UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #17

[katydid23]

My feeling is that by 'questioning' she took it to mean whether she, or anyone else, thought there was anything suspicious which needed investigating. Speculating as to reasons is different.

'Letby, 33, claimed that neither she nor other staff had questioned what had caused the 'spike' of three deaths and one near-death on the neonatal unit in the single month of June eight years ago.
.... Backing up why she did not question the spike in deaths, she added: 'I didn't think there was maybe anything to be looked into. It was just a shock for everybody.'

But doesn't it seem weird that she didnt think it was something that needed to be looked into ?

If you lost 2 babies back to back and the 3rd coded the very next night, wouldn't you want the hospital to figure out why?

 

[Marantz4250b]

Lucy Letby told police three baby deaths in fortnight ‘bad luck’

NURSE Lucy Letby said it was “bad luck” that three babies died in a fortnight while she was on duty, her murder trial has heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

Letby, 33, was asked by detectives to explain the “spike” of fatalities at the Countess of Chester Hospital in June 2015 when she was first arrested three years later.

In police interviews read at Manchester Crown Court on Thursday, April 20, a detective asked her: “What were you thinking during that period?”

Letby replied: “That it was a shock to have that many deaths.”

The detective said: “It must have been devastating.”

“Yes,” replied Letby. “You just have to find a way to deal with it, do the job and provide the care that we give.”

The detective asked: “Did any of the staff sort of question the hospital or colleagues as to where the spike was coming from?”

Letby replied: “Not that I’m aware of.”

The detective said: “Did you yourself?”

“No,” replied Letby.

The detective said: “Why didn’t you question the spike?”

Letby said: “In a formal way? Because I didn’t feel like anything needed to be looked into, it was just a shock for everybody.”

The detective went on: “You dealt with all those (babies) didn’t you? What did you put that down to, bad luck?”

“Yes,” Letby replied.




I think this ^^^ extra information puts a different light on it---She didn't question where the spike in deaths was coming from----

The detective said: “Why didn’t you question the spike?”

Letby said: “In a formal way? Because I didn’t feel like anything needed to be looked into, it was just a shock for everybody.”


I find that very odd. She witnessed the sudden deaths of 7 newborns, up close and personal, but ' didn’t feel like anything needed to be looked into...

There weren't seven deaths in June 2015, though. She was being questioned about a spike in deaths in that month only.

 

[katydid23]

The defendant also told police that she was “upset and frustrated” six minutes before the collapse of her alleged third victim, a baby boy.

Letby, 33, messaged a colleague during a night shift in the unit’s intensive care room, jurors were told.

Five days earlier another baby boy – her alleged first victim, Child A – had died in intensive care room one.

On the evening of June 13, 2015, the court heard she texted a fellow nurse: “I just keep thinking about Mon(day). Feel like I need to be in 1 to overcome it but (nurse) said no x.

“I just feel I need to be in 1 to get the image out of my head. To be in (room) 3 is eating me up. All I can see is him in 1.”

Later she told her colleague “I’ll overcome it myself” before at 11.09pm texting her, saying: “Forget it I’m obviously making more of it than I should x.

“Sleep well xx.”

At 11.15pm the baby boy, Child C, suddenly deteriorated in room one and died the following morning, jurors have heard.

When interviewed by police about the death of Child C, the defendant said she did not recall the text conversation.

Asked what she felt she needed to overcome, she replied: “I’m assuming … I previously had a bad experience in (room) one.”

Letby thought the image she “wanted out of my head” was that of Child A.

She told officers: “It’s very difficult, when you see dead babies it’s hard to get that image out of your head.”

The detective asked: “Why would going into nursery one help?”

Letby replied: “Because I would see a different baby in there, and see a different scenario to the scenario I had at the time when he died.”

The detective said: “How would it be a different scenario?”

Letby said: “It’s a different baby, it’s different staff, it’s a different night.

“Because I think when you are going to the same incubator space and there is a different baby there you know you let the one you lost go. Until you go into that space, you see that baby until another baby goes in there.”

The detective said: “You sent the final text at 11.09pm. Six minutes after you sent that, (Child C) collapsed.”

“Right,” said Letby.

The detective went on: “What are you thoughts on that?”

Letby responded: “I don’t have any thoughts on that.”

The detective said: “The text messages suggest you were frustrated at not working in nursery one, do you agree?”

The defendant said: “Yes, I think it would have helped me if I could have been in nursery one.”

Letby agreed she was the only staff member in room one when Child C collapsed and that she was seen at his cot-side when a monitor alarm sounded.

The detective asked: “And at that time you were feeling upset and frustrated?”

“Yes,” said Letby.

Lucy Letby told police three baby deaths in fortnight ‘bad luck’

NURSE Lucy Letby said it was “bad luck” that three babies died in a fortnight while she was on duty, her murder trial has heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

==========================================

If she wanted to get the images of there dead babies out of her head, why not stay in room 3 with the healthier babies for a couple of shifts?

My suspicious nature thinks she was craving to be back in room 1 because she like the chaos and craziness of room 1 when emergencies are happening. Only 6 minutes after complaining about not being the designated nurse in room 1, even after she requested it, the baby in room one deteriorated suddenly and died the next day.



That^^^ kind of crazy coincidence could be overlooked if it was just those 3 babies. But those were babies A, B and C. And this same spike in collapses continued for a full year, up through Baby Q.

 

[katydid23]

There weren't seven deaths in June 2015, though. She was being questioned about a spike in deaths in that month only.

And when she was being questioned, are you sure it wasn't after the 22 incidents? I don't think the police questioned her after the 1st 3 babies at all did they?

When she was being questioned about the 1st 3 babies, it was because of the 22 collapses. Am I mistaken?

 

[Tortoise]

Some really interesting answers, IMO.

All IMO -

Asked about the baby receiving an injection of air: 'It would be very hard to push air through a long line. It's a hard pressure to push through'.

Bearing in mind she's responding to questioning about a deliberate injection/act, 'push' is not out of place as it might be if that wasn't in the question, such as 'how did the baby end up with an air embolism', BUT "it would be", "it's" and "through" do show she has experience of this, particularly "it's". The word "through" shows completion, it's very specific to the delivery into the body, and a person who hasn't done this (IMO) would not necessarily think of the point of delivery as opposed to injecting air into the fluid and it filtering down with the fluid at its own pace. She also knows about alarms on these machines which detect air and stop the administration, but she hasn't raised this to say it wouldn't be possible, showing she does know how to bypass the safety mechanism by using the port.


'I didn't deliberately give him any air'.'
No. I didn't do anything deliberate to (Baby) B to harm her'.

These are not denials of giving them air, they are only a denials of deliberate acts. So why hasn't she denied giving them air? She's opening the door to accidental administration as a defence, but why, when she knows the safety features of the equipment, she knows the training, and she's already revealed she knows it takes a deliberate bypass or a hard push through the line? Her answers by way of an accident defence that isn't possible show deception and clear attempts to manipulate the police, IMO.


Asked about the Facebook searches she carried out on [baby D's] her family, she said: 'I don't know what I was looking for, but I would not be looking for photos of dead babies'.

Whoops! she's revealed what she was looking for!!! IMO.

Letby admits she was 'frustrated' before death of baby she 'murdered'

 

[marynnu]

Asked about the baby receiving an injection of air: 'It would be very hard to push air through a long line. It's a hard pressure to push through'.

Bearing in mind she's responding to questioning about a deliberate injection/act, 'push' is not out of place as it might be if that wasn't in the question, such as 'how did the baby end up with an air embolism', BUT "it would be", "it's" and "through" do show she has experience of this, particularly "it's". The word "through" shows completion, it's very specific to the delivery into the body, and a person who hasn't done this (IMO) would not necessarily think of the point of delivery as opposed to injecting air into the fluid and it filtering down with the fluid at its own pace. She also knows about alarms on these machines which detect air and stop the administration, but she hasn't raised this to say it wouldn't be possible, showing she does know how to bypass the safety mechanism by using the port.

It's possible to overthink this IMO. 'Injection' implies a bolus delivered directly into a person with a syringe, not something added to an infusion. That's how I would have interpreted this question anyway.

 

[Sundial]

I think they were referencing speculation, what was she thinking at the time that the events unfolded?
I keep thinking about those handover sheets and how she ended up with so many. Would be shocking if Dr choc or JJK had printed them all off for her. Wondering how much more trouble wonka got himself in before jumping camps.

Wonka lol

 

[Tortoise]

It's possible to overthink this IMO. 'Injection' implies a bolus delivered directly into a person with a syringe, not something added to an infusion. That's how I would have interpreted this question anyway.

I'm not sure I understand you because her answer is about injecting air through the long line, at the time of administering fluids.

 

[Marantz4250b]

And when she was being questioned, are you sure it wasn't after the 22 incidents? I don't think the police questioned her after the 1st 3 babies at all did they?

When she was being questioned about the 1st 3 babies, it was because of the 22 collapses. Am I mistaken?

Yes, she was being questioned when she was arrested after all 22 incidents. The article you quoted, however, said, right at the start, that she was being asked about the spike in June 2015. Only June 2015.

 

[marynnu]

I'm not sure I understand you because her answer is about injecting air through the long line, at the time of administering fluids.

Is it? I didn't see that. I must admit I found what you said rather confusing, maybe I misunderstood!

 

[Marantz4250b]

Some really interesting answers, IMO.

All IMO -

Asked about the baby receiving an injection of air: 'It would be very hard to push air through a long line. It's a hard pressure to push through'.

Bearing in mind she's responding to questioning about a deliberate injection/act, 'push' is not out of place as it might be if that wasn't in the question, such as 'how did the baby end up with an air embolism', BUT "it would be", "it's" and "through" do show she has experience of this, particularly "it's". The word "through" shows completion, it's very specific to the delivery into the body, and a person who hasn't done this (IMO) would not necessarily think of the point of delivery as opposed to injecting air into the fluid and it filtering down with the fluid at its own pace. She also knows about alarms on these machines which detect air and stop the administration, but she hasn't raised this to say it wouldn't be possible, showing she does know how to bypass the safety mechanism by using the port.


'I didn't deliberately give him any air'.'
No. I didn't do anything deliberate to (Baby) B to harm her'.

These are not denials of giving them air, they are only a denials of deliberate acts. So why hasn't she denied giving them air? She's opening the door to accidental administration as a defence, but why, when she knows the safety features of the equipment, she knows the training, and she's already revealed she knows it takes a deliberate bypass or a hard push through the line? Her answers by way of an accident defence that isn't possible show deception and clear attempts to manipulate the police, IMO.


Asked about the Facebook searches she carried out on [baby D's] her family, she said: 'I don't know what I was looking for, but I would not be looking for photos of dead babies'.

Whoops! she's revealed what she was looking for!!! IMO.

Letby admits she was 'frustrated' before death of baby she 'murdered'

On your last point. I don't think that that follows at all. Again, we don't know if this scenario was put to her or it was implied that that was what she was looking for. To be honest, it seems to be a strange response to begin with as why would anyone think there would be photos of dead babies on FB? It gives the impression that she'd been primed by circumstances to say that.

 

[Tortoise]

Is it? I didn't see that. I must admit I found what you said rather confusing, maybe I misunderstood!

Yes, these are her words 'It would be very hard to push air through a long line. It's a hard pressure to push through'.

 

[WaxLyrical]

Do we have any idea whether it would or would not be hard to push air through? Has anything like that been discussed by the experts, or have they tried to replicate it somehow?

 

[Marantz4250b]

Yes, these are her words 'It would be very hard to push air through a long line. It's a hard pressure to push through'.

I'm not really understanding why these words come over as incriminating, though. They are simply statements of facts according to her understanding surely?

 

[ColourPurple]

Some really interesting answers, IMO.

All IMO -

Asked about the baby receiving an injection of air: 'It would be very hard to push air through a long line. It's a hard pressure to push through'.

Bearing in mind she's responding to questioning about a deliberate injection/act, 'push' is not out of place as it might be if that wasn't in the question, such as 'how did the baby end up with an air embolism', BUT "it would be", "it's" and "through" do show she has experience of this, particularly "it's". The word "through" shows completion, it's very specific to the delivery into the body, and a person who hasn't done this (IMO) would not necessarily think of the point of delivery as opposed to injecting air into the fluid and it filtering down with the fluid at its own pace. She also knows about alarms on these machines which detect air and stop the administration, but she hasn't raised this to say it wouldn't be possible, showing she does know how to bypass the safety mechanism by using the port.


'I didn't deliberately give him any air'.'
No. I didn't do anything deliberate to (Baby) B to harm her'.

These are not denials of giving them air, they are only a denials of deliberate acts. So why hasn't she denied giving them air? She's opening the door to accidental administration as a defence, but why, when she knows the safety features of the equipment, she knows the training, and she's already revealed she knows it takes a deliberate bypass or a hard push through the line? Her answers by way of an accident defence that isn't possible show deception and clear attempts to manipulate the police, IMO.


Asked about the Facebook searches she carried out on [baby D's] her family, she said: 'I don't know what I was looking for, but I would not be looking for photos of dead babies'.

Whoops! she's revealed what she was looking for!!! IMO.

Letby admits she was 'frustrated' before death of baby she 'murdered'

Twice now she's referred to them as "dead babies". Maybe, just me but I find them really cold, detached descriptions.


"It's very difficult, when you see dead babies it's hard to get that image out of your head."

and

'I don't know what I was looking for, but I would not be looking for photos of dead babies'.


Also did the police just say experts believed "air was injected" or specify that it was injected via the long line.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I have thought for a long time that if she is guilty the motivation was a death fixation. The evidence points to it if guilty. Morbid curiosity gone wrong. Thought that since the “fate” quote.

I'm not really understanding why these words come over as incriminating, though. They are simply statements of facts according to her understanding surely?

to me the hard pressure sentence doesn’t even make sense. I can see how people think that about that though.

 

[marynnu]

Yes, these are her words 'It would be very hard to push air through a long line. It's a hard pressure to push through'.

That's true though. Are you thinking 'long line' is the infusion line from the bag to the baby maybe?

 

[marynnu]

Do we have any idea whether it would or would not be hard to push air through? Has anything like that been discussed by the experts, or have they tried to replicate it somehow?

It's certainly harder to inject through a long line than a cannula. It's not very common to do this though, as the line should be left unbroken once an infusion is started to prevent infection. It's only done if it seems to be blocked (the vein can go into spasm) or VERY rarely if it's the only point of access, for antibiotics etc. That's extremely unusual though.

 

[Tortoise]

On your last point. I don't think that that follows at all. Again, we don't know if this scenario was put to her or it was implied that that was what she was looking for. To be honest, it seems to be a strange response to begin with as why would anyone think there would be photos of dead babies on FB? It gives the impression that she'd been primed by circumstances to say that.

That's guesswork though. They haven't reportedly said were you looking for photos of dead babies, and her answer isn't "no I wasn't", it was 'I don't know what I was looking for', followed by 'but I would not be looking for photos of dead babies'. She was photographing these babies after they died and she had dressed them up, to put photos in their memory boxes. She was asked what she was looking for, as evidenced by her answers to consistent questioning, as in baby A - 'I'm not sure I was looking for anything'.

Guessing that the police suggested she was looking for photos of dead babies is the same as guessing "I killed them on purpose because...I'm evil etc" was her writing down what other people said about her, when she didn't reference that, and there's no foundation for it. You can analyse words but you can't analyse words that are not there, invent evidence or project your own thoughts onto absent content.

These are her words and I believe that was on her mind for her to even think of saying it. JMO

 

[ColourPurple]

On your last point. I don't think that that follows at all. Again, we don't know if this scenario was put to her or it was implied that that was what she was looking for. To be honest, it seems to be a strange response to begin with as why would anyone think there would be photos of dead babies on FB? It gives the impression that she'd been primed by circumstances to say that.

I've only seen this personally with parents whose babies were born sleeping,when those were the only photos they had. Not sure it would be common with babies where there were pics of the babies when they were alive to post. If guilty, maybe she was hoping they might uise the photos she'd taken for the memory boxes.

IMO