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

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

It is kind of creepy in my opinion.

When asked if she told E's mum to leave the unit, her reply= "That’s not something we would do"

She was reportedly alone with the mother and baby at that time, so who is 'we'?

Ms Letby is presumably referring to the team to which she belonged, at the time.

By replying using this term, Ms Letby is outlining the training that her whole team would observe, and making it clear she would not be operating outside of those sets of framework.

JMO

 

[esther43]

Ms Letby is presumably referring to the team to which she belonged, at the time.

By replying using this term, Ms Letby is outlining the training that her whole team would observe, and making it clear she would not be operating outside of those sets of framework.

JMO

I agree and it reminds me of the body and language analysis conducted on prince Andrew after the paedophile scandal.
The commentators pointed out the use of language around the 'we' word because prince Andrew repeatedly used the words 'we' as in 'us royals' wouldn't do that kind of thing simply because 'we' are too royal by nature.
It's a form of 'othering' and the goal is to make the other person believe they have no insight into the issues because they are in some way inferior. Imho

 

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

Yet.

We simply do not know what other points of interest may come to light (in due course). I feel we are only just scratching the surface with understanding her character and there is a lot we (the public) are not privvy to that the jury undoubtedly are. The amount of times I’ve read here “something really odd, makes no sense, bizarre etc etc” is because there is something we are not being told. We cannot know anymore about her or her character other than what has so far been reported in evidence (in the public domain) because we are not being told the full points they are hearing in court.
Jmo

Very true. If there is evidence we are not privy to, then that is what it is.

In terms of more evidence coming to light, I wonder whether or not this is possible, at this stage.
The prosecution has rested its case and all they have left to do is cross examine.

My point is, in a case of such magnitude, and with today's level of forensics and the crown's ability to dig deeper than ever before and unearth such a plethora of personal information, it is a real wonder how nothing that suggests any pyschopathic tendencies have come to light.

I can't think of another murderer who has so few blemishes on their record.
You would think if Ms Letby was a stone cold pyscopath, that there would be a queue of at least two people whom she had wronged in her past, lining up to expose her for what she really is.

However we have nothing like that.

Which leads us to feel we can't really help but want some other explanation. Because clearly with no smoking gun, and so few instances of anyone witnessing anything purely in the moment, something is not adding up.
Having read her answers so far, she doesn't come across as a genius, which makes it all the more difficult to believe this has been masterminded with so few mistakes.

JMO

 

[Sundial]

Does anyone know the process for delivery of expressed breast milk On a NNU ?

I can see it being something that isn’t documented but I would have thought there would be equipment given to a mother for the process. I also don’t know if it’s stored in the fridge for a time or is expressed close to the time it’s needed. I’m just trying to figure out the likelihood that the mother wasn’t told by someone to deliver the milk, told to express the milk, told the NNU was ready for the delivery and cares, helped off the unit, or someone didn’t register that the mom was waiting at the front door of the NNU and buzzed her in around 9pm. I just find it remarkable that not a single person can corroborate her testimony.

I don’t know if this has been mentioned; still catching up.

But; her husband perhaps, the phone data? Records with feeds that were scheduled? So far (unless I’ve totally missed it, welcome to correct me); I haven’t seen anywhere that backs up ll version. It’s the mothers account via the accused. Given this isn’t the first mother/parent who has said something and ll gave a different answer, I think speaks volumes.
JMO

 

[Sweeper2000]

Door swipe data isn’t a possibility considering but this is still a high security unit. According to the floor plan there are five locked Doors one could go through, I think two are facing the post natal ward for the parents. Presumably one would have to knock to enter etc?


Who answered the call, that’s a guaranteed witness to the time of arrival who absolutely must have opened the door. If I am correct.

 

[Parker Knoll]

Very true. If there is evidence we are not privy to, then that is what it is.

In terms of more evidence coming to light, I wonder whether or not this is possible, at this stage.
The prosecution has rested its case and all they have left to do is cross examine.

My point is, in a case of such magnitude, and with today's level forensics and the crown's ability to dig deeper than ever before and unearth such a plethora of personal information, it is a real wonder how nothing that suggests any pyschopathic tendencies have come to light.

I can't think of another murderer who has so few blemishes on their record.
You would think if Ms Letby was a stone cold pyscopath, that there would be a queue of at least two people whom she had wronged in her past, lining up to expose her for what she really is.

However we have nothing like that.

Which leads us to feel we can't really help but want some other explanation. Because clearly with no smoking gun, and so few instances of anyone witnessing anything purely in the moment, something is not adding up.
Having read her answers so far, she doesn't come across as a genius, which makes it all the more difficult to believe this has been masterminded with so few mistakes.

JMO

Smudge and tigger ?

 

[katydid23]

Yes but that record only proves a call was made. No one is disputing that the call was made, it is the all-important contents of the call that is far from being a proven fact.

JMO

If a father gets a frantic call from his wife, saying his newborn son was screaming and his mouth was bleeding and the nurse told his wife to leave and go back to her room, you don't think he would remember that call?

The timing of the call corroborates the mother's version of the story. The father's memory of the call corroborates her story. The timing of the feeding , which prompted mom to come to the nursery with expressed milk, corroborates her story.

It is their word against LL's word in this case. Why would the parents make up a story about their tragic memories of their baby?

 

[Sweeper2000]

Smudge and tigger ?

i wonder if she put them in the shredder.

 

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

I agree and it reminds me of the body and language analysis conducted on prince Andrew after the paedophile scandal.
The commentators pointed out the use of language around the 'we' word because prince Andrew repeatedly used the words 'we' as in 'us royals' wouldn't do that kind of thing simply because 'we' are too royal by nature.
It's a form of 'othering' and the goal is to make the other person believe they have no insight into the issues because they are in some way inferior. Imho

That's one way to look at it.

Another would be that this has precisely zero to do with prince Andrew or the royals, and that Ms. Letby is actually really well trained.

Granted, she has done things to undermine how professional she really is, so it really comes down to the things we have no idea about, which are only apparent to those in the courtroom - demeanour, overall attitude when answering questions, responsiveness, genuity, and most importantly IS SHE BELIEVABLE.

JMO

 

[Parker Knoll]

Anything is possible at this stage sweep !

 

[katydid23]

Would it be fair to assume their were other phone calls surrounding the 9.11pm call though? Do we have a complete log of their calls that evening/night, or has only the one call been highlighted?

There was another call an hour later when the collapse happened. And the midwife was also on that call. So it is clear what that call was about.

LL was caught out in this incident, in my opinion. I think this is one of the situations in which it is very clear that she was lying about things and it is detrimental to her overall case, in my opinion.

 

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

If a father gets a frantic call from his wife, saying his newborn son was screaming and his mouth was bleeding and the nurse told his wife to leave and go back to her room, you don't think he would remember that call?

The timing of the call corroborates the mother's version of the story. The father's memory of the call corroborates her story. The timing of the feeding , which prompted mom to come to the nursery with expressed milk, corroborates her story.

It is their word against LL's word in this case. Why would the parents make up a story about their tragic memories of their baby?

Completely agree he would remember the call.

However, over the space of an evening and night, assuming there are many calls, would a person be able to pinpoint exactly which call was made at a certain time?

 

[Sweeper2000]

If a father gets a frantic call from his wife, saying his newborn son was screaming and his mouth was bleeding and the nurse told his wife to leave and go back to her room, you don't think he would remember that call?

The timing of the call corroborates the mother's version of the story. The father's memory of the call corroborates her story. The timing of the feeding , which prompted mom to come to the nursery with expressed milk, corroborates her story.

It is their word against LL's word in this case. Why would the parents make up a story about their tragic memories of their baby?

It’s quite strong testimony imo but I believe these parents had time for what is a highly trivial memory in Regards to the time to be dulled under recall. Was there anything to suggest that actually under witness interview the memory wasn’t prompted by suggestion by the interviewers?

 

[Xanadu62]

It was at 9.11pm in the night. The father was unlikely to be getting that many calls that late at night from anyone but his wife.

Also, Ben Myers had the opportunity to cross examine the father and raise the same questions being asked here. He did not, the below is all he asked. If the defence don't think it's relevant or important, it isn't.

Mr Myers asks if the bleeding was referred to at the 10.52pm phone call, rather than 9.11pm. The father replies it was not; that was referred to in the 9.11pm phone call.

That completes the father's evidence.

 

[JamesMcGillEsquire]

There was another call an hour later when the collapse happened. And the midwife was also on that call. So it is clear what that call was about.

LL was caught out in this incident, in my opinion. I think this is one of the situations in which it is very clear that she was lying about things and it is detrimental to her overall case, in my opinion.

Were these the only two calls made between the couple, in this timeframe?

 

[Xanadu62]

It’s quite strong testimony imo but I believe these parents had time for what is a highly trivial memory to be dulled under recall.

You can't seriously believe that a call where the father incorrectly dismissed his wife's concerns about bleeding, only for their new born baby to die shortly after with bleeding, as trivial for them...? He will be beating himself up over that call for the rest of his life, for not taking his wife more seriously. It was one of the last calls between him and his wife before their baby died!

"He tells the court the phone call he received from his wife at 9.11pm, wo was "upset and very worried" about the bleeding from the baby's mouth.

He said he was sure the medical staff knew what they were doing, and she was panicking over nothing.

The second phone call was split between the midwife and his wife. He was told: "Don't panic, but get over here now.""

 

[esther43]

[

That's one way to look at it.

Another would be that this has precisely zero to do with prince Andrew or the royals, and that Ms. Letby is actually really well trained.

Granted, she has done things to undermine how professional she really is, so it really comes down to the things we have no idea about, which are only apparent to those in the courtroom - demeanour, overall attitude when answering questions, responsiveness, genuity, and most importantly IS SHE BELIEVABLE.

JMO

The reference to the royals was more to offer some broader context to the 'we all' approach that LL is applying in testimony.
Not sure people will buy it as LL has few allies. She seems to be flying solo as it were.

 

[esther43]

Completely agree he would remember the call.

However, over the space of an evening and night, assuming there are many calls, would a person be able to pinpoint exactly which call was made at a certain time?

Well yes, by the phone records.

 

[katydid23]

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 'when' mom visited----so how can she deny mom's claim that she visited at 9 pm?

Letby says she cannot recall why the mother came down specifically, but she came down with breastmilk.

Letby says she does not recall 'why' the mom visited her baby, but the mom did have expressed breastmilk with her. Well, duh, doesn't that mean she expected to be bringing milk for the 9 pm feed?

Letby denies telling the mother to leave. She says that is not something that would be done.

That is a pretty vague answer...." 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.

How would mom know about the blood at 9 pm when she called her husband if it didn't happen until 10?

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

 

[Parker Knoll]

It’s quite strong testimony imo but I believe these parents had time for what is a highly trivial memory in Regards to the time to be dulled under recall. Was there anything to suggest that actually under witness interview the memory wasn’t prompted by suggestion by the interviewers?

Sweep this was anything but a “ highly trivial “ memory of a call.
It would be seared into his memory, it was the phone call before the unthinkable happened. It would be impossible to forget as a parent.