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

[katydid23]

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

Child P's final collapse came at 3.14pm and, despite resuscitative efforts, he died at 4pm.

A post-mortem examination had the coroner concluding Child P died from Sudden Unexpected Postnatal Collapse but he was unable to identify the underlying cause. He certified the cause of death as “prematurity”.

Medical expert Dr Dewi Evans initially suggested the cause of death was complications from his pneumothorax. He was, however, suspicious of the large volume of air in the stomach and intestines evident on x-ray. In his subsequent reports Dr Evans concluded that excess air in the stomach could have “splinted” Child P's diaphragm compromising his breathing.

Dr Sandie Bohin also concluded that the abdominal distension splinted Child P's diaphragm resulting in an inability fully to expand his lungs and causing his collapse. Subsequent resuscitation and intubation involved high ventilatory pressures, which together with vigorous resuscitation, can cause pneumothorax. She described the abnormal gas pattern seen in Child P's stomach through to his rectum which she concluded it was caused by the exogenous injection of air via the NGT – describing that as “the only plausible explanation”.

This excess gas splinted the diaphragm, compromised breathing and it caused Child P's collapse.

Lucy Letby trial recap: Prosecution finishes outlining case, defence gives statement

THE prosecution in the trial of Lucy Letby, accused of murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[MsBetsy]

exactly how dire though?

Dire enough to cause a life long disability or death, it seems.

I think the problem with these babies is that air embolus was not expected, whereas in open heart surgery doctors and anesthesiologists anticipate it and are prepared to correct it quickly.

So maybe it's the fact that they would not expect air embolus to occur so weren't able to correct it on time. They were desperately trying to find what was causing babies to suddenly collapse but a deliberate injection of air likely never crossed their minds.

Half the battle for the doctors was that they did not know what they were dealing with...

Imo

 

[marynnu]

Can I just say that whatever your view of LL, IMO some if the expressions she used are of no significance. To watch like a hawk just means being extra vigilant. A student glued to her, babies looking rubbish/being angels/naughty/misbehaving etc., to me are just things you hear all the time. And on NNUs people say much worse things, trust me!

 

[Dotta]

Can I just say that whatever your view of LL, IMO some if the expressions she used are of no significance. To watch like a hawk just means being extra vigilant. A student glued to her, babies looking rubbish/being angels/naughty/misbehaving etc., to me are just things you hear all the time. And on NNUs people say much worse things, trust me!

Language/expressions used reflect person's character and state of mind.
Happy/optimistic people use different language than morbid ones.
People are often judged by style of vocabulary they use.

JMO

 

[JosieJo]

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

Baby's O and P both had post mortems and both screened for infection (bloods)

 

[esther43]

Child P's final collapse came at 3.14pm and, despite resuscitative efforts, he died at 4pm.

A post-mortem examination had the coroner concluding Child P died from Sudden Unexpected Postnatal Collapse but he was unable to identify the underlying cause. He certified the cause of death as “prematurity”.

Medical expert Dr Dewi Evans initially suggested the cause of death was complications from his pneumothorax. He was, however, suspicious of the large volume of air in the stomach and intestines evident on x-ray. In his subsequent reports Dr Evans concluded that excess air in the stomach could have “splinted” Child P's diaphragm compromising his breathing.

Dr Sandie Bohin also concluded that the abdominal distension splinted Child P's diaphragm resulting in an inability fully to expand his lungs and causing his collapse. Subsequent resuscitation and intubation involved high ventilatory pressures, which together with vigorous resuscitation, can cause pneumothorax. She described the abnormal gas pattern seen in Child P's stomach through to his rectum which she concluded it was caused by the exogenous injection of air via the NGT – describing that as “the only plausible explanation”.

This excess gas splinted the diaphragm, compromised breathing and it caused Child P's collapse.

Lucy Letby trial recap: Prosecution finishes outlining case, defence gives statement

THE prosecution in the trial of Lucy Letby, accused of murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

Another pneumothorax? Child P?

 

[scottishgal]

I dont think the situation was that black or white. None were 'perfectly healthy babies' per terminology used in one of the earlier posts as none would have been in NNU then - they were fragile babies but still the collapse and death was unexpected given they were in an NNU where resuscitation and what not was at hand to aid and manage them till they got stronger and bigger like the full term babies and could be taken home.

I think we need to acknowledge that it may not have been either/or on a number of factors here. Management may have started enquiry and due process took as many months as there was simply no Physical evidence that from their perspective that she was deliberately harming the babies (caught on CCTV, caught in the act attacking /injecting air etc)

Something that has me thinking in circles is the insulin that was involved in two /three of the babies. If she had already by then established that injecting air was a trusted method and deliberate harm would be difficult to trace, why then switch over to a more riskier way of inducing collapses via injecting insulin for those few babies. The insulin on one hand is the linchpin and yet , one the other hand would be so foolhardy of the alleged killer that one wonders if the insulin was just accidental (bag defect etc) and not linked to the other cases.

I hope more investigation work is revealed to show that they ruled out definitely on the pharmacy error / bag defect aspects of the insulin cases as they just dont tie up with the other standard cases of air being injected / airway being compromised.

<modsnip>

 

[marynnu]

Language/expressions used reflect person's character and state of mind.
Happy/optimistic people use different language than morbid ones.
People are often judged by style of vocabulary they use.

JMO

Yes, but not those expressions! They're just normal, everyday English.

 

[ColourPurple]

...Something that has me thinking in circles is the insulin that was involved in two /three of the babies. If she had already by then established that injecting air was a trusted method and deliberate harm would be difficult to trace, why then switch over to a more riskier way of inducing collapses via injecting insulin for those few babies. The insulin on one hand is the linchpin and yet , one the other hand would be so foolhardy of the alleged killer that one wonders if the insulin was just accidental (bag defect etc) and not linked to the other cases.

I hope more investigation work is revealed to show that they ruled out definitely on the pharmacy error / bag defect aspects of the insulin cases as they just dont tie up with the other standard cases of air being injected / airway being compromised.

Even LL has agreed that the insulin poisoinings could not have been accidental. As for why, if guilty, she would suddenly change her method, well we will never know for sure , but...


The following conversation took place at 7.55pm on 4th August. In it her colleague had pointed out two things, that LL seemed to be having some "very bad luck" and that she "needed a break from it being on [her] shift". Within a few hours of this conversation, LL allegedly changed her method to insulin poisoining via a TPN bag. (The TPN was started at 12.25am on the 5th August). This was a method that would see the alleged poisoning carry on onto the next shift, after LL had left, thus implicating somebody else on that next shift, if the baby were to collapse or die after LL had left. So, we will never know for sure, but if guilty, was this a reaction to her colleague's comments? An alleged deliberate change of method to implicate somebody else on the next shift?

"Jennifer Jones-Key, a nursing colleague, contacted her at 7.55pm that evening to ask: 'Hey, how's you? X'

Letby: 'Not so good. We lost E overnight.'

Ms Jones-Key: 'That's sad. We're on a terrible run at the moment. Were you in (Nursery) 1? x'

Letby: 'Yes, I had him and F'.

Ms Jones-Key: 'That's not good. You need a break from it being on your shift'.

Letby: 'It's the luck of the drawer (sic), isn't it unfortunately. Only 3 trained (nurses) so I Iended up having both whereas just had F the other shifts'.

Ms Jones-Key: 'You seem to be having some very bad luck though.'"

Nurse Lucy Letby 'poisoned baby by contaminating two intravenous bags'

Neonatal nurse Lucy Letby poisoned a baby boy by contaminating two bags of intravenous feed with insulin that could not be detected by the human eye, a court heard today.

www.dailymail.co.uk

ALL IMO

 

[Dcflag]

I agree, a possible motive for insulin would be for an unexpected collapse to happen when she wasn’t present.

 

[Tortoise]

I hope more investigation work is revealed to show that they ruled out definitely on the pharmacy error / bag defect aspects of the insulin cases

respectfully snipped for focus

The pharmacy aspect has been thoroughly covered in the evidence given for the jury's consideration

 

[Becci]

I agree, a possible motive for insulin would be for an unexpected collapse to happen when she wasn’t present.

I'm been a bit lazy here. I know the insulin babies survived but how did they react from been poisoned. Did they collapse?

 

[Tortoise]

Baby's O and P both had post mortems and both screened for infection (bloods)

Yes. Professor Arthurs wasn't giving multiple opinions on the cause of death, he was explaining various causes of that much air throughout the gut, as he has done previously for most of the cases.

We heard very little from his evidence and cross-examination yesterday, and he was likely asked about any other identifying features for NEC and other problems associated with the bowel, from a radiology perspective, as he was asked to do with baby C.

 

[Tortoise]

Can I just say that whatever your view of LL, IMO some if the expressions she used are of no significance. To watch like a hawk just means being extra vigilant. A student glued to her, babies looking rubbish/being angels/naughty/misbehaving etc., to me are just things you hear all the time. And on NNUs people say much worse things, trust me!

In my opinion -

It's not the expressions she uses, in a murder trial it's the possible intent behind her words and texts that deserve close scrutiny.

If she is innocent there would be no deception involved in saying I'm watching him like a hawk, or she looked rubbish this morning.

If she is guilty, one needs to look at whether the medical records show baby was in a poor state or was absolutely stable and had no problems when she told her colleague she looked rubbish, and whether there could be a reason she didn't want student following her every move, and why she wanted the doctor to think she was being vigilant, and if there was intent to deceive or to manipulate in her words.

The texts have significance because they've been selected from hundreds or most likely thousands over the year, to be used in the trial. Her words give us a revealing snapshot of her mind at these points in time, and if she is guilty they certainly reveal cool-headedness, calculation and manipulation.

 

[Kemug]

'they have no evidence' is a very strange thing to write, because (IMO) it speaks from a mind that has contemplated crime and evidence of crime. I'm not sure anyone would have said or implied anything to her about intention, the police investigation and medical investigation was to find out if crimes had been committed.

It's also worded in such a way as to imply knowledge of whether evidence was left behind or not.

IMO

I believe I'd be more likely to write "What are they talking about? What on earth? As if I would ever do something like that!" Not talk about evidence.

 

[Tortoise]

I believe I'd be more likely to write "What are they talking about? What on earth? As if I would ever do something like that!" Not talk about evidence.

Agree 100%

 

[Imogenia]

Language/expressions used reflect person's character and state of mind.
Happy/optimistic people use different language than morbid ones.
People are often judged by style of vocabulary they use.

JMO

If there is any truth to Freudian psychoanalysis, the language used by an alleged murderer (who would be under stress, trying to maintain a wholly different facade), would sometimes be highly significant.

 

[esther43]

I dont think the situation was that black or white. None were 'perfectly healthy babies' per terminology used in one of the earlier posts as none would have been in NNU then - they were fragile babies but still the collapse and death was unexpected given they were in an NNU where resuscitation and what not was at hand to aid and manage them till they got stronger and bigger like the full term babies and could be taken home.

I think we need to acknowledge that it may not have been either/or on a number of factors here. Management may have started enquiry and due process took as many months as there was simply no Physical evidence that from their perspective that she was deliberately harming the babies (caught on CCTV, caught in the act attacking /injecting air etc)

Something that has me thinking in circles is the insulin that was involved in two /three of the babies. If she had already by then established that injecting air was a trusted method and deliberate harm would be difficult to trace, why then switch over to a more riskier way of inducing collapses via injecting insulin for those few babies. The insulin on one hand is the linchpin and yet , one the other hand would be so foolhardy of the alleged killer that one wonders if the insulin was just accidental (bag defect etc) and not linked to the other cases.

I hope more investigation work is revealed to show that they ruled out definitely on the pharmacy error / bag defect aspects of the insulin cases as they just dont tie up with the other standard cases of air being injected / airway being compromised.

This is the only case that I am following where I am wondering if anyone knows the full truth. Still struggling with motive, and strictly IMO if guilty, must have shown lots of prior signs through school, college, nursery even. I think PI would be not out of line to explore her past here to find motive would build the prosecution case up a lot more -given a lot of the evidence here is cirumstantial (too many unusual happenings) rather than physical (forensic evidence etc) - a shady past with similar pattern would be the definitive linchpin to get a jury on board

I would agree with you in part, that it would be good to hear more about LL's history. For example did she ever babysit for other people's children? Were there any strange encounters with others in her life that pointed towards her having zero empathy, that would suggest that the 'friendly' side of LL was just a means to an end?
In relation to the alleged mix methods applied, I think this could potentially tie in with not wanting to be caught out. So a little tinkering with this and tinkering with that would keep people on their toes. I could imagine that sticking to one method would be more detectable. Jmo

 

[Sweeper2000]

Remember the actual quote. “They have no evidence so why have I to hide away”. that entire sentence speaks more of someone who has been informed about the situation and isn’t based on “I know they have no evidence because I left no breadcrumbs“.

I would be much more concerned with a phrase like “they can’t have any evidence“.

 

[Kemug]

Personally I'm just not seeing it. But let's say it's true. Who goes looking for parents on the anniversary of their child's death?

A ghoul, that's who. IMO