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

[Phoenix Lazarus]

If she's convicted, I think the management of the time will be under pressure to explain to the media.

 

[Parker Knoll]

Oh no doubt.
I would put money on them protesting “ lessons will be learned “

 

[katydid23]

So until the police were contacted she was trying to get her job back, or management were trying for that.

Dan O'Donoghue

Mr Myers repeatedly put it to Dr Gibbs that if he had concerns he would have taken action. Dr Gibbs repeated that he knew it had been raised by colleagues with management. He said the senior consultants had openly discussed 'the one common factor' in the baby deaths

He said it was noted that Ms Lebty had been present on the unit or caring for the babies when they had collapsed in unusual circumstances. Mr Myers asks why it hadn't been reported to the police, Dr Gibbs said it was 'difficult' as they didn't have 'the full picture'

Eventually, Dr Gibbs said that consultants insisted that Ms Letby be removed from the unit. He tells the court that management pushed for her to return a month later - they said only if CCTV is installed in each unit

He said the 'TV cameras never came and neither did nurse Letby'

Dr Gibbs said 'over the next 11months we had to resolutely resist attempts by management to have staff nurse Letby back on the unit'

 

[Tortoise]

"TV cameras never came and neither did nurse Letby"

and no more sudden collapses.

 

[Dcflag]

Mr Myers is wrong in his questioning imo. He’s asking why if there was suspicions did dr gibb (or others) not act on it. They DID act on them. Is mr Myers implying the only correct was to act is his way?

They all at one point or another raised concerns whether with colleagues, head of nursing, even higher up etc. it’s very clear they all acted on concerns.

No they didn’t go to the police, I’m not sure I would have either, in a medical setting you’d expect more support and action to protect the patients and to take all concerns seriously, but individual people (not as a collective) only have bits of the picture.

It’s very easy for mr Myers to say now, why didn’t they report to the police. It’s clear less senior staff members weren’t in the know, only hearing rumours and gossip, each person only has their own individual experience, those slightly higher up have a slightly better gauge but again, they don’t have all the collective information from the other nurses, care assistants, parents. Things that didn’t seem relevant as an individual piece of information so wasn’t discussed at the time.

 

[Dcflag]

I also think, despite the calls for more in depth statistics, the very fact that letby was the ONLY staff member present for 22 incidences, with the next highest being 7 incidences is absolutely mind blowing. She might have been working overtime, but she was no way the only staff member pulling crazy shift patterns. I don’t know how you could feasibly explain that without there being a cause for concern.

 

[Legal]

Also, I think this may have been mentioned before but Mr Myers is saying the consultants should have gone to the police, but at the same time he is saying there isn't enough evidence to prove LL is guilty. Surely this is a logical fallacy?

 

[katydid23]

The leaving here alive thing I don't really think anything of. LL interpreted him as sicker than the doctor did.

But isn't it kind of cheeky to tell a doctor, who was in charge of this child's care, that the child is not living through the night?
Even though the tests and readings had greatly improved and the child was healthy overall?

The doctor was shocked at the comment.

I think if LL did say the rest of it in that excited tone then it is very very weird. JMO

It is very very weird.

 

[katydid23]

Also, I think this may have been mentioned before but Mr Myers is saying the consultants should have gone to the police, but at the same time he is saying there isn't enough evidence to prove LL is guilty. Surely this is a logical fallacy?

Exactly.

 

[Tortoise]

Biggest hurdle for the defence will be that the hospital had identified LL being associated, even though the defence would have it that they were blaming her for suboptimal care from every doctor in the unit, but then Dr Evans identified the suspicious and non-suspicious cases, without knowing her name and even when she hadn't signed the nursing notes and had been near other nurses' designated babies.

JMO

 

[Penny68]

Oh no doubt.
I would put money on them protesting “ lessons will be learned “

Yes, so many times that is quoted on many events that happen in hospitals etc.

 

[Dcflag]

Also, I think this may have been mentioned before but Mr Myers is saying the consultants should have gone to the police, but at the same time he is saying there isn't enough evidence to prove LL is guilty. Surely this is a logical fallacy?

It’s also worth pointing out that the majority of these concerns would have stemmed from potential inadequate care by LL. Perhaps many people who’d raised concerns were actively hoping management would look into her performance, maybe do some reviews, see if she needed more training or more support. It’s highly unlikely anyone would be suspecting her of actually harming babies intentionally initially. I think that shows with the “not nice Lucy” reaction. Even near the end it was still something many people hadn’t considered.

I’d love to see if any of the whisperings or general colleague information surrounding the suspicion of LL was about her performance, suspicion of malice or just generally the observations that something must be going on. It’s unfair for Mr Myers to assume that all of these people were concerned about intentional harm and therefore should’ve called the police, they probably weren’t. Poor nursing skills would be an in house hospital thing to deal with. Not police.

 

[LorriB]

But isn't it kind of cheeky to tell a doctor, who was in charge of this child's care, that the child is not living through the night?
Even though the tests and readings had greatly improved and the child was healthy overall?

The doctor was shocked at the comment.

I firstly think the doctor is naturally viewing the situation in hindsight, and we know from research that does change perspective. Things that at the time were maybe just a bit odd now take on a very sinister twist.

Maybe LL had seen this decline happening before and thought it was similar? I've no idea! I just think there's way too many ways to interpret it for it to stand out to me.

JMO

 

[DinerMite]

I firstly think the doctor is naturally viewing the situation in hindsight, and we know from research that does change perspective. Things that at the time were maybe just a bit odd now take on a very sinister twist.

Maybe LL had seen this decline happening before and thought it was similar? I've no idea! I just think there's way too many ways to interpret it for it to stand out to me.

JMO

They referred to it as "absolutely shocking at the time" so it's not really in hindsight imo

Dan

 

[LorriB]

I wonder if this is the position the defense will approach from:

(1) a dysfunctional hospital (chaos, stress, short-cuts being taken)
(2) a nurse who is different from the other nurses. Stands up in the crowd. Different sex or age or class. More than average intelligence. Big mouth, critical.
(3) something goes wrong. Someone dies and everyone is surprised. (Why surprised: because of wrong diagnosis, disinformation, ….)
(4) Something clicks in someone’s mind (a paranoid doctor) and the link is made between the scary nurse and the event
(5) Something else clicks in … we had a lot more cases like that recently.
(6) The spectre of a serial killer has now taken possession of the minds of the first doctor who got alarmed and he or she rapidly spreads the virus to his close colleagues. They start looking at the other recent cases and letting their minds fall back to other odd things which happened in recent months and stuck in their minds. The scary nurse also stuck in their mind and they connect the two. They go trawling and soon they have 20 or 30 “incidents” which are now bothering them. They check each one for any sign of involvement of the scary nurse and if he’s involved the incident quickly takes on a very sinister look. On the other hand if he was on a week’s vacation then obviously everything must have been OK and the case is forgotten.
(7) Another conference, gather some dossiers – half a dozen very suspicious cases to report to the police to begin with. The process of “retelling” the medical history of these “star cases” has already started. Everyone who was involved and does know something about the screw-ups and mistakes says nothing about them but confirms the fears of the others. That’s a relief – there was a killer around, it wasn’t my prescription mistake or oversight of some complicating condition. The dossiers which will go to the police (and importantly, the layman’s summary, written by the coordinating doctor) does contain “truth” but not the *whole truth*. And there is lots of truth which is not even in hospital dossiers (culture of lying, of covering up for mistakes).
(8) The police are called it, the arrest, there is of course an announcement inside the hospital and there has to be an announcement to the press. Now of course the director of the hospital is in control – probably misinformed by his doctors, obviously having to show his “damage control” capacities and to minimize any bad PR for his hospital. The whole thing explodes out of control and the media feeding frenzy starts. Witch hunt, and then witch trial.


JMO But it matches some of what the defense have said in court. The witch hunt, the confirmation bias, the meetings behind the scenes.

 

[LorriB]

She referred to it as "absolutely shocking at the time" so it's not really in hindsight imo

Dan

If it was recorded at the time then yes I agree. If this is her looking back at it years later, may have been influenced by what she now knows. JMO

 

[Imogenia]

I firstly think the doctor is naturally viewing the situation in hindsight, and we know from research that does change perspective. Things that at the time were maybe just a bit odd now take on a very sinister twist.

Maybe LL had seen this decline happening before and thought it was similar? I've no idea! I just think there's way too many ways to interpret it for it to stand out to me.

JMO

There are many ways to interpret a remark such as this. If one feels shocked, that feeling, in itself, is for a reason. The best thing is (if possible) not to demonstrate any emotion, but nonchalantly to ask ‘Why do you say that?’, and note what is said and demonstrated (in body language) in the person’s reply.

 

[katydid23]

I firstly think the doctor is naturally viewing the situation in hindsight, and we know from research that does change perspective. Things that at the time were maybe just a bit odd now take on a very sinister twist.

it sounds like the Dr thought it was shocking even back then when it happened:


"The consultant's harrowing account emerged when she was asked if any conversations that day had stuck in her mind.

She recalled going through to Nursery 1 to Nursery 2 shortly after receiving an optimistic gas reading that suggested Baby P might recover.

'A few nurses were there, including Staff Nurse Lucy Letby. I remember when you face one wall there's a clock in front. It was just going past 12. I was desperately wanting this baby to get better and feeling totally out of my depth.

'I just said, almost thinking out loud: "Ok, the transport team are going to be here". Staff Nurse Letby said "He's not leaving here alive, is he?"

'I found it absolutely shocking at the time. I turned round and said "Don't say that – he's had a good gas". In my mind he was very much alive. I said that and left the room.'

Maybe LL had seen this decline happening before and thought it was similar? I've no idea! I just think there's way too many ways to interpret it for it to stand out to me.

JMO

Well, LL certainly had seen these declines before, so there's that. And she did sound very certain the baby was not leaving there alive.

Tomorrow we will hear about another baby that collapsed unexpectedly the very next night. Also a baby under her care.

I don't think there are that many ways to interpret three babies, 3 nights in a row, collapsing unexpectedly, while under her care.

 

[katydid23]

If it was recorded at the time then yes I agree. If this is her looking back at it years later, may have been influenced by what she now knows. JMO

'I found it absolutely shocking at the time. I turned round and said "Don't say that – he's had a good gas". In my mind he was very much alive. I said that and left the room.'

 

[marynnu]

The leaving here alive thing I don't really think anything of. LL interpreted him as sicker than the doctor did.

I think if LL did say the rest of it in that excited tone then it is very very weird. JMO

"he's not leaving here alive, is he" would be a very bizarre thing to say by any health professional IMO. I'd have been shocked and puzzled if one of my colleagues said this.