UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #18

[Sweeper2000]

There aren't only two options. No attachment or unhealthy attachment.


She's said herself that she she photographed the card for her own benefit.


She didn't have deep relationship with that family, other than in her head, and any imagined bond or connection was one-sided on her part. That in itself is worrying IMO


So on one hand you're saying she felt she had a deep bond and connection with them but on the other hand you're saying they can't have been that important to her or she'd have taken the day off.

RE basking in the consequences of her alleged actions by going to the funeral and taking pics. Pics of what ? The grieving parents? the coffin? Like that wouldn't draw attention to her?

If she's guilty then the whole reason she gave for keeping a photo of the card is untrue. She would no longer be keeping the photo to remind her of kind words she had said to a family she'd bonded with, would she? She'd be keeping it for a very different reason.

ALL JMO

1. that’s why I said the process of saying goodbye is something one will learn.

2. the unit of value or in your words benefit is imo the words or connection she shared with them. Which imo is normal. Lots and lots of people keep things that remind them of momentous occasions Like birthday cards etc

3. as I said the bond isn’t necessarily deep it’s just deeper than others which going by marynnu opinion is 0.01 above nothing or no connection at all.

4. pics of anything that reminds her of the “gain” she got whilst there, could even be a picture of her at the church or the church itself which obviously wouldn’t be suspicious at all

5. if she’s guilty she lied about everything including about the true and “perverse” reason for keeping the pic.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Im not sure I understand your answer to me - sorry

I meant any SM posts showing a defendant in bad light - especially from ppl who know her personally - are removed.

What we write on forums are just our opinions based on MSM reports.
And we always add - JMO, MOO, etc.

I was saying if you report the posts the mods will say if it is indeed subjudice. I was also saying that you and you alone may have that privilege. As it’s you.

 

[ColourPurple]

I think that too much is being read into the thing of her taking a photo of the card. People, especially young people take photos of literally everything these days so I don't think it's at all unusual.

Let's also not forget that LL is quite the hoarder, which we know from the numbers of hand over sheets and she had along with other seemingly pointless possessions in her house. She says she often takes photos of cards she sends - if there were nonsuch photos on here phone I think the prosecution would make that point. They haven't, so.........

On the other hand if there were other photos of other cards, I think the defence would have already argued that it was just one of many, like they did with the handover sheets and facebook searches.

You think too much is being made of her taking and keeping a photo of the card to remind herself of the kind words she wrote. I think too much is being made of trying to normalise her taking and keeping a photo of a sympathy card to remind herself of the kind words she wrote. It's just not a thing.

JMO

 

[Sweeper2000]

I wouldn't.

You don't share a bond with particular families, or at least it's extremely rare & somewhat unprofessional IMO. All the babies & families are equally deserving of the same care & attention.

Just to add, you can't just take a day off, paid or otherwise, to attend the funeral of a patient.

Are you saying you believe all nnu nurses are indifferent to the children and families?

we might mean different things by bond. In this context I’m simply saying a connection that is all, nothing necessarily significant to an individual. However the significance of this card and the connection between ll and that family is relative. So if that family was the only one she ever did that for in her entire career it’s Probably well within expectations.

ie reasonable to expect something memorable or a deeper than usual connection once every million babies.

 

[Tortoise]

Possibly but it would be something that would be discussed between BM and Letby.
I’m all out of ideas tbh !

It would, but the court also has to advise her about adverse inferences of not giving evidence

The Criminal Procedure Rules 2020

Procedure on plea of not guilty​

25.9.—(2) (f)subject to paragraph (4), at the end of the prosecution evidence, the court must ask whether the defendant intends to give evidence in person and, if the answer is ‘no’, then the court must satisfy itself that there has been explained to the defendant, in terms the defendant can understand (with help, if necessary)—

(i)the right to give evidence in person, and

(ii)that if the defendant does not give evidence in person, or refuses to answer a question while giving evidence, the court may draw such inferences as seem proper;

(4) Paragraph (2)(f) does not apply where it appears to the court that, taking account of all the circumstances, the defendant’s physical or mental condition makes it undesirable for the defendant to give evidence in person.


I keep thinking it was odd for Myers to say this in his opening speech. Did he mean her appearance?

"You won't get your answers [to what Letby is like] through seeing her in the dock.
"This is what she is like six years after the allegations started. That, as you can imagine, is gruelling for anyone.
"You may want to keep that in mind as we go through the evidence in this case."


see also -
Where the defence wish to avoid an adverse inference being drawn against a defendant who does not give evidence, they will have to show that the defendant has a particular physical or mental condition and that this condition makes it undesirable for them to give evidence. This will almost certainly require expert evidence to be produced to demonstrate what the defendant’s condition is and why it would be undesirable for them to give evidence.
Crown Court Trial - Defence Case — Defence-Barrister.co.uk


But none of this may apply, so just putting it out there

 

[Dotta]

I was saying if you report the posts the mods will say if it is indeed subjudice. I was also saying that you and you alone may have that privilege. As it’s you.

Oh, I see
Phew!
Writing on a foreign forum is like walking on a minefield haha

 

[Sweeper2000]

Oh, I see
Phew!
Writing on a foreign forum is like walking on a minefield haha

I was hoping you would let me report your posts as well.

i

 

[WaxLyrical]

"... and I think it was nice to remember the kind words I shared with that family"

I think that is very odd. I can see wanting to remember kind words someone shared with me or to me. But wanting to remember kind things I said to someone else by taking a photo? I don't get that. Don't you just say those things out of compassion, in a natural way? Why the need to take a photo?

Agree, it’s a very odd thing to say.

“Remember the kind words I shared.” Assuming it’s not a trophy, she might have kept it as a template for future sympathy cards. JMO.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Im not sure, but I suspect that, IF GUILTY, she treated others in objectifying way.

Like means of satisfying her needs/compulsions.

As if their rights/feelings didn't exist.

Maybe this letter of sympathy was written and saved to deny her feeling of emotional emptiness/void?
Like a proof to herself and others that she was capable of sympathy?

JMO

Or... *if* guilty or even not guilty, she gratifies herself (narcissistic supply) by reviewing the cards she's sent and the kind words she's written that were so gratefully received by suffering and grieving families (oneupmanship, importance, relevance?).

<modsnip> frankly that bit of all things is the one element that's got me. Who, or rather what sort of personality, would even think to take a photograph of the words one has written in such a card and then keep that image as a memento of someone else's devastating loss? Someone who is one of many hundreds of people per year that come in your ward and is not a personal firend or relative. It wouldn't even cross my mind. JMO MOO

 

[Dotta]

I was hoping you would let me report your posts as well.

i

Keep on dreaming

Good night!
It is midnight here!

 

[Sweeper2000]

Keep on dreaming

Good night!
It is midnight here!

I now know exactly how doc choc felt after those chocolates were rejected.

i thought love was all we needed but you let us down.

 

[JosieJo]

I think that too much is being read into the thing of her taking a photo of the card. People, especially young people, take photos of literally everything these days so I don't think it's at all unusual.

Let's also not forget that LL is quite the hoarder, which we know from the numbers of hand over sheets and she had along with other seemingly pointless possessions in her house. She says she often takes photos of cards she sends - if there were no such photos on her phone I think the prosecution would make that point. They haven't, so.........

To play devil's advocate...we haven't heard Myers ask the tec witness if there were other photos either

 

[marynnu]

Are you saying you believe all nnu nurses are indifferent to the children and families?

we might mean different things by bond. In this context I’m simply saying a connection that is all, nothing necessarily significant to an individual. However the significance of this card and the connection between ll and that family is relative. So if that family was the only one she ever did that for in her entire career it’s Probably well within expectations.

ie reasonable to expect something memorable or a deeper than usual connection once every million babies.

Of course I don't mean indifferent. We all care very much about the parents & babies in this case, don't we. But we don't have a bond or connection with them. All parents need is for their baby to be cared for skilfully & compassionately, and for the staff to act in a professional and respectful manner. They don't want them to develop a creepy bond with their child.
JMO

 

[ColourPurple]

1. that’s why I said the process of saying goodbye is something one will learn.

2. the unit of value or in your words benefit is imo the words or connection she shared with them. Which imo is normal. Lots and lots of people keep things that remind them of momentous occasions Like birthday cards etc

3. as I said the bond isn’t necessarily deep it’s just deeper than others which going by marynnu opinion is 0.01 above nothing or no connection at all.

4. pics of anything that reminds her of the “gain” she got whilst there, could even be a picture of her at the church or the church itself which obviously wouldn’t be suspicious at all

5. if she’s guilty she lied about everything including about the true and “perverse” reason for keeping the pic.

Rather than having a long drawn out debate, going over and over the same points, I think I can sum up my response to all the points by simply saying I think you're reaching, and I've already explained why.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Of course I don't mean indifferent. We all care very much about the parents & babies in this case, don't we. But we don't have a bond or connection with them. All parents need is for their baby to be cared for skilfully & compassionately, and for the staff to act in a professional and respectful manner. They don't want them to develop a creepy bond with their child.
JMO

Jmo but if it’s not indifference it is at least some form of relationship/bond. Difference in use of words I think.

I don’t mean in any way a personal bond/connection.

 

[ColourPurple]

Agree, it’s a very odd thing to say.

“Remember the kind words I shared.” Assuming it’s not a trophy, she might have kept it as a template for future sympathy cards. JMO.

Or both

 

[Parker Knoll]

It would, but the court also has to advise her about adverse inferences of not giving evidence

The Criminal Procedure Rules 2020

Procedure on plea of not guilty​

25.9.—(2) (f)subject to paragraph (4), at the end of the prosecution evidence, the court must ask whether the defendant intends to give evidence in person and, if the answer is ‘no’, then the court must satisfy itself that there has been explained to the defendant, in terms the defendant can understand (with help, if necessary)—

(i)the right to give evidence in person, and

(ii)that if the defendant does not give evidence in person, or refuses to answer a question while giving evidence, the court may draw such inferences as seem proper;

(4) Paragraph (2)(f) does not apply where it appears to the court that, taking account of all the circumstances, the defendant’s physical or mental condition makes it undesirable for the defendant to give evidence in person.


I keep thinking it was odd for Myers to say this in his opening speech. Did he mean her appearance?

"You won't get your answers [to what Letby is like] through seeing her in the dock.
"This is what she is like six years after the allegations started. That, as you can imagine, is gruelling for anyone.
"You may want to keep that in mind as we go through the evidence in this case."


see also -
Where the defence wish to avoid an adverse inference being drawn against a defendant who does not give evidence, they will have to show that the defendant has a particular physical or mental condition and that this condition makes it undesirable for them to give evidence. This will almost certainly require expert evidence to be produced to demonstrate what the defendant’s condition is and why it would be undesirable for them to give evidence.
Crown Court Trial - Defence Case — Defence-Barrister.co.uk


But none of this may apply, so just putting it out there

Yes possibly …. Having all legal teams, judge and defendant but no jury would make sense but it would be a first.
The madness continues.

 

[Sweeper2000]

One thing I think will be very very interesting to hear about is what she said in police interviews about the conversation she had with the fellow nurse regarding getting info from the years events. For instance her reply when they ask how she went about gathering the info and how she remembered some deaths/collapses happened near handover.

 

[Sundial]

Band 5 is the lowest band for a Registered nurse ..you automatically start on 5 as soon as you qualify

I’ve been thinking about this (bear with me if it’s already been mentioned as I’m still catching up!);

I noticed she hadn’t been shift leader too and originally thought she was actually a band 6 but something is so off with this case.

If she had taken additional training etc, from qualifying to her arrest, I’m surprised she was still a band 5 and then there’s all her medical diagnoses and reasoning for these cases etc in her text messages.

She also seems very sure of herself, going against her superiors, putting herself forward for all these extra shifts- which there isn’t anything wrong with that at all, but something just seems very wrong with all this.
She mentions about being “more experienced” and able to spot something her colleague couldn’t, even appears dismissive of the nursery nurse skills who’d worked there many years. She also points out to dr choc her skill set and the preference of skill set so “it works” because everyone agrees (or something along those lines, I can’t recall exactly what it was).
She was also discussing that advanced neonatal practitioner role with dr choc, so she must have been considering it; yet she was still at the band 5 status. She highlights how great things seemingly are and what she’s experienced etc at Liverpool women’s, being asked to be “on call” and appears very defiant/ arrogant when being questioned by others (eg; forget I said anything, I know how I feel and people should respect that).

For a band 5, she seems very sure of herself and doesn’t strike me as an awkward, shy individual at all. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with being at band 5 and this could be absolutely irrelevant, but I wonder if she’d created these awful cases to ‘prove her worth’ how fabulous she was, face of the new unit, look at me and seemingly shuts down anyone who is at odds with what SHE wants.

I think back to previous discussions recently where it was mentioned how her “go to person” seems to change, in some instances especially when people question or raise concerns for her well-being. Except for dr choc, because he seems to glorify to her how wonderful and great she is; strokes of affection.

And then, whilst she is so commendable at her role; there are dozens of handover sheets, blood gas records (and whatever else we might yet hear), found at her parents and her home address.

All JMO of course

 

[Kasmeer]

On the photo of the card debate, I don't think I can judge LL's reasons, but I can certainly disagree with the idea that nobody does that, as I've taken photos of cards I've written myself, and saved various letter drafts on my computer. Not to take pride in what I wrote but more out of anxiety: "did that sound ok? did I phrase it too awkwardly?"; I'm often bad at wording things so it's reassuring to check back a few days later and make sure it still looks alright! And then I never get around to clearing my files out so they stick around for years. If asked why I had a particular photo I may well say something like "reminding myself of the words I wrote".

As it happens, I've never written a sympathy card so don't have anything like that saved, but even over a year later I wish I'd taken a photo of the thank you card I wrote to a neighbour who was very kind to my late father; I can't articulate why I'd like to see it again in a way that'd make sense to those of you who can't understand why anyone would do that, but it's not unique to LL. And yes, I know I'm weird; I'm autistic, I'm not a murderer or criminal of any kind