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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #281
Would it not be documented from a review of the care recieved after each death? Who was where exc...
That would be a lot more reliable than been asked over a year or so later.

Not forgetting that Sophie Ellis & Melanie Taylor could discuss things & LL was not allowed to communicate.

WOW!!

evidence from the trial - nurses Sophie Ellis and Mel Taylor

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."

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, October 28

Mr Myers says Ms Taylor's police statement said she was called over by Sophie Ellis, and there is no mention of Lucy Letby.
Ms Taylor: "No, but she was there."

Prosecution questions -

Ms Taylor said she has not changed her mind about who was present there.
"I tell you now, when I approached the incubator, she [Lucy Letby] was there on the other side."
She added she remembered how "cool and calm" Lucy Letby looked at the time.
Ms Taylor said she hadn't said Lucy Letby was not in room 1 at the time of the collapse.
Ms Taylor tells the court said she didn't think it was necessary at the time to include that information [of Letby's presence] to police.
 
  • #282
Would it not be documented from a review of the care recieved after each death? Who was where exc...
That would be a lot more reliable than been asked over a year or so later.

Not forgetting that Sophie Ellis & Melanie Taylor could discuss things & LL was not allowed to communicate.
I think if there was documentation we would have heard about it.

So the jury will have to decide if they believe the testimony of the two nurses that testified, or the defendant who's changed her story. JMO.
 
  • #283
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
11m

Ms Letby says she cannot recall any further information about Child D or her collapses

Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
9m

We're now moving to Child E and F, twin boys. Child E was born prematurely in late July 2015 and initially needed breathing support, but later stabilised. The court has heard that on 3 August, his mother heard him crying and found him with "blood coming out of his mouth".

Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
9m

Child E and F's mother told the jury she recalled Ms Letby was standing at a nearby work station on the unit. Child E later deteriorated and despite medical efforts, later died on 4 August.

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
8m

The Crown say Ms Letby murdered Child E by administering a fatal amount of air into the bloodstream.

Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
7m

Mr Myers is taking the court back over the clinical notes for Child E - Ms Letby was the boy's designated nurse
 
  • #284
2:45pm

Mr Myers moves on to the cases of twin boys Child E and Child F.
The twins were born on July 29, 2015. Child E was born weighing 1.327kg, gestational age 29 weeks +5 days.
On the evening of August 3, Child E bled from his mouth, Mr Myers tells the court. Child E died in the early hours of August 4.
Mr Myers reads out nursing notes by Letby which include: 'prior to 21:00 feed, 16ml mucky slightly bile-stained aspirate obtained and discarded, abdo soft, not distended. SHO informed, to omit feed'.
Child E declined through the night after vomiting blood. Resus happened at 1.15am and Child E bled from the mouth.
In family communication: 'Mummy was present at start of shift attending to cares...aware that we had obtained blood from his NG tube and were starting some different medications to treat this.'

 
  • #285
2:50pm

Mr Myers asks Letby about the nursing note, about the 16ml aspirate. The note has her signature initials.
Letby says the aspirate was obtained before the 9pm feed.
The note adds: 'At 2200 large vomit of fresh blood. 14ml fresh blood aspiate obtained from NG Tube'. Mr Myers says a 15ml aspirate is obtained on the chart, by Belinda Simcock.
Letby says the '14' is a typo on her behalf and should be 15.

 
  • #286
2:56pm

A night shift staff diagram is shown to the court for the night of August 3-4. Letby was the designated nurse for Child E and Child F in nursery 1.
As Child E's needs increased that night, Belinda Simcock took care of Child F, Letby tells the court.
Mr Myers shows a feeding chart for August 3 for Child E.
No feed is recorded for 9pm. Letby says she had a large mucky aspirate obtained prior to then, so it was "standard practice" not to give the feed.
The aspirate was shown to Belinda Simcock "as it was an abnormal finding" and the SHO was informed. Letby says she did not know who informed them.
Letby tells the court the advice was to omit the feed.

3:00pm

At 10pm, the registrar attended, Dr David Harkness, when fresh blood was obtained from Child E.
Mr Myers asks if Letby can provide an exact time Dr Harkness arrived. Letby says she cannot. She says she is not sure if Dr Harkness was there on the unit just for Child E or whether he was there for anything in addition.
Letby says she can recall Child E and Child F's mother being on the unit that night, until about 10pm.

 
  • #287
3:05pm

A nursing note shows 'mummy was present at start of shift attending to cares. Visited again approx 2200'.
The mother had said Child E was, when she visited, "screaming" with "fresh blood around his mouth".
Letby is asked if Child E had been screaming. She replies: "No."
"He was unsettled at some points, but not screaming."
A diagram the mother had drawn of where she said fresh blood was on Child E is shown to the court, around the mouth. Letby is asked if she can recall this when the mother visited.
She replies: "Not that I can recall, no."
Letby says she cannot recall why the mother came down specifically, but she came down with breastmilk.
Letby denies telling the mother to leave. She says that is not something that would be done.
Letby says there was "no" blood around Child E's mouth at 9pm. She says the blood was noticed on Child E at 10pm.

 
  • #288
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.
Is it possibly that the mother had one autoimmune disease, which baby A did not have according to the professor; but baby A did have a separate condition , which is the one we are hearing about now?
 
  • #289
Is it possibly that the mother had one autoimmune disease, which baby A did not have according to the professor; but baby A did have a separate condition , which is the one we are hearing about now?
Dan named the condition in ones of his tweets during the prosecution's evidence, and it was the same one mentioned today (Tortoise posted the tweet a few pages back).

If the defence say the baby had this condition, I would like to see a medical expert testify to this, otherwise it won't hold much weight IMO.
 
  • #290
Is it possibly that the mother had one autoimmune disease, which baby A did not have according to the professor; but baby A did have a separate condition , which is the one we are hearing about now?
It looks like it's the same condition but the medical experts have said Baby A didn't have it. But today Myers had said he did. Maybe it was just an error. I'm sure the prosecution will clarify when they get their turn.
 
  • #291
3:12pm

The court is shown the timeline for the night shift on August 3-4. Letby is shown administering medication for Child F at 9.13pm, with nurse Caroline Oakley also present, in room 1 - the same as Child E.
Letby is asked if Caroline Oakley observed blood on Child E's face at that point, or if it was noted. Letby replies: "No."

 
  • #292
3:22pm

The trial will resume shortly after a 15-minute break.

 
  • #293
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
1m

We're back and continuing to look at Child E. Mr Myers is reading what Ms Letby said in relation to the baby in her police interview
 
  • #294
3:27pm

The trial is now resuming.
Mr Myers is now asked to look at her police interview in the section of Child E.

3:30pm

Police ask about 9pm, which the mother said was when she arrived at the neonatal unit, seeing Child E crying and having blood come out of his mouth.
Letby said this was not the case. She said a 'large vomit of fresh blood' is at 10pm.
She said she was not accepting the mother's statement that blood was in Child E's mouth at 9pm.

 
  • #295
LL ‘not remembering’ child D directly contradicts with what she’s said several times about how ‘you never forget something like that’ referring to the death of a baby. IMO
 
  • #296
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
4m

In her interview, the police officer puts to Ms Letby the statement of Child E's mother - who said she arrived on the unit to the baby screaming and blood around his mouth. In that interview Ms Letby did not accept he was screaming or had blood around his mouth

Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
2m

Mr Myers is continuing to take Ms Letby back over her police interview in relation to Child E. In that interview, the officer put it to Ms Letby that the baby's mother had said Ms Letby had told her the bleeding had been caused by a feeding tube
 
  • #297
3:34pm

Letby said she could not recall what Child E was like when the mother visited, but did not accept blood was present on Child E's mouth.
Letby says she first saw blood at 10pm.

 
  • #298
3:36pm

Letby replies: "Not that I can recall, no" and there was "no blood at that point" in response to if she had cleaned up blood from Child E's mouth at 9pm.
She says there was a large mucky aspirate obtained prior to 9pm, but it did not have blood in it.

3:41pm

Letby said she did not ignore a bleed, and nor did any of her colleagues, as there was no bleed at 9pm. She denies failing to record a bleed.
She says when there was a bleed, she escalated it to the registrar.
Letby recalls, from 10pm onwards, the 15ml fresh blood aspirate was "very concerning".
A red line around Child E's abdomen was also displaying, around the umbilical cord area. Letby says that could have been a sign of a bleed in the abdomen.

 
  • #299
3:05pm

A nursing note shows 'mummy was present at start of shift attending to cares. Visited again approx 2200'.
The mother had said Child E was, when she visited, "screaming" with "fresh blood around his mouth".
Letby is asked if Child E had been screaming. She replies: "No."
"He was unsettled at some points, but not screaming."
A diagram the mother had drawn of where she said fresh blood was on Child E is shown to the court, around the mouth. Letby is asked if she can recall this when the mother visited.
She replies: "Not that I can recall, no."
Letby says she cannot recall why the mother came down specifically, but she came down with breastmilk.
Letby denies telling the mother to leave. She says that is not something that would be done.
Letby says there was "no" blood around Child E's mouth at 9pm. She says the blood was noticed on Child E at 10pm.

If having to choose between believing a nurse who sees multiple babies and parents every day, one who has been accused of murder and attempted murder none the less, or believing the mum of baby E, who’s last memories of her baby will be etched in her mind forever. I know exactly who I’d believe in this instance.

If LL is accusing baby E’s mum of lying about the blood, the screaming, LL telling her to leave then I find it in extremely bad taste. This poor mum didn’t get to spend much time with her baby, the time she did have will be precious to her and IMO I believe her, right down to her saying she went down to the unit before 10pm, witnessed her baby screaming horrendously and bleeding and was told to leave by LL. What reason would mum have to lie about this? None IMO.

All JMO
 
  • #300
3:46pm

The note '0036 acute deterioration' is made by Letby.
She tells the court Child E was intubated, was 'actively bleeding', and continued to decline.
Becoming tearful, Letby says Child E was "bleeding from his mouth and his nose".
She says Child E's parents were present for resuscitation.
She denies Child E's deterioration was something she had wanted to happen.
Following Child E's death, Letby says teddy bears were given to Child E and Child F, and on the parents' wishes, a photo was taken of the twins.
Letby says she continued to look after Child F after the night shift.
For Child E, she said she found his death "very traumatic", having not seen that kind of sight before.

3:48pm

Mr Myers moves on to the case of Child F, after asking if Lucy Letby is ok to continue.
Child F was born weighing 1.434kg.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
103
Guests online
2,252
Total visitors
2,355

Forum statistics

Threads
632,725
Messages
18,630,974
Members
243,274
Latest member
WickedGlow
Back
Top