UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #20

[WaxLyrical]

rsbm

APS is an autoimmune condition. This means the immune system, which usually protects the body from infection and illness, attacks healthy tissue by mistake.

In APS, the immune system produces abnormal antibodies called antiphospholipid antibodies.

These target proteins attached to fat molecules (phospholipids), which makes the blood more likely to clot.

It's not known what causes the immune system to produce abnormal antibodies.

Diagnosing APS can sometimes be difficult, as some of the symptoms are similar to multiple sclerosis.

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS)

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), also known as Hughes syndrome, is a disorder of the immune system that causes an increased risk of blood clots.

www.nhs.uk

Saves people googling it - if like me they’ve never heard of it.

I just did a quick Google too. It also causes a red/blue lacy rash on the skin.

Interesting.

I’m right in saying this baby had a post mortem though?

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Did we hear in the prosecution case for baby A any facts about APS? I’d like to know the mortality rate in infants, from what I’ve seen online, in the cases where death occurs it is usually due to a blood clot. Was baby A found to have a blood clot? Was treatment already being given for the APS at the time baby A collapsed and died? I’d guess that if treatment had started then the risk of death is much lower than without treatment. I hope this is touched on by the prosecution in cross. All MOO

 

[katydid23]

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, May 5 - defence continues

The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more, is…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

Letby says she began the 'usual procedure' of administering Neopuff to Child A.

Child A's heart stopped and a 'crash call' was put out. Letby says that is an emergency line for doctors to arrive urgently. Dr Ravi Jayaram arrived immediately and another nurse arrived shortly afterwards.

Letby says she cannot recall the resuscitation efforts, and says it was "an unexpected, huge shock", saying she had just gone through the doors and "then this was happening".

Child A died shortly before 9pm.

Letby says she, as designated nurse, arranged hand and foot prints for Child A as part of the hospital's 'bereavement checklist' which the court heard about on Tuesday. A nursing colleague helped assist in the hand and footprints, as that was a two-staff procedure.

A baptism was offered to Child A during resuscitation, and Child A and Child B were baptised together. The court hears this was part of the practice.

Letby said she felt after Child A, the bag of fluids and the long line "should be retained". She says she labelled the bag as "at the time...we should be checking everything in relation to the line and fluids" as it could be "tested" afterwards.

She says she did not know what happened to the bag afterwards.

[In an interview in June 2019, Letby said she had asked for all fluids to be kept from the bag at the end to be checked, but the prosecution said there was was no record of her having made such a request.]

 

[ColourPurple]

Letby tells the court the first she knew she was going to be caring for Child A, in nursery room 1 was when she arrived for the handover at 7.30pm.

She recalls there was "a lot of activity" in the nursery, with Dr David Harkness doing a line procedure and nurse Melanie Taylor sorting fluids for Child A. She explained Child A had been without fluids for a few hours.


An intensive care chart is shown for Child A - after 4pm on June 9, the 'cannula tissued' which meant Child A's fluids had stopped, the court is told.

A clinical note is shown to the court about the UVC and long line insertions.

Letby says she was told by Dr Harkness and nurse Taylor the long line was suitable for use to administer 10% glucose.

A collective handover had taken place prior to Letby arriving at the nursery, lasting about 20 minutes.

Letby tells the court when fluids are administered via a long line, one of the two nurses present has to be sterilised, and in this case that was nurse Melanie Taylor, handling the bag, cleaning the long line, attaching the bag to the long line 'port' on Child A's left arm and making sure the line was 'flushed'.

Letby was, she says, the 'dirty nurse' (ie unsterilised) for this procedure.

Letby say she turned her attention to hanging the bag on to the drip stand cotside and programming the pump.

Letby says the "usual practice" is for the line to be flushed with sodium chloride prior to fluid administration. She says she did not observe if that took place.

The 10% dextrose solution is shown from a fluid prescription chart as beginning at 8.05pm.

Letby says Melanie Taylor went over to a computer to start writing up notes.

Letby said she was doing some checks - on cotside equipment, suction points, emergency equipment.

She says Dr Harkness at this point was doing a procedure on twin Child B at this point.

Letby says she observed Child A to be "jittery".


Letby says "jittery" was an abnormal finding for Child A. It was "an involuntary jerking of the limbs".

She says she remembered it was "noticeable".

Child A's monitor sounded and his "colour changed".

Letby says the alarm sounded, but she did not know what it indicated at the time.

She says she noted Child A' "hands and feet were white".

She went over to Child A, who was not breathing, so they went to Neopuff him.

Letby and nurse Taylor disconnected the 10% dextrose, on Dr Harkness's advice.

Referring to 'centrally pale', Letby says that refers to Child A being pale in the abdomen and torso.

Child A was apnoeic - "not breathing".

Nurse Caroline Bennion was also in nursery room 1, and had been during handover, the court hears.

Interesting how much detail she remembers now compared to her police interviews. I sense this is going to be a running theme now she's heard what everybody else has said.

JMO

 

[ColourPurple]

Did we hear in the prosecution case for baby A any facts about APS? I’d like to know the mortality rate in infants, from what I’ve seen online, in the cases where death occurs it is usually due to a blood clot. Was baby A found to have a blood clot? Was treatment already being given for the APS at the time baby A collapsed and died? I’d guess that if treatment had started then the risk of death is much lower than without treatment. I hope this is touched on by the prosecution in cross. All MOO

I can only remember hearing his mother had a condition rather than Baby A himself.

 

[katydid23]

Letby said, in reaction to Child A's death, she was "stunned, in complete shock...it felt like we had walked through the door into this awful situation - that was the first time I met [Child A] and [Child A's] parents".

A nursing colleague messaged Letby on June 9, praising her for how she handled the sitation with Child A: "...You did fab."

Letby responded: "...Appreciate you saying that & Thanks for letting me do it but supporting me so well x"

Letby says the network of support among colleagues in messaging each other outside of work was "something we all did".

Letby says there was a debrief after Child A had died, a few days later, led by Dr Jayaram, which discussed if there was anything to learn from the event.

Letby said it was "more clinically based" rather than emotional support.

She said the event "affected her" emotionally, and denies causing Child A any deliberate harm.

Letby says, of that night: "You never forget something like that".

 

[Blondiexoxo]

I can only remember hearing his mother had a condition rather than Baby A himself.

This is what Myers has just said:
The focus turns to the case of Child A, born on June, 7, 2015, twin of Child B. Child A died the following day.

Mr Myers is retelling the notes for Child A's birth. Child A, a baby boy, was born with antiphospholipid syndrome.

He died the following day.

I wonder if we are going to hear from a medical expert about this, I remember hearing that the mother of one of the babies had a condition but can’t recall if it was baby A. It’s been so long since we heard the prosecution case for baby A, we could probably do with having a side by side comparison once they’ve finished giving evidence for each baby so we can see what the prosecution say happened vs what the defense say.

 

[katydid23]

Here is what Meyers said about Baby A during opening statements:



Regarding the point of air embolus cases
The defence "accept it is a theoretical possibility", but that "does not establish very much".

The defence do not accept, for Child A, an air embolus was the cause, but one of "sub-optimal care", as a result of either "lack of fluids" or "various lines put into him, with potential to interfere with his heart rate".

"You will hear in this case, that the air present after death does not indicate an air embolus."
Mr Myers said air present in the abdomen "can happen post-mortem".

UK - Lucy Letby Trial - Media, Maps & Timeline *NO DISCUSSION*

END OF PROSECUTION OPENING SPEECH Chester Standard: 11:37am Mr Johnson: "Following those events, the consultants suspected that the deaths and life-threatening collapses of these 17 children were not medically explicable and were the result of the actions of Lucy Letby. "No doubt they were...

www.websleuths.com

 

[Becky53]

I just did a quick Google too. It also causes a red/blue lacy rash on the skin.

Interesting.

I’m right in saying this baby had a post mortem though?

Can’t remember re post mortem but will google the condition again as NHS site doesn’t mention a lacey rash. I used NHS site as it seemed most reliable for me with the information they give.

Wonder what BM KC has to explain it in others the babies?

 

[Tortoise]

Evidence heard in the trial in November -
Professor Sally Kinsey, Prosecution Expert Witness,
Retired Consultant Paediatric Haematologist (Blood Expert)

11:29am

Professor Sally Kinsey, a blood expert, is going to give evidence in relation to a number of the cases so far in the trial.

11:32am

Professor Kinsey confirms she was approached by Cheshire Police to look at several cases in the course of this trial. One is yet to come, while the other three are the cases of Child A and Child B (both twins) and Child F.
She also confirms she has looked at the records of Child F's twin brother, Child E, for the purpose of her investigation.
She has written reports for each case and set out the relevant backgrounds for each child, the court hears.

11:45am

Her first report is dated March 4, 2020, relating to Child A.
The court hears the conditions that Child A and Child B's mother had before her birth, and the decision to deliver the twins by C-section in June 2015.
The events of Child A's treatment at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit, subsequent collapse and death, are relayed in court.

11:57am

Child A's blood count was considered 'normal' for his age.
She said she had considered whether Child A's mother's auto-immune disease could have been a significant factor in the death of Child A.
Said auto-immune disease was a rare condition (affecting about 50 in 100,000 people) which affected the mother, which can cause increased blood clotting.
It is "well recognised" that pregnancy can cause issues, which can cause nutritional problems for babies in the womb, and a C-section can be required "to save the life of the mother and the child".
The court hears it can cause premature birth and blood clotting for the mother.
Nicholas Johnson KC, for the prosecution, asks: "Did the...syndrome pass on to [Child A or Child B]?"
Professor Kinsey: "No, that is not the case."

11:58am

Mr Johnson says there was concern the condition had passed from mother to son, but says Professor Kinsey is sure it did not.
"It didn't," Professor Kinsey replies.

Prof Kinsey says she is sure the cause of Child A's death does not have a haematological origin.

There was, like Child A, no passing on of the mother's auto-immune disease to Child B, she adds.
The question of air embolus is raised. She said she had made similar observations to Child A.
The professor says there was no haematological evidence that could have caused Child B's collapse, and wanted to draw attention to the skin discolouration in the area around the chin, which she said was most likely a 'rash' caused when medical staff were trying to administer air.

Mr Myers refers to the summary/opinion for Child A, and whether there was any haematological significance for Child A. He says that is not in dispute.


Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Tuesday, November 29

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Evidence heard in the trial in November -
Professor Sally Kinsey, Prosecution Expert Witness,
Retired Consultant Paediatric Haematologist (Blood Expert)

11:29am

Professor Sally Kinsey, a blood expert, is going to give evidence in relation to a number of the cases so far in the trial.

11:32am

Professor Kinsey confirms she was approached by Cheshire Police to look at several cases in the course of this trial. One is yet to come, while the other three are the cases of Child A and Child B (both twins) and Child F.
She also confirms she has looked at the records of Child F's twin brother, Child E, for the purpose of her investigation.
She has written reports for each case and set out the relevant backgrounds for each child, the court hears.

11:45am

Her first report is dated March 4, 2020, relating to Child A.
The court hears the conditions that Child A and Child B's mother had before her birth, and the decision to deliver the twins by C-section in June 2015.
The events of Child A's treatment at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit, subsequent collapse and death, are relayed in court.

11:57am

Child A's blood count was considered 'normal' for his age.
She said she had considered whether Child A's mother's auto-immune disease could have been a significant factor in the death of Child A.
Said auto-immune disease was a rare condition (affecting about 50 in 100,000 people) which affected the mother, which can cause increased blood clotting.
It is "well recognised" that pregnancy can cause issues, which can cause nutritional problems for babies in the womb, and a C-section can be required "to save the life of the mother and the child".
The court hears it can cause premature birth and blood clotting for the mother.
Nicholas Johnson KC, for the prosecution, asks: "Did the...syndrome pass on to [Child A or Child B]?"
Professor Kinsey: "No, that is not the case."

11:58am

Mr Johnson says there was concern the condition had passed from mother to son, but says Professor Kinsey is sure it did not.
"It didn't," Professor Kinsey replies.

Prof Kinsey says she is sure the cause of Child A's death does not have a haematological origin.

There was, like Child A, no passing on of the mother's auto-immune disease to Child B, she adds.
The question of air embolus is raised. She said she had made similar observations to Child A.
The professor says there was no haematological evidence that could have caused Child B's collapse, and wanted to draw attention to the skin discolouration in the area around the chin, which she said was most likely a 'rash' caused when medical staff were trying to administer air.

Mr Myers refers to the summary/opinion for Child A, and whether there was any haematological significance for Child A. He says that is not in dispute.


Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Tuesday, November 29

So baby A did not have APS? Yet Myers just said he did?
The focus turns to the case of Child A, born on June, 7, 2015, twin of Child B. Child A died the following day.

Mr Myers is retelling the notes for Child A's birth. Child A, a baby boy, was born with antiphospholipid syndrome.

He died the following day.

Or was that a reporting error?

 

[WaxLyrical]

I’m confused, why would the clinical notes say they both had this syndrome if they did not?

 

[Becky53]

Interesting how much detail she remembers now compared to her police interviews. I sense this is going to be a running theme now she's heard what everybody else has said.

JMO

That’s what I was thinking as she’s very detailed. I wonder if she’s referring to her notes which I also assumed she saw/heard during her police interviews.

 

[katydid23]

Mr Myers turns to the case of Child B, Child A's twin sister.

Child B was born on June 7, 2015, weighing 1,669g. Mr Myers says Child B was born with antiphospholipid syndrome, as noted on a clinical note.

Mr Myers notes that, at birth, Child B was 'blue and floppy, poor tone, HR approx 50.'

Resuscitation efforts were required, with a series of inflation breaths. Intubation was successful after a couple of attempts, and Child B stabilised on the evening of June 7.

Mr Myers refers to nursing notes written retrospectively on the morning June 10.

Child B had desaturated to 75% 'shortly before midnight', with Child B's CPAP prongs pushed out of nose.

'Prongs and head reposition. Took a little while and O2 to recover. HR remained stable.'

'0030. Sudden desaturation to 50%. Cyanosed in appearance. Centrally shut down, limp, apnoeic. CMV via Neopuff commenced and chest movement seen...'

'Became bradycardiac to 80s. Successfully intuinated...and HR improved quickly. 0.9% saline bolus given and colour started to improve almost as quickly as it had deteriorated. Started to breathe for self...'

Lucy Letby says she does not have much recollection of the night shift for June 9-10, in respect of Child B.

A diagram shows Letby was in nursery room 3 for that night shift, looking after two babies. Letby says without that diagram, she would not have recalled who was doing what from that night.

 

[ColourPurple]

This is what Myers has just said:
The focus turns to the case of Child A, born on June, 7, 2015, twin of Child B. Child A died the following day.

Mr Myers is retelling the notes for Child A's birth. Child A, a baby boy, was born with antiphospholipid syndrome.

He died the following day.

I wonder if we are going to hear from a medical expert about this, I remember hearing that the mother of one of the babies had a condition but can’t recall if it was baby A. It’s been so long since we heard the prosecution case for baby A, we could probably do with having a side by side comparison once they’ve finished giving evidence for each baby so we can see what the prosecution say happened vs what the defense say.

Yes, I dont think we've heard this until today . I don't think they even named the mother's exact condition in newspaper reports before, but I do recall some people were discussing antiphospholipid syndrome in relation to the mother, so maybe it was mentioned in court?

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Here is what Meyers said about Baby A during opening statements:



Regarding the point of air embolus cases
The defence "accept it is a theoretical possibility", but that "does not establish very much".

The defence do not accept, for Child A, an air embolus was the cause, but one of "sub-optimal care", as a result of either "lack of fluids" or "various lines put into him, with potential to interfere with his heart rate".

"You will hear in this case, that the air present after death does not indicate an air embolus."
Mr Myers said air present in the abdomen "can happen post-mortem".

UK - Lucy Letby Trial - Media, Maps & Timeline *NO DISCUSSION*

END OF PROSECUTION OPENING SPEECH Chester Standard: 11:37am Mr Johnson: "Following those events, the consultants suspected that the deaths and life-threatening collapses of these 17 children were not medically explicable and were the result of the actions of Lucy Letby. "No doubt they were...

www.websleuths.com

So far for baby A there is the APS that baby A may or may not have had, prosecution witness had said the syndrome had not passed to baby A, yet Myers just said he did have it. We have LL insinuating something was going on with the fluid bag that she apparently wanted to keep (no evidence to suggest she asked that it be kept), and then the defence reject air embolism as the cause of death, BUT if it was an AE then it can happen post mortem anyway.

I’m feeling that saying…. Flinging stuff at the wall to see what sticks, IMO.

 

[ColourPurple]

That’s what I was thinking as she’s very detailed. I wonder if she’s referring to her notes which I also assumed she saw/heard during her police interviews.

It was reported that she's been making notes during the trial.

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Yes, I dont think we've heard this until today . I don't think they even named the mother's exact condition in newspaper reports before, but I do recall some people were discussing antiphospholipid syndrome in relation to the mother, so maybe it was mentioned in court?

Posted above by Tortoise (I’d consider Tortoise an expert by now ) that Sally Kinsey Blood Expert for the prosecution testified that the APS did NOT pass to baby A. Very confused by this now, hopefully it will be cleared up on cross!

 

[ColourPurple]

Evidence heard in the trial in November -
Professor Sally Kinsey, Prosecution Expert Witness,
Retired Consultant Paediatric Haematologist (Blood Expert)

11:29am

Professor Sally Kinsey, a blood expert, is going to give evidence in relation to a number of the cases so far in the trial.

11:32am

Professor Kinsey confirms she was approached by Cheshire Police to look at several cases in the course of this trial. One is yet to come, while the other three are the cases of Child A and Child B (both twins) and Child F.
She also confirms she has looked at the records of Child F's twin brother, Child E, for the purpose of her investigation.
She has written reports for each case and set out the relevant backgrounds for each child, the court hears.

11:45am

Her first report is dated March 4, 2020, relating to Child A.
The court hears the conditions that Child A and Child B's mother had before her birth, and the decision to deliver the twins by C-section in June 2015.
The events of Child A's treatment at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit, subsequent collapse and death, are relayed in court.

11:57am

Child A's blood count was considered 'normal' for his age.
She said she had considered whether Child A's mother's auto-immune disease could have been a significant factor in the death of Child A.
Said auto-immune disease was a rare condition (affecting about 50 in 100,000 people) which affected the mother, which can cause increased blood clotting.
It is "well recognised" that pregnancy can cause issues, which can cause nutritional problems for babies in the womb, and a C-section can be required "to save the life of the mother and the child".
The court hears it can cause premature birth and blood clotting for the mother.
Nicholas Johnson KC, for the prosecution, asks: "Did the...syndrome pass on to [Child A or Child B]?"
Professor Kinsey: "No, that is not the case."

11:58am

Mr Johnson says there was concern the condition had passed from mother to son, but says Professor Kinsey is sure it did not.
"It didn't," Professor Kinsey replies.

Prof Kinsey says she is sure the cause of Child A's death does not have a haematological origin.

There was, like Child A, no passing on of the mother's auto-immune disease to Child B, she adds.
The question of air embolus is raised. She said she had made similar observations to Child A.
The professor says there was no haematological evidence that could have caused Child B's collapse, and wanted to draw attention to the skin discolouration in the area around the chin, which she said was most likely a 'rash' caused when medical staff were trying to administer air.

Mr Myers refers to the summary/opinion for Child A, and whether there was any haematological significance for Child A. He says that is not in dispute.


Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Tuesday, November 29

Thanks, this is the part I was remembering and it's at odds with what Myers is saying now:

She said she had considered whether Child A's mother's auto-immune disease could have been a significant factor in the death of Child A.
Said auto-immune disease was a rare condition (affecting about 50 in 100,000 people) which affected the mother, which can cause increased blood clotting.
It is "well recognised" that pregnancy can cause issues, which can cause nutritional problems for babies in the womb, and a C-section can be required "to save the life of the mother and the child".
The court hears it can cause premature birth and blood clotting for the mother.
Nicholas Johnson KC, for the prosecution, asks: "Did the...syndrome pass on to [Child A or Child B]?"
Professor Kinsey: "No, that is not the case."

11:58am

Mr Johnson says there was concern the condition had passed from mother to son, but says Professor Kinsey is sure it did not.
"It didn't," Professor Kinsey replies.

 

[katydid23]

Mr Myers turns to the case of Child B, Child A's twin sister.

Child B was born on June 7, 2015, weighing 1,669g. Mr Myers says Child B was born with antiphospholipid syndrome, as noted on a clinical note.

Mr Myers notes that, at birth, Child B was 'blue and floppy, poor tone, HR approx 50.'

Resuscitation efforts were required, with a series of inflation breaths. Intubation was successful after a couple of attempts, and Child B stabilised on the evening of June 7.

Mr Myers refers to nursing notes written retrospectively on the morning June 10.

Child B had desaturated to 75% 'shortly before midnight', with Child B's CPAP prongs pushed out of nose.

'Prongs and head reposition. Took a little while and O2 to recover. HR remained stable.'

'0030. Sudden desaturation to 50%. Cyanosed in appearance. Centrally shut down, limp, apnoeic. CMV via Neopuff commenced and chest movement seen...'

'Became bradycardiac to 80s. Successfully intuinated...and HR improved quickly. 0.9% saline bolus given and colour started to improve almost as quickly as it had deteriorated. Started to breathe for self...'

Lucy Letby says she does not have much recollection of the night shift for June 9-10, in respect of Child B.

A diagram shows Letby was in nursery room 3 for that night shift, looking after two babies. Letby says without that diagram, she would not have recalled who was doing what from that night.

Here is what the prosecution claims in opening:


Count 2: Child B attempted murder

Child B is the elder twin sister of Child A, born in June 2015. She required breathing support via a ventilator at birth.
Attempts to fit an umbilical vein catheter (UVC) twice failed, so a long line (IV) was inserted for fluids to be administered successfully.
Breathing support gradually lessened and Child B was stable.



A designated night-shift nurse was responsible for Child B. Shortly before midnight, the blood/oxygen levels had fallen to 75% and the Cpap nasal prongs were dislodged from Child B's nostrils. The nurse repositioned the prongs and the levels recovered.
Just after midnight, Letby started a bag of liquid feed with Child B, with the nurse, through an IV line.
At 12.16am Letby - while not Child B's designated nurse - took her blood gases.
About 28 hours after her twin brother had died, at about 12.30am, Child B's alarm sounded and Letby had called the nurse to the child's incubator. Child B was not breathing.



A crash call was put out at 12.33am, and resuscitation began. The nurse noted purple blotches and white patches all over Child B's body, and the heart rate had dropped.
In a witness statement three years later, Letby's colleague, the designated nurse for Child B, said she and Letby had been preparing antibiotics at the time of the collapse.
After efforts to resuscitate Child B, Child B "recovered very quickly".
A doctor subsequently found "loops of gas filled bowel".
The prosecution say this was a finding replicated many times in the upcoming cases.
Child B improved until being discharged the following month.

Letby police interview:

In police interview, Letby was asked about the circumstances regarding the connection of a liquid feed bag at 12.05am. She said she had looked at paperwork for the lipid syringe (an addition to the liquid feed bag to children not being given milk), and said the prescription was "not her writing" but "she had signed for it" and "ideally it should have been co-signed by somebody".
The rules are that two nurses have to sign for things administered to a baby.



Letby told police she had conducted observations on Child B, but the other nurse was the allocated nurse.
Letby also said it was the other nurse who had alerted her to the problem with Child B.
In a June 2019 police interview, Letby said it was her signature on the blood gas record at 12.15am, just before Child B collapsed.
The prosecution say this is an example of Lucy Letby signing the charts for a baby who was not her designated patient at a time just before the child collapsed.



In November 2020, Letby was asked by police about a handover sheet relating to Child B found at her home address in a search.
The sheet showed she had been the designated nurse for two babies in a different room that night.
Mr Johnson said: "Here you can see that we have twins who were born prematurely but in pretty good condition.
"No one expected them to face grave problems, yet both suffered unusual symptoms within a short time of each other which in interview Lucy Letby said were similar.
"The prosecution’s expert paediatricians say that the collapses and skin mottling were the result of air being injected into their bloodstream.
"The first injection caused the death of [Child A], the second the dangerous collapse of his sister.
"We say that there is no plausible alternative to an air injection [air embolus]. The fact that it happened in 2 cases just over 24 hours apart shows that these were no accidents.
"Lucy Letby was the only person present [with Child A] at the time he collapsed...and was in the room when the same happened to [Child B].
"We also say that you are entitled to look at the evidence of what happened to [Child A and B] in the context of one, what Lucy Letby did to other children and two, most starkly, her having poisoned [two other children] with insulin."

Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders