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

[Becky53]

Lucy Letby murder trial - latest: 'Swipe data' and text appear to show 'killer' nurse arriving at hospital after mother said she saw her there

Lucy Letby, 33, is accused of the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of 10 others. She was questioned for a second time on Friday, telling the court she was "not meant to be working" on the night her first alleged victim died.

news.sky.com

Today’s live feed for Sky. Unsure if there‘s anything extra not noted by others reporting.

 

[Tortoise]

Judith Moritz
@JudithMoritz
·
1h

Baby E's mother previously gave evidence that Lucy Letby told her to go back to her bed on the maternity ward. Ben Myers KC asks nurse Letby "Did you send her away?" Lucy Letby: "No, that’s not something we do on the unit. Parents are welcome 24/7"

 

[Anxala]

You're forgetting, these were notes to herself. She didn't need to explain it.

I was thinking about those notes and it occurred to me that while they go through the gamut of emotions expected in the circumstances in which she finds herself - acute distress, disbelief, intense fear, confusion, anger, hysteria, desperation etc etc - there's no evidence whatsoever of the type of rage I'd expect to see from someone who knows the jig is up.

If I were a serial killer and knew that my serial killing rampage had come to an end, I feel I'd be absolutely furious. Were I a note-keeping one with LL's unloading habits, I'd expect my private notes to be filled with foot-stamping rage that my killing spree had been cut short. I find the complete absence of the latter emotion... odd.

Not claiming anything either way, just a random observation.

 

[IspyWithMyBigEye]

The evidence is definitely not overwhelming it's circumstantial. We have read all the facts most of us have been here for the whole trial.

So would you say it’s circumstantial that a senior consultant doctor said in court that he saw LL standing over one of the babies, where she’d turned off the alarms on the monitors, and he’d been injected with air?

Would you say it’s circumstantial that one baby had injuries so shocking to their liver that it was as though they’d been in a fatal car crash?

Would you say that it was “just circumstantial” that most of the babies who died in LL’s care ALL had the same mottling on their bodies which no doctor had ever seen before?

Would you say that the fact LL took 257 medical notes home with her, which “hid” her involvement with their deaths was just circumstantial?

Oh, I could go on and on and on…

I don’t need to as she’s already tripped herself up today - and that was with her defence barrister!

 

[Parker Knoll]

In my opinion - She’s lying through her teeth. No wonder she needs breaks all the time as it must be exhausting keeping her story straight.
All my humble musings obviously.

 

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

So would you say it’s circumstantial that a senior consultant doctor said in court that he saw LL standing over one of the babies, where she’d turned off the alarms on the monitors, and he’d been injected with air?

Would you say it’s circumstantial that one baby had injuries so shocking to their liver that it was as though they’d been in a fatal car crash?

Would you say that it was “just circumstantial” that most of the babies who died in LL’s care ALL had the same mottling on their bodies which no doctor had ever seen before?

Would you say that the fact LL took 257 medical notes home with her, which “hid” her involvement with their deaths was just circumstantial?

Oh, I could go on and on and on…

I don’t need to as she’s already tripped herself up today - and that was with her defence barrister!

Did you just literally list several circumstantial pieces of evidence, and then ask if Ruby would consider them to be cirumstantial?

 

[IspyWithMyBigEye]

Yes, the insulin cases are crucial, I think.

As far as my mind is concerned, I'm in pretty much no doubt that insulin introduced from outside the body was the cause of the reactions in the babies. Exogenous insulin produces different markers than insulin produced by the body so I don't think there is any doubt that this was introduced insulin rather than insulin made internally. In my opinion they have proved that to the relevant standard.

What I do not think they have proved (from the evidence we have heard) is precisely WHO was responsible for administering it. Furthermore, I don't see how they can prove, definitively, that it was LL who administered it. Unless they can show a definite chain of custody and who had access to those bags or other pieces of equipment from when they were made up which I doubt they can then where is the evidence other than evidence based on probability? Wasn't it said that at least one of them wasn't hung up by LL? So other people did have access to them.

Let's also remember that this is exactly what happened in another famous and recent case involving a nurse who was actually mistakenly arrested, charged and remanded so this is not some fanciful thinking here.

These are exceptionally serious allegations which, if convicted of, will result in exceptional sentences. The evidence to convict needs to be exceptional in nature, too. Personally, I would be extremely uncomfortable convicting on these charges unless someone could demonstrate to me that the accused person was definitely the cause of the administered insulin.

The sealed bags would need to have been tampered with to inject insulin into them, and all bags are kept under lock and key. The only person who takes one out is the nurse administering it, and she would have seen had it been opened or tampered with. What’s more, even if someone was so devious to inject insulin into the bag - it would have leaked.

It didn’t leak, though - so that leaves just one person who could have put insulin into the bag….

 

[Xanadu62]

I was thinking about those notes and it occurred to me that while they go through the gamut of emotions expected in the circumstances in which she finds herself - acute distress, disbelief, intense fear, confusion, anger, hysteria, desperation etc etc, there's no evidence whatsoever of the type of rage I'd expect to see from someone who knows the jig is up.

if I were a serial killer and knew that my serial killing rampage had come to an end, I feel I'd be absolutely furious. Were I a note-keeping one with LL's unloading habits, I'd expect my private notes to be filled with foot-stamping rage that my killing spree had been cut short. I find the complete absence of the latter... odd.

Not claiming anything either way, just a random observation.

The jig wasn't up at that point in fairness. She still maintained that they had no evidence, so I don't think she expected the police to actually arrest her. I think she assumed it would all blow over eventually and never get to a point she was on trial. That's why her notes don't mention anything about lawyers or prison or arrest or conviction or never working again. If she seriously thought the police would be involved and she was in trouble, there'd be some mention of legal advice. Also her nursing registration/PIN was still active until her arrest and so she had every chance of moving to a different trust and practising again if they couldn't stand up a case against her.

Also i think unless you're a serial killer or violent psychopath, it's really hard to think like they would. It's a completely different wiring and emotional language and I think a certain arrogance and invincibility is inherent - where they never think they'll be caught.

MOO

 

[IspyWithMyBigEye]

This is exactly why I'm confident with these 2 cases ...simply because they were 2 completely different types of fluid ...tpn comes hand made from pharmacy...the glucose bags come in sealed boxes with multiple bags in from stores ..these bags have a very much longer shelf life. Therefore it's virtually impossible that someone not on the unit would handle both bags.

That then leaves us with

Someone on the unit other than LL did this ....

And who injected the air?

 

[WaxLyrical]

The sealed bags would need to have been tampered with to inject insulin into them, and all bags are kept under lock and key. The only person who takes one out is the nurse administering it, and she would have seen had it been opened or tampered with. What’s more, even if someone was so devious to inject insulin into the bag - it would have leaked.

It didn’t leak, though - so that leaves just one person who could have put insulin into the bag….

The bags wouldn’t have leaked. They have a self-sealing port in them for adding medicine. It’s been established the bags would not have looked like they’d been tampered with.

 

[IspyWithMyBigEye]

A few things I’m interested in;
1. When the defence asked her about her scribbled jumbled notes, the only thing i didn’t hear him touch on was the “tiny boy” or “if anyone will think of you today/your birthday” writings. Strange he would ask about everything else but appeared to avoid even asking about this.

2. Dr choc; something feels somewhat amis here and this is just my opinion.
On the sheet found (at her desk I believe?) she wrote his name numerous times over making reference to something along the lines of “my love, I think you knew I loved you, it didn’t need to be/happen like this” etc.

On the stand she said it was a “close friendship” but nothing more. They would go for walks, coffee, meals, he’d go to her house etc, which fizzled out around 2018 (her arrest I imagine?)

Something just doesn’t sit properly with this IMO. Recalling her reaction at his name from behind the screen and her tears. Granted it may have been a long time she’s heard his voice, but I think there was also a female colleague behind the screen the reaction wasn’t the same.

I’m wondering, if dr choc was a close friendship and they had meals, walks and coffee etc who she says also went to her house, whether he had seen/come across all the handover notes or whatever?

It’s odd that a very “close” friendship (who seemed to have her back and was sending her confidential doctor’s conversations- the “keep to yourself” comments he made to her and forwarding that email) then appears to have gone sour and it does make you question why. Her notes indicate something amiss at the time she was working in the office; almost as if he turned his back on her.

Very odd imo
JMO

He possibly started to suspect she wasn’t “quite right”…

 

[Powermjp]

Judith Moritz
@JudithMoritz
·
1h

Baby E's mother previously gave evidence that Lucy Letby told her to go back to her bed on the maternity ward. Ben Myers KC asks nurse Letby "Did you send her away?" Lucy Letby: "No, that’s not something we do on the unit. Parents are welcome 24/7"

Interesting, her using "we" is distancing/deflection language, and a possible sign of deception. Of course you need to factor in she's in front of a jury. But it could be something she's prepared, it's not a normal way to answer a direct question.


Relying on her profession too, for example if a policeman was on trial for theft and, and they answered "we don't steal, we always follow the law"

 

[IspyWithMyBigEye]

A few things I’m interested in;
1. When the defence asked her about her scribbled jumbled notes, the only thing i didn’t hear him touch on was the “tiny boy” or “if anyone will think of you today/your birthday” writings. Strange he would ask about everything else but appeared to avoid even asking about this.

2. Dr choc; something feels somewhat amis here and this is just my opinion.
On the sheet found (at her desk I believe?) she wrote his name numerous times over making reference to something along the lines of “my love, I think you knew I loved you, it didn’t need to be/happen like this” etc.

On the stand she said it was a “close friendship” but nothing more. They would go for walks, coffee, meals, he’d go to her house etc, which fizzled out around 2018 (her arrest I imagine?)

Something just doesn’t sit properly with this IMO. Recalling her reaction at his name from behind the screen and her tears. Granted it may have been a long time she’s heard his voice, but I think there was also a female colleague behind the screen the reaction wasn’t the same.

I’m wondering, if dr choc was a close friendship and they had meals, walks and coffee etc who she says also went to her house, whether he had seen/come across all the handover notes or whatever?

It’s odd that a very “close” friendship (who seemed to have her back and was sending her confidential doctor’s conversations- the “keep to yourself” comments he made to her and forwarding that email) then appears to have gone sour and it does make you question why. Her notes indicate something amiss at the time she was working in the office; almost as if he turned his back on her.

Very odd imo
JMO

He possibly started to suspect she wasn’t “quite right”…

Im waiting for the Prosecution to ask the defendant about "on purpose" part of the note.

Because the answers I have already heard make no sense to me at all.

Not at all.

I also noticed that Defence didn't particularly dwell on this subject.

But who can blame them, as this literally sounds like a confession.

JMO

Anyone writing I did it “on purpose” means they did exactly that. What else could ir mean?

 

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

The jig wasn't up at that point in fairness. She still maintained that they had no evidence, so I don't think she expected the police to actually arrest her. I think she assumed it would all blow over eventually and never get to a point she was on trial. That's why her notes don't mention anything about lawyers or prison or arrest or conviction or never working again. If she seriously thought the police would be involved and she was in trouble, there'd be some mention of legal advice. Also her nursing registration/PIN was still active until her arrest and so she had every chance of moving to a different trust and practising again if they couldn't stand up a case against her.

Also i think unless you're a serial killer or violent psychopath, it's really hard to think like they would. It's a completely different wiring and emotional language and I think a certain arrogance and invincibility is inherent - where they never think they'll be caught.

MOO

The part that I find difficult to get my head around, is not whether someone could have done this. I understand there are some very sick, evil people out there. Thes kinds of people would undoubtedly have no quarms with studying nursing, going to uni, focusing intently on becoming an elite nurse only to intentionally hamr babies.

I am certainly not naive enough to not want to accept that the above scenario is possible.

Where I am having trouble, is believing that this same sick, evil, twisted person would exhibit practically zero psychopathic traits.

Normally when you have a psychopath accused of murder, somehwere along the line, their character reveals something about themsleves that backs up the hypothesis that they could have behaved in the ways being suggested.

With Ms Letby, salsa dancing aside, we have nothing like this.

 

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

The only things about Ms Letby that I find really annoying do not amount to anything like what could beconsidered pyshopathic behaviour - for instance, how much she condenses her text messages when there is no need. Personally I cannot stand it when people do this, I just find it intensely lazy and I rarely reply to people that text me with haf of the words missing from a sentence.

Having had all her devices forensically examined, and with her life under the microscope to this extent though, we might expect to find something more in support of psychopathic tendencies - but there are none.

 

[ginnyw]

In my opinion - She’s lying through her teeth. No wonder she needs breaks all the time as it must be exhausting keeping her story straight.
All my humble musings obviously.

She must be lying, as clearly there's nobody else responsible for the murder and attempted murder of all those babies. She's the one in the frame and there's abundant evidence. IMO.

 

[Dotta]

Interesting, her using "we" is distancing/deflection language, and a possible sign of deception. Of course you need to factor in she's in front of a jury. But it could be something she's prepared, it's not a normal way to answer a direct question.

I understood "we" as a general term of medical staff.
"We" - my colleagues and me ( a team).

JMO

 

[Sweeper2000]

In my opinion - She’s lying through her teeth. No wonder she needs breaks all the time as it must be exhausting keeping her story straight.
All my humble musings obviously.

what is it that makes you think that?

 

[IspyWithMyBigEye]

For me, baby E was the worst baby to hear about. Just horrendous and absolutely no idea why this baby was bleeding out. I have only ever seen a baby bleeding out like that once and it was due to organ failure caused by HIE.
The nurse caring for him had to take a week off afterwards as sadly the baby died.

That must have been heartbreaking fr you to witness that, Esther. I’m so sorry.

What I don’t understand is why LL was so eager to get back to the ICU ward after seeing that happen.

 

[Tortoise]

Police interview:

"From memory Letby believes she was either in Nursery 3, where she was the designated nurse to a healthier baby, or at the nurses' station at the time she was messaging from her mobile.

She told Jones-Key that she kept thinking about the day that Baby A had died the previous week, and seeing the image in her mind's eye of him lying in his cot.

When her colleague suggested she needed to take a break, she reacted with a message, sent at 11.09pm on June 30, 2015, that read: 'Forget it. I'm obviously making more of it than I should'.

The officer pointed out that six minutes after the 11.09pm message Baby C had collapsed, then went on to tell Letby: 'You were the only staff member there and you were seen at his cot-side when the alarm sounded. You were feeling frustrated and upset at the time. Do you agree?'

Letby replies: 'Yes'."

Letby admits she was 'frustrated' before death of baby she 'murdered'



Court:

"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.

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."

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