- Joined
- Oct 24, 2022
- Messages
- 2,971
- Reaction score
- 9,350
I would be interested to see the cases that happened whilst she was doing overtime.
UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #20
- Thread starter sleuth777
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2018
- Messages
- 1,113
- Reaction score
- 14,362
I’m surprised we didn’t hear anything about LL’s personal life around the time of all the attacks too. I really thought there would be a significant event like a break up or something going on around the time. We haven’t heard from anyone close to LL apart from colleagues. I am surprised that the prosecution didn’t offer a motive, in a more direct way. This case has been very strange all round IMO, we’ve heard all the evidence but haven’t heard a theory of WHY?
We have speculated whether if guilty, it was for attention, or enjoying the drama, simply boredom with the babies who were ‘just feeding’ as she put it. Or if there was something else going on. Was she punishing the parents for some reason, was she going through other stresses in her life, was there some jealousy or a need to make people feel sorry for her with all her ‘bad luck’
I know, in some cases there is no motive, no rhyme or reason. I would have liked to hear what the prosecution believed the motive, if guilty, was. Or maybe there just isn’t one.
All JMO
We have speculated whether if guilty, it was for attention, or enjoying the drama, simply boredom with the babies who were ‘just feeding’ as she put it. Or if there was something else going on. Was she punishing the parents for some reason, was she going through other stresses in her life, was there some jealousy or a need to make people feel sorry for her with all her ‘bad luck’
I know, in some cases there is no motive, no rhyme or reason. I would have liked to hear what the prosecution believed the motive, if guilty, was. Or maybe there just isn’t one.
All JMO
Possibly but they also mentioned that date on the Mail Online podcast, where the hosts are also in court doing their own reporting?
Sorry, I was more just piggy-backing off the other users comment and talking in a general sense that being asked to work wasnt an annoyance for her but yes you are definitely correct re. Baby A imo
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,288
- Reaction score
- 13,179
Bold was the word that sprang to mind for me. Especially as she has admitted not only being in room 1 in her police interviews but being the only one in there when Baby C collapsed.
But then, if guilty, it's all she can do on this particular case really. She's fighting for her freedom here.
JMO
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,288
- Reaction score
- 13,179
I know. It's strange because it suggests the error was made by LL , if there was one.
Professor Owen Arthurs on this -
"Mr Myers says Child C, at four days old, did not have his bowels open, and a bowel obstruction could be considered.
Prosecution Re-Direct
11:30am
Professor Arthurs, asked by the prosecution about a bowel obstruction, says if the bowel was blocked at a particular point, it would give a 'marker' of where the obstruction was.
He says the image shows no such marker, and as bowel obstructions are a 'common clinical occurrence', it would be diagnosed and babies would go to theatre for an operation.
He says there is no evidence of a bowel obstruction on the imaging, on the clinical notes, or in an autopsy.
Referring to the possibility of a twisted bowel, which he says 'can happen in small babies' and result in a blockage. He says that is often a surgical emergency, and would be documented as such, and found post-mortem if there is such a finding.
11:33am
That concludes Professor Arthurs's evidence at this stage."
Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, November 11
Lammergeier
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2023
- Messages
- 19
- Reaction score
- 197
I see, so the distension/gas is in dispute? Prosecution/expert says it doesn’t exist? The live coverage today has the quote I posted but no mention of who actually said it or where that information is from, alas.
No it's not in dispute, it's been attributed most likely to CPAP by the experts.
Dr Evans said air on that x-ray could have been CPAP or injection of air. He said it was not the cause of baby C's collapse and death the following day/night.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,288
- Reaction score
- 13,179
It's possible there was something but the evidence was not allowed. And, (for balance), it's possible that there wasnt anything too.
JMO
1:59pm
The trial is now resuming following the lunch break.
2:04pm
Mr Myers is now referring to the case of Child D, a baby girl born on June 20, 2015, weighing 3.13kg.
The mother's waters had broken several hours earlier.
Notes show Child D '12 mins age - in dad's arms - lost colour, floppy. 5 rescue breaths + 2mins IPPV. Reviewed by SHO - on arrival, good resp. effort'.
Child D 'started grunting in theatre' and the midwife was 'not happy' with Child D's colour.
Child D later stabilised and had been transferred to the neonatal unit.
2:06pm
Child D suffered three collapses on the morning of June 22, the court is told, the last of those at 3.45am. Child D later died at 4.25am.
Mr Myers refers to police interviews with Letby, in which she said she did not recall Child D.
www.chesterstandard.co.uk
The trial is now resuming following the lunch break.
2:04pm
Mr Myers is now referring to the case of Child D, a baby girl born on June 20, 2015, weighing 3.13kg.
The mother's waters had broken several hours earlier.
Notes show Child D '12 mins age - in dad's arms - lost colour, floppy. 5 rescue breaths + 2mins IPPV. Reviewed by SHO - on arrival, good resp. effort'.
Child D 'started grunting in theatre' and the midwife was 'not happy' with Child D's colour.
Child D later stabilised and had been transferred to the neonatal unit.
2:06pm
Child D suffered three collapses on the morning of June 22, the court is told, the last of those at 3.45am. Child D later died at 4.25am.
Mr Myers refers to police interviews with Letby, in which she said she did not recall Child D.
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…
Dan O'Donoghue
We're back, we're now moving to Child D - the infant is alleged to be the third baby murdered by the Ms Letby in a two-week period in June 2015. Jurors have heard Child D was born more than 60 hours after her mother’s waters broke on June 20
Child D's mother has previously told the court that her daughter looked "lifeless" when she was born and she had been concerned about her getting an infection, but antibiotics were not given.
The prosecution accepted the failure to give antibiotics was a "legitimate target of criticism", but Child D had been "responding well to treatment and was not expected to deteriorate".
The court has heard that on 21 and 22 June, Child D collapsed several times and despite resuscitation attempts, she was pronounced dead.
Ms Letby was caring for two other babies in nursery one on the night of 21 June. Mr Myers is putting to Ms Letby that Child D's mother had seen Ms Letby in nursery one 'hovering' with a clipboard at around 1900
Ms Letby tells the court she would not be on the unit at that time. We're looking at door swipe data which shows Ms Letby came through the entrance door at 19:26 that evening
Mr Myers has pulled up a Facebook message, Ms Letby sent to her then housemate at 19:15, she said 'I’m just about to leave for a night shift'. Ms Letby agrees that she was in staff accommodation at Ash House at that time, not on the unit
We're back, we're now moving to Child D - the infant is alleged to be the third baby murdered by the Ms Letby in a two-week period in June 2015. Jurors have heard Child D was born more than 60 hours after her mother’s waters broke on June 20
Child D's mother has previously told the court that her daughter looked "lifeless" when she was born and she had been concerned about her getting an infection, but antibiotics were not given.
The prosecution accepted the failure to give antibiotics was a "legitimate target of criticism", but Child D had been "responding well to treatment and was not expected to deteriorate".
The court has heard that on 21 and 22 June, Child D collapsed several times and despite resuscitation attempts, she was pronounced dead.
Ms Letby was caring for two other babies in nursery one on the night of 21 June. Mr Myers is putting to Ms Letby that Child D's mother had seen Ms Letby in nursery one 'hovering' with a clipboard at around 1900
Ms Letby tells the court she would not be on the unit at that time. We're looking at door swipe data which shows Ms Letby came through the entrance door at 19:26 that evening
Mr Myers has pulled up a Facebook message, Ms Letby sent to her then housemate at 19:15, she said 'I’m just about to leave for a night shift'. Ms Letby agrees that she was in staff accommodation at Ash House at that time, not on the unit
<modsnip - quoted post was off topic>
Also the defendant wrote the note in July 2016 (when she was redeployed) when all she was told was she was being moved to admin role and had to re-do competencies like everyone else - as they were reviewing the increased mortality rate. Which is a reasonable and common performance management process anywhere you work. She wasn't even suspended, and had Karen Rees and hospital management supporting her at that time. She only learnt in Sept 2016 from the RCN that she was being investigated as responsible for the deaths.
Thinking you're evil and wanting to kill yourself because your competency is under review, creates a situation where you can never be disciplined or corrected. And that feels manipulative - to dangle the potential for suicide every time you perform poorly. Also it shows a lack of accountability to expect that you are above any sort of review, particularly where it involves deaths.
MOO.
Also the defendant wrote the note in July 2016 (when she was redeployed) when all she was told was she was being moved to admin role and had to re-do competencies like everyone else - as they were reviewing the increased mortality rate. Which is a reasonable and common performance management process anywhere you work. She wasn't even suspended, and had Karen Rees and hospital management supporting her at that time. She only learnt in Sept 2016 from the RCN that she was being investigated as responsible for the deaths.
Thinking you're evil and wanting to kill yourself because your competency is under review, creates a situation where you can never be disciplined or corrected. And that feels manipulative - to dangle the potential for suicide every time you perform poorly. Also it shows a lack of accountability to expect that you are above any sort of review, particularly where it involves deaths.
MOO.
Last edited by a moderator:
reminder of some of the evidence for baby D:
"In a statement read to the jury [...] [Dr Thomas] recalled: 'A nurse called Lucy was the designated nurse for D.
'I believe she'd been the designated nurse for Baby A, and later she became very upset in front of me.
'She said to me 'This is my second baby that this has happened to'.' [...]
[Dr Thomas] asked a nurse to put a crash call out while two of her colleagues began to carry out full CPR on the baby.
The duty registrar, Dr Andrew Brunton, rushed into the unit and took control of the resuscitation attempts.
While he was trying to open an airway into the infant's mouth a nurse called [KP-W], that night's shift leader, was holding a phone to his ear.
There were a few moments' confusion as he talked to the person at the end, believing he had been put through to Dr Elizabeth Newby, the on-call consultant.
'He thought he was talking to Dr Newby, but he was talking to Baby B's mother."
Murder-accused Lucy Letby 'very upset' during girl's fatal collapse
The nurse recalls the efforts made to resuscitate Child D, which were ultimately successful. After Child D had died, she told the court there was a discussion with Ms Letby about the resuscitation drugs used.
The chart advising dose levels would normally be kept by the child, but it was missing. The nurse said "it must have gone missing in the stress of everything".
The nurse said that Ms Letby asked her how she knew what dose levels to give, and the nurse explained how she did this by calculating the doses with Child D's weight, and using her years of experience
https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue
"In a statement read to the jury [...] [Dr Thomas] recalled: 'A nurse called Lucy was the designated nurse for D.
'I believe she'd been the designated nurse for Baby A, and later she became very upset in front of me.
'She said to me 'This is my second baby that this has happened to'.' [...]
[Dr Thomas] asked a nurse to put a crash call out while two of her colleagues began to carry out full CPR on the baby.
The duty registrar, Dr Andrew Brunton, rushed into the unit and took control of the resuscitation attempts.
While he was trying to open an airway into the infant's mouth a nurse called [KP-W], that night's shift leader, was holding a phone to his ear.
There were a few moments' confusion as he talked to the person at the end, believing he had been put through to Dr Elizabeth Newby, the on-call consultant.
'He thought he was talking to Dr Newby, but he was talking to Baby B's mother."
Murder-accused Lucy Letby 'very upset' during girl's fatal collapse
The nurse recalls the efforts made to resuscitate Child D, which were ultimately successful. After Child D had died, she told the court there was a discussion with Ms Letby about the resuscitation drugs used.
The chart advising dose levels would normally be kept by the child, but it was missing. The nurse said "it must have gone missing in the stress of everything".
The nurse said that Ms Letby asked her how she knew what dose levels to give, and the nurse explained how she did this by calculating the doses with Child D's weight, and using her years of experience
https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue
I've been thinking the same. One thing that makes me think it might be correct is this:
'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" '
If she'd completed her neonatal training well over a year previously I wouldn't expect that response - "letting me do it" - as it implies she was still early on in her ITU role.
2:21pm
The nursing rota for the night shift of June 21 is shown to the court, in which Letby was on duty in room 1, designated nurse for two babies.
Nuse Caroline Oakley was the designated nurse for Child D in room 1 that night.
Mr Myers refers to Child D's mother's statement in which she said a conversation was had with Letby at 7pm, and also saw Letby at the point Child D collapsed - "hovering around not doing much", holding a clipboard.
Letby says she does not recall the 7pm converation. She said she would not have been on duty in the clinical nurseries at that time, and would have arrived after 7pm for work, then going on to the nursery.
Swipe data for Letby is shown at the entrance to the maternity neonatal entrance doors at 7.26pm. Letby says that would be to prepare for her shift.
A text message is sent from Letby's phone at 7.15pm where she says: "Im just about to leave for a night shift so no problem. Hope all ok x". Letby says she would have been in Ash House at the time she sent the message.
Nursing notes by Kate Bissell for Child D are inputted into the system, the last of those at 7.45pm.
Observations for Child D are shown to the court, which do not have Letby's initials on them.
Letby denies she was in the nursery unit at 7pm.
Nursing notes by Caroline Oakley are now shown for Child D, written retrospectively at June 22. '0130 called to nursery by [nurse] and Letby. [Child D] had desaturated to 70s.
The notes add Child D also desaturated (to 70s) at 3am and 3.45am. For the latter 'stimulation given to no effect; bagging via Neopuff at 3.52am. SHO on unit and called to help. Dr crash called and resus commenced...'
2:22pm
Lucy Letby says she has no recollection of the first event or the build-up to it.
2:25pm
A timeline of nursing duties is shown for June 22 from midnight is shown to the court. Letby is shown as one of two nurses for an infusion at 1.25am with Caroline Oakley. Letby says she has no recollection of this event.
She says that night she would have been caring for babies on room 1 and helping other nurses, along with other miscellaneous duties.
2:30pm
A timeline shows Lucy Letby and Caroline Oakley are "checking medication for" Child D at 2.18-2.39am, and had started an infusion at 2.40am.
The order of the signatures did not have any indication on who administered the infusion, Letby tells the court.
At 2.44am, Letby and Caroline Oakley give medication to Child D.
www.chesterstandard.co.uk
The nursing rota for the night shift of June 21 is shown to the court, in which Letby was on duty in room 1, designated nurse for two babies.
Nuse Caroline Oakley was the designated nurse for Child D in room 1 that night.
Mr Myers refers to Child D's mother's statement in which she said a conversation was had with Letby at 7pm, and also saw Letby at the point Child D collapsed - "hovering around not doing much", holding a clipboard.
Letby says she does not recall the 7pm converation. She said she would not have been on duty in the clinical nurseries at that time, and would have arrived after 7pm for work, then going on to the nursery.
Swipe data for Letby is shown at the entrance to the maternity neonatal entrance doors at 7.26pm. Letby says that would be to prepare for her shift.
A text message is sent from Letby's phone at 7.15pm where she says: "Im just about to leave for a night shift so no problem. Hope all ok x". Letby says she would have been in Ash House at the time she sent the message.
Nursing notes by Kate Bissell for Child D are inputted into the system, the last of those at 7.45pm.
Observations for Child D are shown to the court, which do not have Letby's initials on them.
Letby denies she was in the nursery unit at 7pm.
Nursing notes by Caroline Oakley are now shown for Child D, written retrospectively at June 22. '0130 called to nursery by [nurse] and Letby. [Child D] had desaturated to 70s.
The notes add Child D also desaturated (to 70s) at 3am and 3.45am. For the latter 'stimulation given to no effect; bagging via Neopuff at 3.52am. SHO on unit and called to help. Dr crash called and resus commenced...'
2:22pm
Lucy Letby says she has no recollection of the first event or the build-up to it.
2:25pm
A timeline of nursing duties is shown for June 22 from midnight is shown to the court. Letby is shown as one of two nurses for an infusion at 1.25am with Caroline Oakley. Letby says she has no recollection of this event.
She says that night she would have been caring for babies on room 1 and helping other nurses, along with other miscellaneous duties.
2:30pm
A timeline shows Lucy Letby and Caroline Oakley are "checking medication for" Child D at 2.18-2.39am, and had started an infusion at 2.40am.
The order of the signatures did not have any indication on who administered the infusion, Letby tells the court.
At 2.44am, Letby and Caroline Oakley give medication to Child D.
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…
2:33pm
Letby says she does not recall any details for the 3am entry made on a fluid chart for Child D.
An infusion for Child D is made by Letby and Caroline Oakley at 3.20am.
Mr Myers says there is nothing recorded on the timeline for Letby's involvement in respect of Child D between 3.20am-3.45am.
Letby says she has no memory of the events leading up to Child D's collapse at 3.45am.
www.chesterstandard.co.uk
Letby says she does not recall any details for the 3am entry made on a fluid chart for Child D.
An infusion for Child D is made by Letby and Caroline Oakley at 3.20am.
Mr Myers says there is nothing recorded on the timeline for Letby's involvement in respect of Child D between 3.20am-3.45am.
Letby says she has no memory of the events leading up to Child D's collapse at 3.45am.
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…
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
Staff online
-
BreezyflavorModerator
Online statistics
- Members online
- 66
- Guests online
- 2,172
- Total visitors
- 2,238