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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #181
So if the insulin wasn't enough to kill a baby, then what? Should the poisoning of the bags be ignored?


Really? It should be fine if someone poisons a newborn's feeding bag with insulin if it isn't enough to kill them? o_O

I am evil and yis.
Sorry, what?

Apart from anything else, we don't know exactly how much insulin was used, but we know it was enough to give a reading that was as high as tests were capable of recording. And the fact that thankfullly medical staff managed to treat the babies and the babies survived does not mean that the intention was not to kill.

Furthermore, regardless of amounts, deliberately giving anybody insulin when they don't need it, is poisoning and should not be ignored.

All JMO, and applicable to whoever deliberately gave those babies insulin, and it's accepted that somebody did.
 
  • #182
I'm so ambivalent about the notes but they certainly do work in terms of sitting and weighing up the issues that meant she was going to take her own life, maybe in a maudlin state after a few drinks or suchlike.

Writing down all the issues that mean her life is not viable? I killed them on purpose, I am evil, I will never get married etc...

In those circumstances, it would be remarkable she *didn't* try to take her own life - or maybe she did and we don't know about it? But as a nurse she would know how to go about it pretty effectively.

JMO MOO
Maybe she did, but I don't think it would be "remarkable" if she didnt.
 
  • #183
Are we going to hear from Ms. Letby later today?

Did she start talking about the baby cases yet?
 
  • #184
What? Has there ever been a killer who didn't at some point deny they did it?
Joanne Dennehy.
Timothy McVeigh.
Doctor of George V.
The two who killed Lee Rigby.
Mosy terrorists ever caught.
 
  • #185
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 expected to continue today (Friday, May 5).

We will be bringing you updates throughout the day.

 
  • #186
Joanne Dennehy.
Timothy McVeigh.
Doctor of George V.
The two who killed Lee Rigby.
Mosy terrorists ever caught.
Of course, they were terrorists who killed because they wanted to send a message. This killer at the hospital was trying to hide their sins, not broadcast them.
 
  • #187
Are we going to hear from Ms. Letby later today?

Did she start talking about the baby cases yet?
I think they were just about to start with these.

I suspect she may be in the witness box for days, possibly weeks!
 
  • #188
Alright, I guess she will start with Babies A and B. Below are excerpts from her interviews about babies A and B:



Child A was given 1ml of milk via a nasogastric tube at 4pm and 6pm.
A nurse had looked after Child A that day. She handed over care to Letby at 8pm before she had been able to administer intravaneous fluids. The fluids were started at the time of the handover - the nurse assisting Letby. Child A was stable at the time of the handover.



The connection of the fluids, Mr Johnson said, would have been after 8.10pm, and it was recorded on the infusion prescription chart at 8.05pm.
At 8.20pm, Child A was reported to have white feet and hands, and Letby called a doctor to the incubator at 8.26pm, as child A was deteriorating.
Resuscitation procedures began, with adrenaline administered to stimulate the heart.
Doctors observed "an odd discolouration on Child A's abdominal skin - flitting patches of pink over blue skin that seemed to appear and disappear".
Mr Johnson said: "This proved to be the first of a series of similar presentations on the skin of babies suddenly and catastrophically collapsing at the CoCH NNU over the succeeding months.
"It is a hallmark of some of the cases in which Lucy Letby injected air into the blood streams of some of these small babies."


"All resuscitation techniques which would be expected to bring a baby back to life failed."
Child A was pronounced dead at 8.58pm. He had died, Mr Johnson said, within 90 minutes of Lucy Letby coming on duty.
She was recorded as being the only witness associated with Child A's collapse.
The doctor noted, at 8.26pm, that Lety was showing an oxygen mask to Child A's face.
The monitors showed Child A had a normal heart rate and good oxygen saturations, and a normal ECG, but was not breathing.
The doctor noted: "an unusual blotchy pattern of well perfused pink skin over the whole of [Child A]'s body coupled with patches of white and blue skin … all over his body."

Medical expert Dr Dewi Evans suggested Child A's collapse was "consistent with a deliberate injection of air or something else into [Child A]'s circulation a minute or two prior to deterioration," Mr Johnson told the court. Only Letby was present.
Another medical expert said the cause was "not some natural disease process, but a dose of air "deliberately administered".
An independent pathologist described the cause of death was 'unascertained', in that there was nothing in the autopsy that pointed to why Child A had died, but the cause was most likely 'exogenous air administration through the longline or UVC'.

Said explanations are also backed up, the prosecution say, by an independent radiologist.



When interviewed by police regarding the circumstances over Child A's death, Letby said she had given fluids to Child A at the time of the change of shifts.
She said within "maybe" five minutes, Child A developed 'almost a rash appearance, like a blotchy red marks on the skin'.
She said she had wondered whether the bag of fluid "was not what we thought it was".
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.
It was suggested by police that Letby had administered an air emolus. She replied it would have been very hard to push air through the line.




In a November 2020 police interview, police put to her that Letby had tracked the family of Child A on Facebook. She said she had no memory of doing so but accepted it if there was evidence on her computer doing so.
The prosecution said there was evidence.

Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders
 
  • #189
This is the 26th week of the trial.

For a recap of everything that has happened in the trial so far, visit our comprehensive index at Countess nurse Lucy Letby: What has happened in trial so far

There you will find links to each week of the prosecution case, and what was said earlier this week as Lucy Letby's defence began on Tuesday.

For our coverage of the trial from Tuesday, visit: Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Tuesday, May 2 - defence begins

And here is a round-up story from that day, as Letby tearfully recalled the occasions when she was arrested by police: Lucy Letby tells court it was ‘sickening’ being blamed for baby deaths
 
  • #190
If it ends up being a proven fact, that ONLY Nurse L was present for all of the charged incidents, then I think that will lead to a very high percentage of probability. All of the other side issues, like the 2nd TPN bag, and the confusion about aspiration, etc, will not be as important. It is very hard to believe that there is another nurse tainting the TPN bags besides the alleged actions of LL. JMO
Sure, I’m not suggesting it’s impossible to convict people of crimes, because clearly it’s not. But the jury still needs to consider each allegation and decide how persuaded they are by the prosecution’s case or whether they doubt it enough to not feel sure that a) a crime took place and b) LL did it.

For example, if I was on the jury, based on the small amount of info I know, there are certain cases that I might not be convinced by. Such as Baby N. I would then have to consider how that impacted the bigger picture. In that scenario, it would remove the suggested pattern that she attacked babies immediately before and after her holiday.

Which is fine, because I may well be compelled enough about some of the other cases that I can safely conclude she is guilty, and don’t need to consider such patterns. However, in doing so, that doesn’t mean I should automatically go back and say “well she probably did do it to Baby N too then”, because it still comes down to whether I am sure based on the evidence presented, and in that case I’m not persuaded it’s been established that an attack took place at all. For the insulin cases, I think it HAS been established the babies were poisoned, and so the train of thought and reasoning around those would be different.

Anyway, it’s matters not a jot, as I’m not on the jury!
 
  • #191
Is there anything expected to happen at court today?
 
  • #192
Alright, I guess she will start with Babies A and B. Below are excerpts from her interviews about babies A and B:



Child A was given 1ml of milk via a nasogastric tube at 4pm and 6pm.
A nurse had looked after Child A that day. She handed over care to Letby at 8pm before she had been able to administer intravaneous fluids. The fluids were started at the time of the handover - the nurse assisting Letby. Child A was stable at the time of the handover.



The connection of the fluids, Mr Johnson said, would have been after 8.10pm, and it was recorded on the infusion prescription chart at 8.05pm.
At 8.20pm, Child A was reported to have white feet and hands, and Letby called a doctor to the incubator at 8.26pm, as child A was deteriorating.
Resuscitation procedures began, with adrenaline administered to stimulate the heart.
Doctors observed "an odd discolouration on Child A's abdominal skin - flitting patches of pink over blue skin that seemed to appear and disappear".
Mr Johnson said: "This proved to be the first of a series of similar presentations on the skin of babies suddenly and catastrophically collapsing at the CoCH NNU over the succeeding months.
"It is a hallmark of some of the cases in which Lucy Letby injected air into the blood streams of some of these small babies."


"All resuscitation techniques which would be expected to bring a baby back to life failed."
Child A was pronounced dead at 8.58pm. He had died, Mr Johnson said, within 90 minutes of Lucy Letby coming on duty.
She was recorded as being the only witness associated with Child A's collapse.
The doctor noted, at 8.26pm, that Lety was showing an oxygen mask to Child A's face.
The monitors showed Child A had a normal heart rate and good oxygen saturations, and a normal ECG, but was not breathing.
The doctor noted: "an unusual blotchy pattern of well perfused pink skin over the whole of [Child A]'s body coupled with patches of white and blue skin … all over his body."

Medical expert Dr Dewi Evans suggested Child A's collapse was "consistent with a deliberate injection of air or something else into [Child A]'s circulation a minute or two prior to deterioration," Mr Johnson told the court. Only Letby was present.
Another medical expert said the cause was "not some natural disease process, but a dose of air "deliberately administered".
An independent pathologist described the cause of death was 'unascertained', in that there was nothing in the autopsy that pointed to why Child A had died, but the cause was most likely 'exogenous air administration through the longline or UVC'.

Said explanations are also backed up, the prosecution say, by an independent radiologist.



When interviewed by police regarding the circumstances over Child A's death, Letby said she had given fluids to Child A at the time of the change of shifts.
She said within "maybe" five minutes, Child A developed 'almost a rash appearance, like a blotchy red marks on the skin'.
She said she had wondered whether the bag of fluid "was not what we thought it was".
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.
It was suggested by police that Letby had administered an air emolus. She replied it would have been very hard to push air through the line.




In a November 2020 police interview, police put to her that Letby had tracked the family of Child A on Facebook. She said she had no memory of doing so but accepted it if there was evidence on her computer doing so.
The prosecution said there was evidence.

Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders
Here is info for Baby A's twin, Baby B [Baby A, her brother, had died a day earlier]:


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.



Dr Dewi Evans concluded Child B was "subjected to form of sabotage" that night, the court hears.

Another medical expert said an airway obstruction would cause a "sudden desaturation and reduction in heart-rate", but would not account for the "florid change in skin colour and perfusion noted at the time".
The medical expert said a "relatively quick recovery" would "only be explained by a dose of air...deliberately administered in the bloodstream".

A blood expert added "no blood disorder would account for the sudden deterioration suffered by [Child B]."



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
].


Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders
 
  • #193
Is there anything expected to happen at court today?
Lucy Letby should be testifying again. Supposedly to discuss the babies cases.
 
  • #194
  • #195
So basically it's dr j who becomes "suspicious"
Very early on.
Painting her in a bad light to others but not direct? <rsbm>
No, this is not what happened.

Dr Jayaram did not become suspicious very early on, or paint her in a bad light to others.

There is a podcast called 'An Association' which sets out the sequence, and it was Dr Brearey who did an informal review after the death of baby D, and it was noticed by him and his colleagues that Lucy Letby was present for all the events in June 2015.

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 19: An Association, "The truth of it is we were thinking the unthinkable. We didn’t want to believe it.” - The Mail.
 
  • #196
The trial is now resuming, with members of the jury entering the courtroom.

Benjamin Myers KC is continuing to ask Lucy Letby questions today.

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.

Mr Myers refers to nursing notes, referring to the UVC line being in the wrong position on June 8 for Child A. It was reinserted but was still in the wrong position. A long line was inserted.

Care was handed over to Lucy Letby at 8pm.



[My prediction for these testimonies about the babies cases----I think Meyers will be able to make each case sound weak, as he discusses them, one by one. But eventually it may become evident that there are so many cases, and it starts being hard to dismiss and downplay every case, as if they are all just unusual coincidences and random bad luck for the defendant. ]
 
  • #197
Mr Myers refers to retrospective nursing notes written by Lucy Letby on the morning of June 9.

The notes include: 'Instructed line not to be used by registrar. [Child A] noted to be jittery, was due to have blood gas and blood sugar taken.

'At 20.20 [Child A's] hands and feets noted to be white. Centrally pale and poor perfusion. [Child A] became apnoeic. Reg in the nursery. [Child A] making nil respiratory effort...'

Child A later died.
Lucy Letby says that, around the time of this taking place, she had moved to Ash House in June 2015.

She said she was "still in the process of moving an unpacking" at the time of Child A's events.

She says she had received a text message that morning asking her to work that night's shift.

A text message from Yvonne Griffiths from 9.21am on June 8, 2015 is shown to the court asking Lucy Letby to work that night.

Letby tells the court she was "frequently" asked to come in and cover neonatal unit shifts at short notice, saying she was very "flexible".

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.

===================================================================================================
[ OK< LL just said that child A had been without fluids for a few hours?------according to the medical logs she had been given milk feedings @ 4 pm and 6 pm. And then she was given an IV of fluids at 8 pm. So that was 2 hours after given her second feed of milk.]


Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders
A medical chart records the fluids going in and out of Child A.
Child A was given 1ml of milk via a nasogastric tube at 4pm and 6pm.
A nurse had looked after Child A that day. She handed over care to Letby at 8pm before she had been able to administer intravaneous fluids. The fluids were started at the time of the handover - the nurse assisting Letby. Child A was stable at the time of the handover.



The connection of the fluids, Mr Johnson said, would have been after 8.10pm, and it was recorded on the infusion prescription chart at 8.05pm.
At 8.20pm, Child A was reported to have white feet and hands, and Letby called a doctor to the incubator at 8.26pm, as child A was deteriorating.
Resuscitation procedures began, with adrenaline administered to stimulate the heart.
Doctors observed "an odd discolouration on Child A's abdominal skin - flitting patches of pink over blue skin that seemed to appear and disappear".
 
  • #198
Mr Myers is retelling the notes for Child A's birth. Child A, a baby boy, was born with antiphospholipid syndrome.
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.


Saves people googling it - if like me they’ve never heard of it.
 
  • #199
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.
 
  • #200
Joanne Dennehy.
Timothy McVeigh.
Doctor of George V.
The two who killed Lee Rigby.
Mosy terrorists ever caught.
Would’ve been difficult to deny as I think most were seen on camera
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
58
Guests online
2,766
Total visitors
2,824

Forum statistics

Threads
632,751
Messages
18,631,198
Members
243,278
Latest member
En0Ka
Back
Top