babies don't have agency but it's a weird cultural thing in neonatal units where nurses 'pretend they do' for example, when babies have desats and bradies the nurse often tell the parents that they are being 'naughty'
I think they do it to soften the atmosphere, as weird as it is! Some parents like it because it gives the baby a 'personality' others are not so keen, thinking it a bit ludicrous for a child who as you say, has no agency.

 

[notsure]

Very true that the babies don't have agency but it's a weird cultural thing in neonatal units where nurses 'pretend they do' for example, when babies have desats and bradies the nurse often tell the parents that they are being 'naughty'
I think they do it to soften the atmosphere, as weird as it is! Some parents like it because it gives the baby a 'personality' others are not so keen, thinking it a bit ludicrous for a child who as you say, has no agency.

Not just neonatal units, I think. That kind of thing extends to other babies and even older people. I don't like it at all.

 

[esther43]

I'd like to say yes, I would know, but... we can never know what goes on in another person's mind, even our own children. I would imagine it is quite unusual, though, even in the world of serial killers, for absolutely nobody to have had any feeling that there was something wrong with that person.

 

[esther43]

Does anybody know, if a person is free from any kind of psychiatric history before an alleged crime took place, would usually be shared in the prosecution's opening speech?

 

[LorriB]

My impression was these are potential causes based on the x Ray's...but through tests the day of death and post mortem infection and NEC were found not to be present

What tests ruled it out please? I've not seen that mentioned as being ruled out definitively but may have missed it. Thanks

 

[katydid23]

It's just an everyday expression though.

True. but I do think it is interesting, even if it was unintentional on her part.