UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #19

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #661
In my experience, prisons do not hand out sleeping tablets on a long term basis unless thorough checks are done and they are absolutely necessary. Prisoners can be checked regularly through the night and it would be noted if they were asleep or not. You couldn't just say "Oh I'm not sleeping because of X,Y,Z, can I have some sleeping tablets please?". They wouldn't hand them over that easily and on a long term basis even if you weren't in prison, never mind if you are. Sleeping tablets would be a sought after currency in prison so they have strict controls over who gets them.
Maybe she wasn't sleeping, I am not saying she lied about that. I'm just saying that only she knows WHY she can't sleep. We can't assume that she has PTSD because she is falsely accused. Maybe it is the opposite?
 
  • #662
I entirely accept that. It's perfectly plausible.

So is my suggestion.

I simply don't know what the answer is here, but giving more weight to one rather than the other isn't the done thing, in my opinion.

This woman is on trial for her life, essentially. It's only just outside of my lifetime where a conviction would see her facing an appointment with Mr Pierrepoint and his length of hemp. As it is, if convicted her life is ruined because she'll never be released - if it isn't already ruined, I might add. I'm questioning everything I can because if she is convicted I'd like to be absolutely sure that she's actually guilty. She's clearly a bit odd but being a bit odd isn't synonymous with being a murderer and, as I think I've mentioned previously, being a bit different from what society considers "normal" is more common than most of us are led to believe.

There are so, so many "unknowns" ad "WTF's" in this case it absolutely makes my head spin, quite frankly.
But she’s been charged with mass murder because she was the only nurse present when air/insulin or milk was pumped into the babies bloodstreams and stomachs. So it doesn’t matter if she comes across as a bit odd, it’s the facts that are important. And the facts are she was seen by doctors and nurses standing by the babies when they suddenly collapsed.

Yes, she may come across as odd in as much as she’s a 30-year-old woman and just 4 years ago had the bedroom of a teenager with all the teddy bears and babyish notepads, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t a psychopath. Beverley Allit was childish too, but that didn’t stop her murdering babies. And I’d be very surprised if LL hadn’t read about BA, especially as all the babies died in exactly the same way as the babies died who BA killed on purpose.
 
  • #663
Why would you assume? Because as a nurse I have stated it is not right to be so overly completely invested to such a degree?

I’ll give you an example. I had a patient who was very unwell and a colleague was a designated nurse and got to know the family well. Long-term palliative care. When the patient died, my colleague was understandably very upset and so was the wider team. Loss is never easy for nurses, and undoubtedly hard for their families, regardless of patient group.

The family gave a card to the whole team, chocolates and an invite to the funeral to the nurse who they had undoubtedly built good rapport with.

Then could you imagine, if you had that one nurse that became overly so invested in the practice of memory boxes, persistent various searches on social media of patients and families like an obsession or found to have DOZENS of handover sheets in their home.

You would not think that was a problem? As a nurse, I would have a problem with my colleague doing that. In the teams I have worked with, seniors have also made this clear; you can be a good nurse with empathy and compassion, you get to the know the families.
However, this is not healthy and whilst I completely respect the views of parents and loved ones families (I have been a patient and also the caregiver of patients); the over investment into patients lives like this is concerning and is one that fitness to practice panels also take a dim view on.

If my child had died and I had very little rapport with a nurse who had barely even known my child in the short time they were there-I would not be ok with this; I would be completely creeped out.
IMO
Yes, one of the babies mother’s said how LL walked into the room where she and her husband were after being told their baby had died, and LL was smiling at them and telling them hiw she remembered bathing the baby before he died. If people think that’s normal, then I must be abnormal because I find that disturbing - as did the mother.
 
  • #664
Maybe she wasn't sleeping, I am not saying she lied about that. I'm just saying that only she knows WHY she can't sleep. We can't assume that she has PTSD because she is falsely accused. Maybe it is the opposite?
<modsnip> She’s probably got no idea what’s causing her to not sleep.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #665
And the facts are she was seen by doctors and nurses standing by the babies when they suddenly collapsed.
Standing by the babies is part of her job.

Am I the only one here that, assuming she is guilty, finds it inexplicably peculiar that not a single person has ever once actually witnessed Ms. Letby attacking any of the babies?

Ok, we had the one Doctor testify he thought he interupted Ms. Letby moments after an attack - as she was just standing there watching the baby struggle, but if I am not mistaken that inaction, if it was indeed inaction, did not, of itself, directly cause a collapse.

Personally, if we are going to find this nurse guilty on 22 counts, I want more than "she was standing by the babies when they suddenly collapsed."
That circumstantial evidence alone doesn't meet the threshold for me, and I would imagine nor would it for jurors.. these thoughts of mine bring it back to what I was saying before - about how the strongest evidence is the sheer totality of coincedences surrounding Ms. Letby and the babies deaths.

Can anyone point out any solid evidence that suggests that Ms. Letby intentionally caused a collapse?

Good luck to the jury.

JMO
 
  • #666
  • #667
I don't think she was specifically 'set up' or 'scapegoated' but I very much think that someone found innocent, but having been held in jail for a few years would be a victim.
If so, she was a victim of her own doing. IMO.

Early on, after losing babies in her care, on back to back nights, her colleagues and her superiors strongly suggested she step back for self care and reflection. Instead, she charged forward, insisted upon staying in the most critical care room, and the collapses continued and continued.

When people began to be suspicious, she could have stepped back and worked with the healthier babies. If the collapses continued in her absence, she would have been cleared from all of this mess. But she insisted upon staying around room one, where most of the collapses were happening. She ignored the danger she was putting herself in by continuing with that scenario. JMO
 
  • #668
What specifically in the defendants professional conduct has clearly crossed that boundary? The sending a card to the family where she couldn't attend the funeral (but is implied others did?) I would not consider crossing a boundary if the team did get to know the family as she described. That seems to have been the "worst" individual example, and is certainly something I've known pass without comment before.

"keep going against your senior" - it can be very hard to remember with the fact we've spent 6 months hearing about events that happened primarily in several minutes to hour long periods over a dozen shifts spread over a year, and that 7 years ago - but I never got the impression that this was a general pattern, and most of her colleagues still seem to acknowledge she was an exemplary nurse.

Rather, it seemed that on a few occasions colleagues told her she should take a break (as anyone in such a job gets told multiple times) and she generally insisted she was fine, and she did appear to get on with the job, so I'm not sure the evidence says otherwise.

I said it could point to "hoarding" rather than "obsession" - but I still think we're talking about 30+ handover sheets that have slowly been accumulating in the bottom of the bag over several months - she eventually takes the time to empty out the bag, shoves the handover sheets to one side to figure out how to properly dispose of later, and without realising, she's accumulated 10 here, 5 there, 40 there, 3 there and when the police search, they total up 257 from years of work, presumably amongst many other irrelevant documents - to her, she accidentally takes home a handover sheet a little less than once a week on average, shoves paperwork into a cupboard every now and then and intends to deal with it on a rainy day that never arrived.
The 257 handovers were ALL from the one year period that the charges are from. So she had to take a sheet home nearly every working day in that year one span of time.
 
  • #669
If so, she was a victim of her own doing. IMO.

Early on, after losing babies in her care, on back to back nights, her colleagues and her superiors strongly suggested she step back for self care and reflection. Instead, she charged forward, insisted upon staying in the most critical care room, and the collapses continued and continued.

When people began to be suspicious, she could have stepped back and worked with the healthier babies. If the collapses continued in her absence, she would have been cleared from all of this mess. But she insisted upon staying around room one, where most of the collapses were happening. She ignored the danger she was putting herself in by continuing with that scenario. JMO
So even if completely innocent, Ms Letby still brought this impending, life changing nightmare upon herself, by being somewhat of a workaholic, and by believing she was a vital part of a team helping to bring life into this world?

Wow.
 
  • #670
Standing by the babies is part of her job.

Am I the only one here that, assuming she is guilty, finds it inexplicably peculiar that not a single person has ever once actually witnessed Ms. Letby attacking any of the babies?

Ok, we had the one Doctor testify he thought he interupted Ms. Letby moments after an attack - as she was just standing there watching the baby struggle, but if I am not mistaken that inaction, if it was indeed inaction, did not, of itself, directly cause a collapse.

Personally, if we are going to find this nurse guilty on 22 counts, I want more than "she was standing by the babies when they suddenly collapsed."
That circumstantial evidence alone doesn't meet the threshold for me, and I would imagine nor would it for jurors.. these thoughts of mine bring it back to what I was saying before - about how the strongest evidence is the sheer totality of coincedences surrounding Ms. Letby and the babies deaths.

Can anyone point out any solid evidence that suggests that Ms. Letby intentionally caused a collapse?

Good luck to the jury.

JMO


How many murder trials have you heard of where the defendant was actually seen doing the deed?


These were not just babies that collapsed ...they collapsed because of foul play ...LL was the only person around all the babies...by far .. no one else came near in being there.

Someone added insulin into fluids that should not have insulin in ...again LL was the only person there for both ...aswell as the other 20 counts.

A mother found LL standing doing nothing while her baby screamed with blood around their mouth .. LL did not tell the Dr about this for another 50 min and documents the event at a totally different time to which it occured

She keeps a photo of a bereavement card she sent

She documents babies deaths in her diary

Staff and families report her being odd in their bereavement care

I think that is certainly not nothing...jmo
 
  • #671
So even if completely innocent, Ms Letby still brought this impending, life changing nightmare upon herself, by being somewhat of a workaholic, and by believing she was a vital part of a team helping to bring life into this world?

Wow.
You know what they say though right? Every climber dead on mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, just relax. However they also say that when the going gets tough the tough get going so I’m led to think people say allot of things.
 
  • #672
Standing by the babies is part of her job.

Am I the only one here that, assuming she is guilty, finds it inexplicably peculiar that not a single person has ever once actually witnessed Ms. Letby attacking any of the babies?

Ok, we had the one Doctor testify he thought he interupted Ms. Letby moments after an attack - as she was just standing there watching the baby struggle, but if I am not mistaken that inaction, if it was indeed inaction, did not, of itself, directly cause a collapse.

Personally, if we are going to find this nurse guilty on 22 counts, I want more than "she was standing by the babies when they suddenly collapsed."
That circumstantial evidence alone doesn't meet the threshold for me, and I would imagine nor would it for jurors.. these thoughts of mine bring it back to what I was saying before - about how the strongest evidence is the sheer totality of coincedences surrounding Ms. Letby and the babies deaths.

Can anyone point out any solid evidence that suggests that Ms. Letby intentionally caused a collapse?

Good luck to the jury.

JMO

If responsible, she was never going to be witnessed doing anything. You are unlikely to get 'solid evidence' in this sort of case. She was a nurse of some experience who would know exactly how to avoid bring seen. If guilty, obviously.
 
  • #673
How many murder trials have you heard of where the defendant was actually seen doing the deed?


These were not just babies that collapsed ...they collapsed because of foul play ...LL was the only person around all the babies...by far .. no one else came near in being there.

Someone added insulin into fluids that should not have insulin in ...again LL was the only person there for both ...aswell as the other 20 counts.

A mother found LL standing doing nothing while her baby screamed with blood around their mouth .. LL did not tell the Dr about this for another 50 min and documents the event at a totally different time to which it occured

She keeps a photo of a bereavement card she sent

She documents babies deaths in her diary

Staff and families report her being odd in their bereavement care

I think that is certainly not nothing...jmo
and

"Dr Brearey said there were "no more events" after Letby left the neo-natal unit.

He said: "It was the same staff doing the same job and there were no sudden collapses."

 
  • #674
What specifically in the defendants professional conduct has clearly crossed that boundary? The sending a card to the family where she couldn't attend the funeral (but is implied others did?) I would not consider crossing a boundary if the team did get to know the family as she described. That seems to have been the "worst" individual example, and is certainly something I've known pass without comment before.

"keep going against your senior" - it can be very hard to remember with the fact we've spent 6 months hearing about events that happened primarily in several minutes to hour long periods over a dozen shifts spread over a year, and that 7 years ago - but I never got the impression that this was a general pattern, and most of her colleagues still seem to acknowledge she was an exemplary nurse.

Rather, it seemed that on a few occasions colleagues told her she should take a break (as anyone in such a job gets told multiple times) and she generally insisted she was fine, and she did appear to get on with the job, so I'm not sure the evidence says otherwise.

I said it could point to "hoarding" rather than "obsession" - but I still think we're talking about 30+ handover sheets that have slowly been accumulating in the bottom of the bag over several months - she eventually takes the time to empty out the bag, shoves the handover sheets to one side to figure out how to properly dispose of later, and without realising, she's accumulated 10 here, 5 there, 40 there, 3 there and when the police search, they total up 257 from years of work, presumably amongst many other irrelevant documents - to her, she accidentally takes home a handover sheet a little less than once a week on average, shoves paperwork into a cupboard every now and then and intends to deal with it on a rainy day that never arrived.
Valid points, in part, but equally the issue you raise with the handover sheets appears to be your point of view rather than fact. We simply don’t know if they have accumulated like you describe or not; only what the defence has indicated today.

It was reported these were specific to 2015-16 and we could do with some more clarity on this; you said it was years prior to this she had them in a previous post I think? Do you have a link to your source please?

Regardless, it is an horrendous amount of confidential papers to have stashed up and *if* this is supposedly accumulated over her working life since qualifying, one must ask, where are the rest? Seemingly disposed of properly perhaps, yet she stated she didn’t know how to dispose of them. She’s also been carrying them around in the same bag so I don’t see how she couldn’t have returned them or even, upon looking into her bag thought she could burn or shred them. Just a thought.

In evidence, her senior reported she was asked more than once not to keep going back into the family room of bereaved parents.
Another mother was also distressed by her comments about putting her baby in a Moses basket where the mother stated; “he’s not dead yet”
She was also told no about going back into room and did continue to question this. On other occasions she was advised by her colleagues she needed a break, they were worried for her and she was quite abrupt in her response.
These are just some examples, but the majority of evidence already provided in relation to this (which you might like to read) can be found in the links to previous threads.

Regarding professional conduct and crossing boundaries which you have asked about and I think I have already answered this.
You may not view this as unprofessional conduct, but many seniors and fitness to practice panels do. Of course, you will have your view and I will have mine and that is perfectly fine. We do not have to agree.

JMO
 
  • #675
How many murder trials have you heard of where the defendant was actually seen doing the deed?


These were not just babies that collapsed ...they collapsed because of foul play ...LL was the only person around all the babies...by far .. no one else came near in being there.

Someone added insulin into fluids that should not have insulin in ...again LL was the only person there for both ...aswell as the other 20 counts.

A mother found LL standing doing nothing while her baby screamed with blood around their mouth .. LL did not tell the Dr about this for another 50 min and documents the event at a totally different time to which it occured

She keeps a photo of a bereavement card she sent

She documents babies deaths in her diary

Staff and families report her being odd in their bereavement care

I think that is certainly not nothing...jmo
Well, when you put it like that..

But as I say, the closest we have to a smoking gun is the sheer totality of coincedences surrounding Ms. Letby and the babies collapsing. There is nothing directly linking Ms. Letby and the circumstances outlined in your post.

And to answer your question, most murder trials there is a clear motive, the accused often has a propensity for violence, there is often witness testimony to suggest an attack was imminent, there can be witness testimony of words spoken by an attacker about the attack, there is often CCTV evidence that places the accused nearby the crime scene, or en route to and from the burial site, there is often forensic evidence implicating the accused that goes far beyond a few Facebook searches.

Here we have nothing concrete. We have Ms Letby supposedly being odd and going salsa dancing. Big deal.
 
  • #676
Not to mention the nature of the crimes being alledged.

How could anyone be put through that and not become filled with resentment?
WHY was she put through that though?

Maybe because of curious circumstances that kept happening over and over.

Like on her last day of work, before she leaves on her trip to Ibiza, Baby N collapses for the 3rd time.

Nurse Letby leaves the unit for 8 days in mid June, 2016. All's quiet on the unit---no unexplained collapses that week.

Then, ON THE VERY DAY SHE RETURNS, Baby O, a healthy triplet, collapses unexpectedly and dies. A few hours later his brother also collapses and dies suddenly. And the next day, Baby Q collapses.

So is it any big surprise she was investigated? Those were the three final babies to be looked at, after it had been unfolding like that for a full year.
 
  • #677
Standing by the babies is part of her job.

Am I the only one here that, assuming she is guilty, finds it inexplicably peculiar that not a single person has ever once actually witnessed Ms. Letby attacking any of the babies?

Ok, we had the one Doctor testify he thought he interupted Ms. Letby moments after an attack - as she was just standing there watching the baby struggle, but if I am not mistaken that inaction, if it was indeed inaction, did not, of itself, directly cause a collapse.

Personally, if we are going to find this nurse guilty on 22 counts, I want more than "she was standing by the babies when they suddenly collapsed."
That circumstantial evidence alone doesn't meet the threshold for me, and I would imagine nor would it for jurors.. these thoughts of mine bring it back to what I was saying before - about how the strongest evidence is the sheer totality of coincedences surrounding Ms. Letby and the babies deaths.

Can anyone point out any solid evidence that suggests that Ms. Letby intentionally caused a collapse?

Good luck to the jury.

JMO
And one of her jobs whilst standing by the babies was to make sure they needed urgent intervention if they suddenly collapsed, started screaming, choked up blood or started projectile vomiting: so why would she just stand and do nothing? Even when the alarms went off she did nothing on several occasions, and even turned the alarms off on one occasion.

And of course she’d have made certain no-one would have spotted her when she quickly injected air into their cannulas. ICU units are such that all patients are relatively distanced , and as just one nurse stays with the patient watching them and their monitors, hw could anyone see LL giving a baby a quick injection of insulin or air. Or too much milk?

Why would the doctors feel alarmed by her attitude when they noticed the baby inexplicably deteriorating rapidly for no reason whatsoever, whilst LL just stood watching them? There’s nothing circumstantial about that as the autopsies established the cause of death - and they died due to being injected with air, insulin, and fed too much milk deliberately. It’s actually impossible to for nurses to accidentally do any of those things, so it’s perfectly obvious she did it deliberately.

In answer to your last question, a senior consultant paediatrician said he saw LL standing over one baby who’d “suddenly” collapsed, who she wasn’t even meant to be watching over. And that baby had been perfectly stable just minutes prior to that.

She claims she was conscientious in her job, but considering she switched alarms off, failed to write notes up, took some notes home with her, and was the ONLY nurse present when these babies suddenly died, her claiming she was conscientious is rather a stretch…
 
  • #678
Well, when you put it like that..

But as I say, the closest we have to a smoking gun is the sheer totality of coincedences surrounding Ms. Letby and the babies collapsing. There is nothing directly linking Ms. Letby and the circumstances outlined in your post.

And to answer your question, most murder trials there is a clear motive, the accused often has a propensity for violence, there is often witness testimony to suggest an attack was imminent, there can be witness testimony of words spoken by an attacker about the attack, there is often CCTV evidence that places the accused nearby the crime scene, or en route to and from the burial site, there is often forensic evidence implicating the accused that goes far beyond a few Facebook searches.

Here we have nothing concrete. We have Ms Letby supposedly being odd and going salsa dancing. Big deal.
As for motive, have you ever considered

Factitious Disorder Imposed on Another (FDIA)

 
  • #679
Yes, one of the babies mother’s said how LL walked into the room where she and her husband were after being told their baby had died, and LL was smiling at them and telling them hiw she remembered bathing the baby before he died. If people think that’s normal, then I must be abnormal because I find that disturbing - as did the mother.
Agreed.
 
  • #680
How many murder trials have you heard of where the defendant was actually seen doing the deed?


These were not just babies that collapsed ...they collapsed because of foul play ...LL was the only person around all the babies...by far .. no one else came near in being there.

Someone added insulin into fluids that should not have insulin in ...again LL was the only person there for both ...aswell as the other 20 counts.

A mother found LL standing doing nothing while her baby screamed with blood around their mouth .. LL did not tell the Dr about this for another 50 min and documents the event at a totally different time to which it occured

She keeps a photo of a bereavement card she sent

She documents babies deaths in her diary

Staff and families report her being odd in their bereavement care

I think that is certainly not nothing...jmo
also when she was moved to day shifts;


"Dr Brearey had 'clearly' been aware of the association with Letby, and he recalled how Baby P's collapse had occurred near the start of a day shift. This had also been the case in the death of Baby O.

Questioned by Philip Astbury, prosecuting, he went on to point out that the collapses of Baby N and of a set of twins in the case, Baby L and Baby M also happened during day shifts."

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
125
Guests online
2,820
Total visitors
2,945

Forum statistics

Threads
632,991
Messages
18,634,609
Members
243,364
Latest member
LadyMoffatt
Back
Top