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

[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?

I think it would depend what area they were placed in. I don't think they wear scrubs in admin departments such as HR or PALS, own clothes I think. Admins on wards wear scrubs for infection control purposes but they would usually be a blatantly different colour to the blue. E.g pink or maroon.
It would be difficult if they kept her on Trust grounds whilst under investigations, surely they would have to ask her to give back her door swipe card and ask her not to visit the neonatal ward if there was a safe guarding concern.
Perhaps if the chief exec was hoping it would 'swing the other way' and all the drs would come under scrutiny instead. If that were the case then perhaps she was initially seconded but then after her first arrest worked from home?

 

[marynnu]

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.

You see a lot of errors in the reporting, mostly trivial. It is obviously incorrect, whoever said it.

 

[Dotta]

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.

"When in fear, God is near"

 

[Marantz4250b]

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.

Worded badly by me - if they suspected she was a danger to patients. And they clearly did suspect this because it's why she was seconded.

 

[esther43]

You see a lot of errors in the reporting, mostly trivial. It is obviously incorrect, whoever said it.

I think there were rota tweeks before child Q though wernt there? Around the time of child I LL was moved to days for a bit. Wasn't she?

 

[marynnu]

I think there were rota tweeks before child Q though wernt there? Around the time of child I LL was moved to days for a bit. Wasn't she?

Not sure. Either way, she was definitely not prevented from doing nights. It never made any sense at all, did it?

 

[Sundial]

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!

Could you imagine also the difference in stimulation in patient safety/risk office too? If she was “bored” with just feeding babies and preferred the more demanding areas of her job (not that there’s anything wrong/sinister with this), the change into the seconded admin role must have been far less stimulating than feeding the babies (which she was allegedly bored with anyway).

JMO

 

[esther43]

Not sure. Either way, she was definitely not prevented from doing nights. It never made any sense at all, did it?

What exactly was said, that when LL was moved from nights the deaths stopped?
Could be wrong here but they could they not be relying on other data? That they looked at retrospectively?

 

[Tortoise]

Worded badly by me - if they suspected she was a danger to patients. And they clearly did suspect this because it's why she was seconded.

Still, a suspicion is not enough. They had not seen her doing anything, all they had was her name coinciding with deaths they couldn't explain, which all bar one were given an explanation at post mortem. They could say to each other 'what if it's this?' but you can't go around treating people as if they are guilty of what you think could be happening, with nothing more than a growing suspicion. It's been gone over multiple times by the consultants giving evidence, the hospital management stood in the way of a police investigation, but they eventually succeeded in keeping her off the unit until it was independently investigated. Had the insulin poisoning been flagged up it would have been a different matter, because that would have been some basis in evidence they could have cited to management.

JMO

 

[thisismyusernamealso]

Yes, I'm thinking that we've heard very little about this "large quantity" of paperwork found at her house. If so then why have they not been introduced as evidence as they relate to each charge/alleged victim? Or maybe they have and we haven't heard?

So far the evidence has been focused on each of the babies. Once they get back after Easter I assume we'll start to hear this sort of evidence, what the police found and so on

 

[thisismyusernamealso]

Welcome to WS and thank you for the info.

What kind of tasks would you give a nurse to do, while seconded to your division? I am very curious to hear how she might have been spending her time.

I think she would have been reviewing incident reports..not sure what they're called in the UK (Datix?). Would usually be a job that involved nursing staff as clinical experiece/knowledge is required for some investigations.

They can be entered for a whole range of reasons and are reviewed by looking at notes, talking to staff involved etc. For example if a report was entered for a medication error, trying to find why it happened (incorrect order, inexperience etc) and what if anything could be implemented to avoid in future.

 

[thisismyusernamealso]

Not sure. Either way, she was definitely not prevented from doing nights. It never made any sense at all, did it?

I think she might have been someone who usually worked nights, with the occasional day shifts thrown into her roster.

So most incidents happened on night shifts, but when she worked her day shifts incidents also happened then (so followed her shift pattern and can't be blamed on less staff on night shift). I think this is what they were implying, not that she had been moved to days to see what happened especially since she was still working night shifts the whole time.

 

[Becci]

Lucy Letby: what has the court heard so far in trial of Hereford nurse?

A HEREFORD nurse was allegedly interrupted by the mother of a victim as she attacked the baby in the neo-natal unit of the hospital where she worked.

www.herefordtimes.com

 

[marynnu]

I think she might have been someone who usually worked nights, with the occasional day shifts thrown into her roster.

So most incidents happened on night shifts, but when she worked her day shifts incidents also happened then (so followed her shift pattern and can't be blamed on less staff on night shift). I think this is what they were implying, not that she had been moved to days to see what happened especially since she was still working night shifts the whole time.

I personally do not think she was moved to days "to see what happened". That's beyond ridiculous, IMO.

 

[Dotta]

I wonder...
If guilty

Whether the victims shared certain features which (allegedly) triggered the attacks - distinctive ones of which the public don't know.

Although,
I guess, they (allegedly) might have been "chosen" b/c of health conditions which facilitated the (alleged) attacks, like haemophilia - the bleeding might have not been surprising.

Or,
the (alleged) factor might have been connected to parents - the real/ultimate victims.
Maybe their suffering was an (alleged) aim.

But, if guilty of course, we will never know.

One can only guess.

Sick minds follow their own sick "logic".

JMO

 

[squish]

I wonder...
If guilty

Whether the victims shared certain features which (allegedly) triggered the attacks - distinctive ones of which the public don't know.

Although,
I guess, they (allegedly) might have been "chosen" b/c of health conditions which facilitated the (alleged) attacks, like haemophilia - the bleeding might have not been surprising.

Or,
the (alleged) factor might have been connected to parents - the real/ultimate victims.
Maybe their suffering was an (alleged) aim.

But, if guilty of course, we will never know.

One can only guess.

Sick minds follow their own sick "logic".

JMO

8/17 were multiples, and a further 2 babies had twins that died in the womb.

Maybe, if guilty, multiples were picked because the parents would stay there for the surviving baby, and their grief could be witnessed and enjoyed.

Perhaps the two babies whose twins died in the womb were picked because their birth would have been extra precious.

Collapses and deaths sometimes happened on special dates (Due date home, 100th day since birth).

 

[Dotta]

8/17 were multiples, and a further 2 babies had twins that died in the womb.

Maybe, if guilty, multiples were picked because the parents would stay there for the surviving baby, and their grief could be witnessed and enjoyed.

Perhaps the two babies whose twins died in the womb were picked because their birth would have been extra precious.

Collapses and deaths sometimes happened on special dates (Due date home, 100th day since birth).

Yes, I know.
So it might indicate that parents (allegedly) were the target.
"Special dates" were important to parents, not the Babies.

By the way - am I mistaken or 1 twin in each pair survived?
Although left brain damaged?

I still remember she was informed by a text that they were expecting an infant with haemophilia - and this particular Baby was (allegedly) targeted.
Bleeding from the mouth.

It all seems interwined -
parents, Babies and their health conditions, (allegedly) covering the attacks.
"Leitmotif" of "medical killings", no?

JMO

 

[Supernovae]

"When in fear, God is near"

"No atheists in foxholes."

 

[squish]

Yes, I know.
So it might indicate that parents (allegedly) were the target.
"Special dates" were important to parents, not the Babies.

By the way - am I mistaken or 1 twin in each pair survived?
Although left brain damaged?

I still remember she was informed by a text that they were expecting an infant with haemophilia - and this particular Baby was (allegedly) targeted.
Bleeding from the mouth.

It all seems interwined -
parents, Babies and their health conditions, (allegedly) covering the attacks.
"Leitmotif" of "medical killings", no?

JMO

I agree, I really think that if guilty, the parents were the target of sadism, and the babies were the vessels to achieve that.

One of each of the first two pairs of twins survived, but not for want of (allegedly) trying to kill them too. Twins L and M survived but both had alleged attempts on their lives. Two of the triplets died and the parents begged for the surviving child to be transferred.

The triplets were naturally conceived and identical, something which only happens in every 200 million pregnancies. That significance would have been irresistible, if guilty.

I can't remember which babies are brain damaged, I know one is profoundly disabled but can't remember if it's a twin.

 

[Dotta]

Dbm