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

[JosieJo]

for some reason I doubt that ll has the level of foresight needed to alter the documents neccesa for her to escape the consequences. As an example not getting rid of the handover notes, the damned note, marks in her diary etc

I'd disagree.."if" baby Es mum walked in seconds after LL hurt the baby as alleged ..LL would have to make sure the notes would reflect a different timeline

 

[Parker Knoll]

There is over 20 threads going over all of this I spy.

 

[Sweeper2000]

At the time of the alleged offences the mother was staying on the postnatal ward. It is likely she would use a pump there as it would be very early days.
As the babies were very young her milk flow would have been taking time to establish and for twins, this would be a challenge to keep up with their demands. As such, the Mother would be very mindful to get milk to the ward at the nearest opportunity. Not doing so would result in the babies having to haver doner milk or formula, something most Mother's will want to avoid.
The baby as I understand it was due a feed at 9pm. It's therefore possible that the mother was dropping newly expressed milk to her babies in time for this. AMOO

The pump, is that just something that would be given to her to use as and when or would she have one to use by herself? I thought maybe every time she needed to express she might be given a new set, fresh and clean?

I did question if any mother would have the capacity to be abl to deliver as per the schedule, that’s one of the things I thought might mean she wasn’t punctual for the 9pm feed but obviously through no fault of her own.

To me from what you have written I would assume that the mom would be prompted by staff to have the milk ready and then perhaps to deliver it? Or at least given the all clear for her to attend at 9pm?
I think that’s absolutely vital to ascertain, could be one of the biggest points in the evidence.

the prosecution are alleging that ll attacked this child almost immediately before the mum turned up and thus ll would know about the 9pm feed and presumably wouldn’t do something like that if she was aware that the mum would turn up and catch her more or less red handed.

 

[bbsaz]

I see your point.

But there’s 17 babies she allegedly tried to kill, seven of which did die unnaturally. To be charged with just the death of one baby in your care is horrendous - but to be charged with SEVENTEEN (seven of who died) babies die suddenly and inexplicably in your care, only to discover they’d been imjected with air in their cannula and insulin in their feeding bag, means that the nurse caring for them must have been involved in their deaths.

Why wasn’t any other nurse suspected?

Why did it only happen to the babies she was monitoring?

I agree with you about the insulin: how did so many babies die of insulin overdose who were solely in her care - but no other babies died of insulin overdose in other nurses care on the same ward? All the nurses had access to the same locker which contained the sealed insulin and feeding bags, so how was it that the insulin only ended up in the feeding bags that LL fed the babies and not in any of the other nurses?

No babies died of insulin overdose. Please read the evidence before posting as it blocks up the feed to keep seeing incorrect posts

 

[Parker Knoll]

So in the defences case there have been no medical experts presented by mr Myers does that then mean they don’t or won’t have any?

We do not know yet who or if the defence will be calling their own independent witnesses.
We are not at that stage yet as letby is still in the box.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I'd disagree.."if" baby Es mum walked in seconds after LL hurt the baby as alleged ..LL would have to make sure the notes would reflect a different timeline

Would she change them or just leave it blank? I thought she had no way of knowing if the mother would go and get a second member if staff to check the babs so if she did alter the notes she had no way of knowing it wouldn’t be discovered. That’s a risk of epic proportions imo

 

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

The pump, is that just something that would be given to her to use as and when or would she have one to use by herself? I thought maybe every time she needed to express she might be given a new set, fresh and clean?

I did question if any mother would have the capacity to be abl to deliver as per the schedule, that’s one of the things I thought might mean she wasn’t punctual for the 9pm feed but obviously through no fault of her own.

To me from what you have written I would assume that the mom would be prompted by staff to have the milk ready and then perhaps to deliver it? Or at least given the all clear for her to attend at 9pm?
I think that’s absolutely vital to ascertain, could be one of the biggest points in the evidence.

the prosecution are alleging that ll attacked this child almost immediately before the mum turned up and thus ll would know about the 9pm feed and presumably wouldn’t do something like that if she was aware that the mum would turn up and catch her more or less red handed.

The feeds aren't necessarily as strictly scheduled as I think you think they might be.
More a guideline than any absolute need to a feed at any exact time.

JMO

 

[IspyWithMyBigEye]

I wrote immediately upon reading that note that the end of that particular sentence was a reference to her capacity as a nurse. “Not good enough to care for them” can be seen as a reference to her capacity as a nurse and literally evepry bit of the evidence suggests that to be the case highlighting her text to doc choc close to the time of suspension. Something like ”was I good enough/ did I miss something“. I believe her when she said she wrote it ie the date and as all surrounding evidence and coms suggest it to be the case. I also said interpretation of the writing would be difficult but to ascertain it’s truth one would have to look at surrounding evidence and circumstance and it all points to her questioning her capacity as a nurse. Imo

But she said “on purpose “.

Interpret that as you wish to, but to almost everyone else, when someone says “I did it ON PURPOSE “ means they did - they did it on purpose.

No-one who’s innocent would say or write that they did it on purpose.

There’s no going back on her admission. It’s there in black and white.

And IMO I still suspect if she did kill them it was the parents’ she wanted to cause heartache to more than the babies, hence why she searched for their updates.


Just because she looks presentable and not like an ogre, some people think she couldn’t be evil, psychopath or sadistic - but outer looks mean nothing.

 

[WaxLyrical]

"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.""

So a timeline was shown which is not the same as clinical notes (unless they also showed clinical notes and just not reported.). However, below are the defendants own notes that prosecution shared and there's no mention of Caroline Oakley anywhere. So really not sure where this has come from? The defence haven't actually presented any evidence of her being there or not observing there was blood.

Also noticed on her notes below, there was supposed to be a 9pm feed!! So mum was right to show up at 9pm. But defendant says it was omitted, yet there's no evidence of this and the SHO has no recollection of advising to omit the feed. So basically, the mum, SHO and Caroline Oakley would all have to be lying or misremembering to support the defendant's version of events.

8pm: Letby's note for 8pm at August 3 is written, written at 4.51am retrospectively, to say: "Mummy was present at start of shift attending to cares."

A further Letby note reads: 'Prior to 9pm feed, 16ml 'mucky' slightly bile stained aspirate' recorded for Child E.

9pm: The neonatal fluid chart for the 9pm column records, under milk feeds, 'omitted', and the word 'discarded' is in a non-specific line. For aspirates, the note '16ml mucky' is made.

10pm: To the right of that, at the 10pm column, is '15ml fresh blood' on aspirates.

The two columns for that chart are signed by Lucy Letby's initials.

Ah thank you, yes I completely misunderstood, I thought I’d read that it was Oakley doing meds at 9:15. Ignore me then!

 

[Xanadu62]

for some reason I doubt that ll has the level of foresight needed to alter the documents neccesary for her to escape the consequences. As an example not getting rid of the handover notes, the damned note, marks in her diary etc

But that is exactly what the prosecution are alleging she did do in some cases - falsify notes to cover her tracks. And if the feed was omitted, wouldn't she have told the mother that before she expressed milk and came over? Wouldn't the SHO have had a reason to omit feeds - the medical notes said feeds were being increased as baby E was tolerating them much better. Nothing in the notes indicate a need to omit them.

As for not getting rid of the handover notes etc from home, that could also be because she never expected the police to search her house, or they were souvenirs. We'll never know how much foresight she has or not tbh - but I think anyone can be capable of falsifying documents to avoid trouble. Even children can falsify things like parents signatures on sick notes, or exam reports as an example, so not a stretch to think she did too.

MOO

 

[Jazmania]

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

Didn't she say in her text messages that she had already been in room 1 to do observations?

 

[Sweeper2000]

But she said “on purpose “.

Interpret that as you wish to, but to almost everyone else, when someone says “I did it ON PURPOSE “ means they did - they did it on purpose.

No-one who’s innocent would say or write that they did it on purpose.

There’s no going back on her admission. It’s there in black and white.

And IMO I still suspect if she did kill them it was the parents’ she wanted to cause heartache to more than the babies, hence why she searched for their updates.


Just because she looks presentable and not like an ogre, some people think she couldn’t be evil, psychopath or sadistic - but outer looks mean nothing.

Just so you know if you take that sentence literally and don’t cherry pick, do ignore the bit where she says she hasn’t done anything wrong your saying she blamed them for her not being a good nurse. “I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough to care for them”. Translates to “I murdered them because I’m not a very good nurse”.

 

[IspyWithMyBigEye]

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

They weren’t circumstantial.

They were witnessed.

By senior consultant paediatricians. <modsnip>

 

[Tortoise]

Would she change them or just leave it blank? I thought she had no way of knowing if the mother would go and get a second member if staff to check the babs so if she did alter the notes she had no way of knowing it wouldn’t be discovered. That’s a risk of epic proportions imo

She didn't write up her notes until nearly four hours after he'd died.

 

[JosieJo]

Would she change them or just leave it blank? I thought she had no way of knowing if the mother would go and get a second member if staff to check the babs so if she did alter the notes she had no way of knowing it wouldn’t be discovered. That’s a risk of epic proportions imo

She wrote the notes up hours later ...so would know ...and so also wouldn't have to change them or leave them blank

 

[Tortoise]

Didn't she say in her text messages that she had already been in room 1 to do observations?

yes, she said she'd already been in there to do some meds.

 

[WaxLyrical]

I will never ever again in my life be able to read the words “on purpose” and not think of these threads.

 

[Sweeper2000]

The feeds aren't necessarily as strictly scheduled as I think you think they might be.
More a guideline than any absolute need to a feed at any exact time.

JMO

It’s not just that, I’m just tryin to figure out why nobody has seemed to notice her leaving her unit and entering the NNU. The feed timelines might not be vigorously adhered to but patients going from one unit to another is almost certainly something the prosecution should be able to prove IMO.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I will never ever again in my life be able to read the words “on purpose” and not think of these threads.

I’m not doing the note anymore. That’s it.

 

[WaxLyrical]

I’m not doing the note anymore. That’s it.

We’ve heard that one before