UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #16

[Marantz4250b]

It does say Lucy's is a 3 month secondment though. But yes could be clever wording again, to avoid giving a definite return date!

I think that's exactly what it is! It would definitely get people speculating as to why she'd been moved and why some people have return dates and why she didn't.

Also, I think it would look highly sus from the outset - why on earth would the very first person you had seconded to clerical be one of the highest band nurses, who as it happens is known to be a virtual work-a-holic on what they've already said is a unit with staffing problems? Mental!

 

[Marantz4250b]

They had to not scare her too much while they conducted their inquiries.

It would do exactly the opposite, if you ask me!

 

[Sweeper2000]

Surely, you just call her in confidentially and say something along the lines of "...okay, you're aware that you've been involved in a number of serious incidents and you know that it's our professional and ethical duty to investigate; this is in no way us saying that we think you've done anything wrong, intentionally or otherwise, but it's our duty to investigate and patient safety trumps everything else so we're taking you off nursing duties for a while...".

She's a professional, well trained nurse, and she should realise that this is a perfectly reasonable way of doing things. Anyone would realise that They can also agree how it's presented to other staff members. No, it's not easy but managers and senior personnel are paid to do this and are promoted because they can do these things - or at least that's how it's supposed to work!

To be honest, this is just another example of how utterly terribly this trust is being run. Again, not surprised that she lodged a grievance.

Yeh looking at her texts I’m getting the impression that she actually wasn’t angry at all up until this very publicly announced move to the patient safety office. She seemed content enough if worried to just go with the flow for a while. Even apparently trying to help the investigation by gathering info. I think she didn’t have much of a problem with it tbh.

I am a bit caught up on this mentioning AE in her info and then saying she doesn’t know exactly what one is Though. Is it self incrimination if guilty or is it pure speculation?

 

[marynnu]

Surely, you just call her in confidentially and say something along the lines of "...okay, you're aware that you've been involved in a number of serious incidents and you know that it's our professional and ethical duty to investigate; this is in no way us saying that we think you've done anything wrong, intentionally or otherwise, but it's our duty to investigate and patient safety trumps everything else so we're taking you off nursing duties for a while...".

She's a professional, well trained nurse, and she should realise that this is a perfectly reasonable way of doing things. Anyone would realise that They can also agree how it's presented to other staff members. No, it's not easy but managers and senior personnel are paid to do this and are promoted because they can do these things - or at least that's how it's supposed to work!

To be honest, this is just another example of how utterly terribly this trust is being run. Again, not surprised that she lodged a grievance.

That sounds reasonable on the face if it, but if I had something like that said to me I wouldn't believe for one second that I wasn't being suspected of something. If that were so she would be an active participant of the investigation, in my view. So no, I would not think it reasonable for one second. And it would single her out far more than what they came up with. JMO

 

[Marantz4250b]

I agree!
Changing work environment from time to time is good for mental health
It helps to avoid burn out.
New opportunities, new challenges - even in the same professional field.

Don't Americans advise to change job every 10 years?
Well, that is what I was once told!

JMO

The point is, I think, that it appears that she wasn't asked. If someone had decided that my role was being changed without notice I'd be raging.

I think you said you were a teacher; if you got an email out of the blue saying to everyone that you were being taken out of the classroom and put in the library sorting books for three months would you take it with good heart?

 

[Dotta]

I think you said you were a teacher; if you got an email out of the blue saying to everyone that you were being taken out of the classroom and put in the library sorting books for three months would you take it with good heart?

Absolutely
I love books!
Although my allegry to dust might kill me!
But I would die happy

 

[Marantz4250b]

There's also the possibility that she was asked to carry out admin tasks from home remotely, to avoid her coming into contact with children.

This is possible. I'm assuming that she'd still be in uniform when on these paper sorting departments? If so, and if the reason they put her there was because she was a danger to patients - particularly in a malicious way - then why was she even allowed on the premises?

 

[Marantz4250b]

If she was found guilty, I wonder how much documentaries and books about her would include those ridiculous photos of her pulling stupid faces!

All of them, for sure!

The usual suspects will, I'm sure, declare that it shows some deep seated weirdness, of course.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Just from my own experience, it's very common to have neonates baptised if they're probably not going to make it. You'd always ask the question. JMO.

That surprises me, tbh.

 

[Marantz4250b]

RSBM

The papers do also love a big "fall from grace" story, and the greater height the person falls from the better, so I think if guilty, they'll still post the 2013 pic, but yes throw in the mugshot and a few more up to date less flattering pics.

Personally, I'd suspect that they have many, many more of her as they'll have totally rinsed her FB before it was switched off along with all of her friends FB's!

They won't be publishing them due to potential contempt issues but if she's convicted we'll see loads more coming out. Also good business practice to hold them back for the inevitable flood of articles they'll use them in.

 

[Tortoise]

The point is, I think, that it appears that she wasn't asked. If someone had decided that my role was being changed without notice I'd be raging.

I think you said you were a teacher; if you got an email out of the blue saying to everyone that you were being taken out of the classroom and put in the library sorting books for three months would you take it with good heart?

But you're removing it from the reason, which is everything. If the pupils all needed CPR every time the teacher was alone with them, it takes on a different slant.

 

[Marantz4250b]

I believe this to be incorrect. She evidently was not moved to day shifts in April. I suspect this was mis-reported then just became accepted as fact. It really was never believable, was it! JMO

I don't have the exact quotes handy but it was categorically stated by the prosecution that she was moved from nights to days because they suspected her of harming patients. It was a very specific statement, and one of great seriousness, and if it were mis reported I would have expected a correction. It's a contempt to ascribe something to having been said in court when it wasn't.

 

[Dcflag]

Is there some sort of religious line running through all of this, I wonder? The UK is by no means a particularly religious country, as far as Christianity goes, but there have been a few mentions in this trial of priests and "emergency" batlptisms, etc which, to me, seems hughly unusual.

From my own experience, I personally don't really know anyone who's particularly religious and plenty of people, myself included, who actively avoid it. I can't speak personally as I don't have kids but I can't think of anyone I know who does who would strike me as the type who would be concerned about keeping their dying child under resus long enough for a priest to arrive apart from maybe one mother although her husband would think the opposite.

It will be interesting to find out if LL is religious, if guilty, or what the demographic in that regard is among her alleged victims. Also, the talk of "priests" suggests Catholicism, rather than Church of England. That is quite prevalent, though, in that general area, especially Liverpool.

All MOO

I can definitely input to this. I’m not religious, not at all really. I did brownies as a kid, attended church of my own volition around 11-13 years old. That’s the extent of it though. When my son died, we were asked if we wanted the chaplain from the hospital to come, she could do a blessing, a christening or just come for support.

We said yes, and I remember debating over whether to christen or bless (if at all). We had him christened, I remember choosing this not because I was religious, but because I didn’t ever want to look back and regret not doing it. Bizarre because I doubt I’d regret not doing it but I have the benefit of hindsight! Sometimes it’s not even really about the religious side of it but the comfort, acknowledgement. It’s something you can do for your baby, because the list of things you can do is basically zero. We went on to have the same chaplain christen our daughter the following year (and we gave our daughter her name as her middle name) only because it seemed quite right at the time (she came into labour and delivery at 6am to meet her and christened her on the post natal ward with no one else there). We’ve since had another son who is now 4, he’s not christened. If we ever did it would be because we’d want the same lady to do it.

Sometimes when faced with baby loss, you make choices for the most random illogical reasons.

I’d imagine it depends on the cultural diversity of the parents too, because that can have a big impact on religion.

 

[Tortoise]

This is possible. I'm assuming that she'd still be in uniform when on these paper sorting departments? If so, and if the reason they put her there was because she was a danger to patients - particularly in a malicious way - then why was she even allowed on the premises?

They didn't know until experts reviewed the cases. Even now, it is not a done deal until and unless the jury pronounces its verdict.

 

[Kemug]

I doubt it would be patient emails. It would revolve around assessing risks to ensure patients are safe, I suppose.

Oh, the irony.

 

[Dotta]

i said it before and I’ll say it again and other people have said similar things before and I won’t be surprised if they say similar things again that is to say I wish to say that I must say it seems dr choc and ll got off to a flying start. Two months and he’s putting his job on the line for her. That’s a surprising thing by itself, she must have had something to her. Really can’t quite understand that, speaks of a level of infatuation or of a feeling of great care he had for her. Normally takes a bit of time to develop imo.

Oh, it has got a name:

"Fatal Attraction"

JMO

 

[Kemug]

It's fortunate that this is all taking place in a courtroom because the inevitable movie and TV series would be laughed out of production if it were a work of fiction!

I was thinking of an opera, myself.

 

[esther43]

This is possible. I'm assuming that she'd still be in uniform when on these paper sorting departments? If so, and if the reason they put her there was because she was a danger to patients - particularly in a malicious way - then why was she even allowed on the premises?

 

[Sweeper2000]

Oh, it has got a name:

"Fatal Attraction"

JMO

You have gone where I could not and in you going I find I must go to.

it’s the killer smile no doubt.

 

[marynnu]

I can definitely input to this. I’m not religious, not at all really. I did brownies as a kid, attended church of my own volition around 11-13 years old. That’s the extent of it though. When my son died, we were asked if we wanted the chaplain from the hospital to come, she could do a blessing, a christening or just come for support.

We said yes, and I remember debating over whether to christen or bless (if at all). We had him christened, I remember choosing this not because I was religious, but because I didn’t ever want to look back and regret not doing it. Bizarre because I doubt I’d regret not doing it but I have the benefit of hindsight! Sometimes it’s not even really about the religious side of it but the comfort, acknowledgement. It’s something you can do for your baby, because the list of things you can do is basically zero. We went on to have the same chaplain christen our daughter the following year (and we gave our daughter her name as her middle name) only because it seemed quite right at the time (she came into labour and delivery at 6am to meet her and christened her on the post natal ward with no one else there). We’ve since had another son who is now 4, he’s not christened. If we ever did it would be because we’d want the same lady to do it.

Sometimes when faced with baby loss, you make choices for the most random illogical reasons.

I’d imagine it depends on the cultural diversity of the parents too, because that can have a big impact on religion.

So sorry to hear you had to go through that. Everything you say makes total sense, obviously. The sense of helplessness must be overwhelming, so it's something you can do to confirm how much your beloved baby matters, and I guess is a memory to treasure. I don't think religion really has to come into it at all.