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

[Blondiexoxo]

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.

Aren’t the prosecution cross examining LL after she’s given her version of events for each baby? I was expecting them to cross examine what she’s just said concerning baby A. Maybe she’s just repeated what she’d already told police. So nothing to cross. I’m confused

 

[Jazmania]

So LL, Melanie Taylor and Dr Harkness were all in nursery 1 room before A collapsed. I'm just looking back at their testimonies to see how they match.

..........

Miss Taylor said she would have relayed the observations to Lucy Letby at the hand-over, and there were no concerns other than the lack of fluids Child A had had for a couple of hours.
The 10% dextrose IV fluid is prescribed, via long line, prescribed by a doctor. A prescription form is shown the court and Miss Taylor explains the various columns and signatures.
Miss Taylor: "All fluids will be checked by two nurses - it is signed [on the prescription form] that I have checked it with Lucy Letby."
The time and date the medication is started is June 8 at 8.05pm.


3:46pm

Miss Taylor explains emergency equipment checks are made at the time of the hand-over - in this case, 8pm.

3:54pm

Miss Taylor said she would have started writing up a nursing note, but Child A then started deteriorating, so the note would not have been saved on the computer.
She said she would have been able to see Child A's incubator when sat at the computer.
She said: "Lucy Letby was standing by the incubator. Initially I stayed there [when Child A started deteriorating] as he was fairly stable and Lucy Letby was there, but when I realised he was not recovering from deterioration I got up to help Lucy Letby."
She said the baby monitor would have alarmed.
Miss Taylor said she is unable to say how long she had been away from the incubator, and thinks it was after the dextrose was administered.
Miss Taylor said she thought Child A was going to recover "quite quickly" as such desaturations were not that uncommon, but when it became clear he was not going to recover she went to help.
"I kept thinking he was going to recover, but he didn't."
Miss Taylor said she was not directly involved in the resuscitation, but involved in getting adrenaline medication.
The following day Miss Taylor was called back to the hospital to finish the notes which had not been completed at the time, 'due to the trauma of what had gone on'.

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 19

11:24am

Miss Taylor says she cannot remember whether it was herself or Lucy Letby who administered the fluids.
Mr Myers said "two nurses" are involved in the process, and one has to be in sterile conditions.
Miss Taylor: "I honestly don't know whether it was me or Lucy [who was in sterile clothing]."

11:26am

The defence say it was Miss Taylor who was the one in sterile clothing for the fluid administration, with Lucy Letby assisting. Miss Taylor says it could have been that, or the other way around.

11:30am

Mr Myers: "When the deterioration commenced, you were at your computer making notes?"
"Yes."
A note by Miss Taylor is made at 8.18pm for Child B.
"It shows you were at the computer at 8.18pm?"
"Yes."
"Was Dr Harkness also in that room?"
"I don't remember."
"You could see where [Child A] incubator was, and the alarm sounded."
"Yes."
"When you went over to Child A, could you recall whether he was breathing or not?"
"I don't recall."
"Would it be fair to say that what followed makes it difficult to recall - that there is a lot of activity surrounding the cot?"
"When you realise that extra support is needed, yes."

11:31am

Mr Myers: "Lucy Letby went to support the family at one point, do you recall that?"
Miss Taylor: "I don't remember that."
Miss Taylor says if Letby was the designated nurse, she would be involved with assisting the resuscitation attempts.
She adds that designated nurses would often be the one to provide support to the family afterwards.

11:32am

Memory boxes, Miss Taylor says, are collated with permission of the family.
Mr Myers: "Do you recall about whether there was any discussion about whether the fluid bag should be kept?"
Miss Taylor: "I don't recall that, no."

 

[Sundial]

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.]

Funny because I remember reading way back
in the threads she’d mentioned that bag was in the sluice.
For those who might not know, the sluice is a room generally used for bodily waste (eg commode pots/urine samples/testing etc). Unless I’m thinking of baby E (the bag wasnt what we thought it was and asked for it to be kept). There was mention in the evidence of it being put in the sluice area for “keeping” to check it.

 

[Tortoise]

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?

it was in Dan's tweets in October

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

The doctor tells the court that in light of Child B's twin brother dying 24 hours before, advice was sought from various medics across the country on whether Child A and/or Child B had been affected by the mum's antiphospholipid syndrome

 

[Tortoise]

Aren’t the prosecution cross examining LL after she’s given her version of events for each baby? I was expecting them to cross examine what she’s just said concerning baby A. Maybe she’s just repeated what she’d already told police. So nothing to cross. I’m confused

no, cross will happen when she finishes her evidence in chief (for everything).

 

[Jazmania]

For Dr Harnkess:

12:24pm

Dr Harkness said because the night of June 8 was a "traumatic event", his memory of entering the unit room was "quite fresh" and he explains there were three babies in the nursery room 1 - the intensive care unit, at the time, and two of them would have been Child A and Child B. He describes which incubators they would have been in, which are adjacent to each other.
A video of the layout of the nursery room one is played to the court and Dr Harkness confirms where Child A and Child B would have been located.

12:31pm

Dr Harkness's x-ray review said at the time the x-ray was available to review, he was "scrubbed inserting a line into another patient", which meant he had to adhere to sterilised conditions, he explains.
The doctor's opinion at the time was the position of the long line was "less than perfect", the prosecution said.
Dr Harkness said that following consultation and in accordance with guidelines, the position of the longline was "actually correct".

12:35pm

He said he was "just about finished with [another baby]" when he was called to Child A at 8.26pm.
Bagging was started "via Neopuff immediately".
The saturations, which "should be in the 90%'s", were in the '70s-80%'s'. The heart rate was "slightly on the lower side", Dr Harkness records.
He said he can remember the events.

12:37pm

He said he was called "by nursing staff" over problems with Child A's breathing.
A junior doctor took on the responsibility of making contemporaneous notes for Dr Harkness during the event, the court hears.

12:39pm

He said it was "most likely nursing staff" who started the Neopuff bagging process by the time he arrived.
"Good chest movement seen" meant there was not a blockage, Dr Harkness explains.

12:44pm

Dr Harkness said as far as he was concerned the longline was the last thing which was inserted, so he removed it at 8.27pm.
He said: "That was my immediate thought. In hindsight...there was no possible link [between its insertion and the collapse]."
He said if the long line had been moved further in, towards the heart, it could have caused a significant increase in the heart rate, or other heart complications. There was no evidence then, or since, which had supported that, he explains.
Help was called at 8.27pm.
Child A was "intubated at the first attempt".

Dr Harkness is asked to examine a clinical note.
During the time he was looking at a third baby in the room, he was scrubbed up and sterilised for a procedure which "takes a lot of concentration."
"Typically, you are left to your own devices."
He said it was shortly after that (about 1-2 minutes), he was urgently called to Child A.

.............


So from LL's testimony I though Harkness would have been close by A's cot shortly before he collapsed. But his testimony suggests he was possibly in another room, or far enough away that he had to be called to A to help

 

[ColourPurple]

it was in Dan's tweets in October

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

The doctor tells the court that in light of Child B's twin brother dying 24 hours before, advice was sought from various medics across the country on whether Child A and/or Child B had been affected by the mum's antiphospholipid syndrome

Good find! Thanks!

 

[katydid23]

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.

Meyers did not say that babies A or B had an auto-immune disease at birth, that I can find:
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



For Child B, the defence say she had been born in a "precarious condition" [because of prematurity] and there were no signs of diagnosing an "air embolus".
The defence say prosecution experts had been "influenced" into believing harm was done.
The defence say Child B had other episodes where she struggled to breathe, after the indictment.

 

[Jazmania]

it was in Dan's tweets in October

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

The doctor tells the court that in light of Child B's twin brother dying 24 hours before, advice was sought from various medics across the country on whether Child A and/or Child B had been affected by the mum's antiphospholipid syndrome

Yes an anonymous consultants testified:

10:57am

The consultant tells the court discussions had been ongoing since the evening of June 9, in light of Child B's twin brother dying, on whether Child A and/or Child B had been affected by the mum's blood condition.
Consultants at Great Ormond Street Hospital had said they "did not feel" the mother's condition would affect the baby "in any way", while consultants at Alder Hey Hospital suggested further blood tests being carried.
Following Child B's collapse, the blood observations taken were 'good', the court heard, and meant the requested extra tests were "held off".

 

[katydid23]

Mr Myers asks how Letby would know if a nurse needed assistance in a non-emergency situation. Letby says they would come and ask.

Letby says CPAP prongs can be dislodged "very easily" and it happened "frequently" in babies.

Before 12.30am, Letby says she believed she carried out a blood gas test on Child B, at about 12.15am.

A fluid chart is shown to the court.

She says at 10pm on June 9, lipids were administered.

A blood gas chart is shown with a reading at 12.16am, with Lucy Letby's signature initials.

She says it was "usual practice" that two nurses would be involved in the blood gas test, and she says she had no other involvement with Child B in the run-up to her deterioration.

Letby is asked about a morphine bolus administered to Child B, as referred to in police interviews, when establishing contact with the baby.

Mr Myers says, to be clear about the timing of this morphine bolus, a prescription is shown to the court, with the 'time started' being 1.10am. The court hears this is 40 minutes after the collapse.




Letby says she cannot recall, "with any clarity", events in the build-up to Child B's collapse.

She says she knows there was a deterioration "fairly soon" after the blood gas test.

She said both she and a nursing colleague were in nursery 1 when Child B's colour changed - "becoming quite mottled", "dark", "all over". She says the nursing colleague alerted her to the deterioration.

Letby is asked if she had seen that mottling before. Letby said it was not unusual but it was a concern, in light of Child A's death the night before.

Child A was "pale" but Child B had "purple mottling".

She says she and the nursing colleague were joined by a doctor at that point.

Letby said she was asked to get the unit camera from the manager's office to take a picture of the mottling.

She says on her return, Child B had stabilised and returned to normal colouring, and there was no mottling to photograph. She said she had the camera with her, and she had returned to the nursery "very quickly".

Letby says she believes she administered some of the prescribed drugs for Child B after the collapse.


A blood gas test taken at 12.51am is signed by Letby. She says as it is a two-nurse procedure, the signature does not indicate whether that was also the nurse who took the initial blood sample.

Letby says following Child B's collapse, other doctors came to the nursery room, but she cannot recall who.

She says presumably the designated nurse would have communicated with the family following the collapse.

An observation chart shows Letby took observations for child B at 1am. She says this was "not unusual" for nurses to do this, especially if the designated nurse was busy elsewhere. The court hears this could be if that designated nurse is speaking with the parents.

 

[ColourPurple]

For Dr Harnkess:

12:24pm

Dr Harkness said because the night of June 8 was a "traumatic event", his memory of entering the unit room was "quite fresh" and he explains there were three babies in the nursery room 1 - the intensive care unit, at the time, and two of them would have been Child A and Child B. He describes which incubators they would have been in, which are adjacent to each other.
A video of the layout of the nursery room one is played to the court and Dr Harkness confirms where Child A and Child B would have been located.

12:31pm

Dr Harkness's x-ray review said at the time the x-ray was available to review, he was "scrubbed inserting a line into another patient", which meant he had to adhere to sterilised conditions, he explains.
The doctor's opinion at the time was the position of the long line was "less than perfect", the prosecution said.
Dr Harkness said that following consultation and in accordance with guidelines, the position of the longline was "actually correct".

12:35pm

He said he was "just about finished with [another baby]" when he was called to Child A at 8.26pm.
Bagging was started "via Neopuff immediately".
The saturations, which "should be in the 90%'s", were in the '70s-80%'s'. The heart rate was "slightly on the lower side", Dr Harkness records.
He said he can remember the events.

12:37pm

He said he was called "by nursing staff" over problems with Child A's breathing.
A junior doctor took on the responsibility of making contemporaneous notes for Dr Harkness during the event, the court hears.

12:39pm

He said it was "most likely nursing staff" who started the Neopuff bagging process by the time he arrived.
"Good chest movement seen" meant there was not a blockage, Dr Harkness explains.

12:44pm

Dr Harkness said as far as he was concerned the longline was the last thing which was inserted, so he removed it at 8.27pm.
He said: "That was my immediate thought. In hindsight...there was no possible link [between its insertion and the collapse]."
He said if the long line had been moved further in, towards the heart, it could have caused a significant increase in the heart rate, or other heart complications. There was no evidence then, or since, which had supported that, he explains.
Help was called at 8.27pm.
Child A was "intubated at the first attempt".

Dr Harkness is asked to examine a clinical note.
During the time he was looking at a third baby in the room, he was scrubbed up and sterilised for a procedure which "takes a lot of concentration."
"Typically, you are left to your own devices."
He said it was shortly after that (about 1-2 minutes), he was urgently called to Child A.

.............


So from LL's testimony I though Harkness would have been close by A's cot shortly before he collapsed. But his testimony suggests he was possibly in another room, or far enough away that he had to be called to A to help

Sounds like he was in the same room but doing a procedure on another baby that required concentration (ie there but concentrating on carrying out that rather than intently watching what anybody else was doing)

 

[Tortoise]

Looks like it's going as fast as I thought it would - I estimate two to three days max on her evidence in chief.


Very noticeable, IMO, that she omitted anything about the red rash on baby A.

from her police interviews:

"The mottled appearance 'could be a sign of low blood sugars', where a baby could be pale but have 'reddy-purple' patches. Child A was 'pale' in the centre and the mottling was on the 'hands and feet.' Child A was not breathing.

Asked to describe the rash, Letby says she thinks it was 'on the side the line was in', on the left side, but there was 'predominantly paleness'."

Lucy Letby: Nurse accused of baby murders weeps in the dock

All that's been reported this morning for baby A is paleness:

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

"She said both she and a nursing colleague were in nursery 1 when Child B's colour changed - "becoming quite mottled", "dark", "all over". She says the nursing colleague alerted her to the deterioration.

Letby is asked if she had seen that mottling before. Letby said it was not unusual but it was a concern, in light of Child A's death the night before.

Child A was "pale" but Child B had "purple mottling"."

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

She hasn't even, reportedly, answered Mr Myers question about mottling.

Baby A is the case where Myers told Dr Jayaram he'd made up the mottling because he'd made no record of it, and he told the shift-leader she was influenced by talk on the unit in her recollections of a rash, when she said she recognised baby B's rash as being the same she'd seen on baby A.

 

[Jazmania]

I couldn't find any testimony from nurses/doctors remembering specifically the events before B collapsed. But here isn use Ellis's recollection of the moments immediately before C collapsed:

11:48am

A discussion on trophic feeds was had "before 11pm", with the feed administered at 11pm.
Ms Ellis said "there was nothing particularly striking" about the care for Child C between 8-11pm, he was "doing well" and was "feisty" at that time.

11:53am

A retrospective note written by Ms Ellis says: "Had 2x fleeting [Bradycardia]s - self correcting not needing any intervention shortly before prolonged [Bradycardia] and apneoa requiring resus[citation].
She said she had left the room "just around the corner", then the alarm went off. She said she could not recall which type of alarm it was - a lower-level yellow or a more frequent [urgent] red alarm.
She said she went into the nursery, having been out for "not a long" time.
She recalls, upon entering: "I saw Lucy standing at [Child C's] incubator. She said he had just had a Brady and a desaturation. I can't remember what she was doing at the time."

11:57am

"After that, the 'brady' and the desat resolved quite quickly."
Ms Ellis said she didn't do or see anything being done to correct the desat and bradycardia, as Child C self corrected.
She added she then sat at a computer which faced a wall, with Child C behind, out of view.
She explains Lucy Letby was still in there, but not sure about anybody else.
Child C, Ms Ellis tells the court, had a further 'brady' and desaturation which did not resolve and required resuscitation.
She said when she turned around, Lucy Letby was stood at the incubator.
A nursing colleague had asked her to put out a crash call.

11:58am

Prior to administering the 11pm feed, Miss Ellis said she had aspirated a tiny amount of 'light green bile' from Child C.

12:00pm

A nursing colleague who was in the room said to put out a crash call, and Miss Ellis left the room, she tells the court.
She said she left the room "not long".
She said when she returned, a nursing colleague was getting ready to administer drugs, and for her to continue chest compressions.
She said Lucy Letby was at the side of the incubator, but cannot recall what she was doing.
Miss Ellis said the medical team of registrars arrived along with a doctor to the unit at some point.

12:03pm

Miss Ellis adds the parents were then informed.
She said she became upset herself as this was "the first time" something like this had happened in her experience, and she found it "overwhelming".
Lucy Letby said to her: "Do you want me to take over?" to which she said: "Yes."
Miss Ellis said she then left the room, taking a minute to compose herself, before returnnig to the unit to look after other babies.

12:05pm

The nursing note says care for Child C was handed over to senior nurse Melanie Taylor following the collapse.
Miss Ellis reiterates that, from memory, there was nothing that concerned her about Child C's condition between 8pm-11pm.

.....

2:09pm

Miss Ellis said there was "always a nurse" in the room looking after Child C, even when she left the room briefly. She said Lucy Letby was in there, and cannot recall if Melanie Taylor was also in there.

12:12pm

Miss Ellis says Child C "could have had" two bradys, as they are quite common.
She said she did not know whether Melanie Taylor was in the room at the time of the collapse.

12:13pm

Miss Ellis tells the court for one of the two bradys, Lucy Letby was in the room for the second one, but not the first.

She says she does not remember if Melanie Taylor was in the room at the start of the collapse.
Mr Myers puts it to Miss Ellis that Lucy Letby was not in there at the time of the collapse, and only arrived later [during the resuscitation efforts].
Miss Ellis: "I don't agree with that."
Mr Myers: "You have placed her there when you spoke to the police several years later."
Miss Ellis: "I don't agree with that."

12:21pm

Miss Ellis has finished giving evidence for Child C.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, October 28

 

[katydid23]

On to baby C:

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

Mr Myers now turns to the case of Child C, a baby boy born on June 10, 2015, weighing 800g, at 30 weeks +1 day gestation.

An event happened on June 12 where Child C's stomach was distended, Mr Myers explains.

Child C collapsed after a projectile vomit. Resuscitation efforts commenced, but he died on the morning of June 14.

A note by nurse Sophie Ellis is shown to the court, made retrospectively after Child C died on June 14.

The note provides observations for Child C from the night shift. It adds: 'First feed of 0.5mls given at 23.00...At around 23.15, [Child C] had an apnoeic episode with prolonged brady and desat. Crash call...resuscitation commenced. Resus drugs given...care handed over to senior nurse Mel Taylor...'

Further notes written retrospectively by Sophie Ellis on June 16: 'Had 2x fleeting bradys - self-correcting not needing any intervention'. A feed was taken and bile was aspirated.

Nurse Melanie Taylor's notes, written retrospectively: 'Called to help as baby had brady desat, when arrived to baby, baby apnoeic, loss of colour, Neopuffed, but not able to bag, no chest movement....medical team crashed bleeped. No heart rate heard, started chest compressions...intermittent gasping, continued resus. Intubated....good chest movement and air entry, continued chest compressions. Emergency drugs administered as documented...'

Resuscitation efforts continued.

Child C was later baptised and died that morning on June 14.

An x-ray examination of Child C on June 12 showed 'marked gaseous distension of the stomach and proximal small bowel'.

Letby confirms, as shown from her work shift pattern displayed to the court, she was not in work that day. She worked night shifts on June 8-9, 9-10, 13-14 and 14-15.

Letby had messaged Yvonne Griffiths if there were any spare shifts going on June 11. The response was the unit was ok for staffing levels through the week, but may get busier at the weekend. Letby responded 'Think I need to throw myself back in on Sat x'

Asked to explain that message, Letby says she wanted to get back into the unit, looking after babies. "That was what I was taught at Liverpool Women's, after a difficult shift...to get back in and carry on".

Mr Myers refers to police interviews with Letby regarding Child C. Letby told police she was involved, from her memory, in resuscitation efforts. She told police she thought she did chest compressions.

Letby tells the court she has no recollection of any of the events leading up to Child C's collapse. She says it was "a normal shift" and has "no memory" of what happened until Child C's collapse, which was a "significant event".

She says she has looked after "hundreds of babies".

A shift rota is shown to the court, showing Letby was looking after two babies that night on June 13. She tells the court she was in nursery room 3, with Child C in room 1 that night.

A timeline of staff duties from the neonatal unit is shown to the court for June 13-14. Lucy Letby is recorded as carrying out observations for the two babies she was the designated nurse for in room 3, plus an entry made on a fluid balance chart for one of those two babies.

Mr Myers asks how long those would have taken.

Letby says one of those would have taken "minutes", the other procedure would have taken "a little longer".

Child C's event is listed at 11.15pm.

Letby says her duties were allocated for two babies in room 3. Among her duties, as shown on the timeline chart, are signing for medication for babies in that room between 10.08-10.21pm, making nursing notes regarding grunting for one of the babies at 10pm, and making observations.

She says she became aware of Child C at the time of his collapse, and her being called to help. Prior to that, she says she was not aware of his events, and was not in room 1.

She says she was called over by nurse Sophie Ellis and asked her to put out a crash call. Melanie Taylor was "in the nursery when I arrived [in room 1]", with Child C.

He was "apnoeic and needed respiratory support".

Another nurse was present in the nursery at the time.

Sophie Ellis put out the crash call.

 

[Jazmania]

Sounds like he was in the same room but doing a procedure on another baby that required concentration (ie there but concentrating on carrying out that rather than intently watching what anybody else was doing)

Well yes, maybe, but LL's testimony said he was doing a procedure on B. From Dr Harknesses's testimony B's cot was right next to A's cot. So surely he wouldn't have had to have been called by nurses to see to A if he was already right next to him? He would have heard the alarm and known the deterioration was serious. His testimony suggests he was far enough away to need to be called. So perhaps in the same room, but possibly in another room.

 

[ColourPurple]

DBM

 

[katydid23]

Here is what the defense said in the opening about child C:



For Child C, the defence say it is accepted that someone had injected air as a "theoretical possibility", but that is "a very long way from proving what has taken place".
Mr Myers said the jury would have to look at the practicalities of that, and consider alternative explanations.
Child C was "subject to a variety of complications" due to being born premature, the jury is told.
"We say, for a starting point, he should have been at a unit providing more specialist care."
The defence say pathology identified acute pneumonia in Child C.
The defence suggest a structural blockage could have caused distention.

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

 

[katydid23]

OKAY, CHECK THIS OUT:

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 was involved in chest compressions as part of resuscitation efforts.

Letby is asked why she can now confirm she was in room 3 of the nursery, having not been able to remember to that in police interview. Letby says she was able to remember being in nursery room 3 after since being made aware of which babies were in room 3 that night.

Letby says she can recall alarms going off, but not standing cotside, or saying anything regarding Child C's observations to Sophie Ellis.

She says she was said to have been in room 1 based on the statement by Sophie Ellis, but she tells the court she had not been in that room prior to Child C's collapse.

She says she had been 'put' in that room 1 based on Sophie Ellis's statement. Letby tells the court she has no recollection of being there. She says she suggested explanations to police in interview of what she was doing in room 1 based on the statement, not on her independent recollection.

Letby says her memory of that night was: "I believe that I had been called to help [Child C following his collapse]".

She says she had assumed what police had told her in interview to be true, based on Sophie Ellis's statement.

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

 

[Tortoise]

Well yes, maybe, but LL's testimony said he was doing a procedure on B. From Dr Harknesses's testimony B's cot was right next to A's cot. So surely he wouldn't have had to have been called by nurses to see to A if he was already right next to him? He would have heard the alarm and known the deterioration was serious. His testimony suggests he was far enough away to need to be called. So perhaps in the same room, but possibly in another room.

"She said there was no crash call put out as the doctors were already in attendance."

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, October 21

^ Evidence of baby B's designated nurse Caroline Bennion

 

[Tortoise]

"She said both she and a nursing colleague were in nursery 1 when Child B's colour changed - "becoming quite mottled", "dark", "all over". She says the nursing colleague alerted her to the deterioration.



Is she also now saying that it was Mel Taylor (who at that point was sat at the computer) who told LL that Baby A was deteriorating, even though it was LL who was at his incubator?

no that's her evidence for baby B.