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

[Tortoise]

"She agrees with Dr Harkness that Child A had "mottling", with "purple and white patches".
Letby says she cannot recall any blotchiness.
"I didn't see it - if he says he saw it...that's for him to justify.
"It's not something I saw.
"I was present and I did not see those."

Mr Johnson refers to Letby's police interview, in which Letby was asked to interpret what she had seen on Child A.
Letby explained to police mottling was 'blotchy, red markings on the skin'
"Like, reddy-purple".

The trial is now resuming. Nicholas Johnson KC says there is one thing he overlooked from the morning's evidence.
He asks Lucy Letby why she said "blotchiness" rather than "mottling" in part of her police statement.
"I think they are interchangeable," Letby tells the court."

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, May 18 - prosecution cross-examines Letby

 

[bobbymkii]

So today was a bit strange. Rather than following the trial on my laptop with a Dowling Live feed open all day on my office computer I was out with my boss inspecting properties in Oxfordshire with no way of accessing updates to the trial because my phone is very old and the battery dies very quickly and my contract is rubbish for data.
Then as we were travelling back to London I hear a brief news report on the car radio stating that today in court Lucy Letby claimed that 4 consultants at the hospital had a "conspiracy" against her to cover up hospital failings and my jaw hit the floor. Has she lost the plot completely? She's trying to defend herself from the most horrifying criminal charges this nation has ever seen with (quite literally) a "conspiracy" theory?!
But then I get back home and actually look at the live updates from the testimony and find out that instead of questioning the defendant about this outrageous accusation, the prosecutor actually wants to move on from it pretty bloody quickly and instead spends about an hour asking very similar questions about the handover notes to those he did yesterday?
Someone. Please make this trial make the remotest bit of sense to me!

 

[Tortoise]

"Letby tells the court she was in close vicinity to the baby but could not touch his lines as the incubator was closed."


Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
9h

Mr Johnson asks Ms Lebty if she believed another nurse, Melanie Taylor, was responsible for air getting into Child A's system. She says she doesn't know why Child A died, but says if nurse Taylor attached his lines and if air embolism is the cause, then yes


Recap: Lucy Letby trial, May 18 - prosecution cross-examines Letby

Mr Johnson asks if Letby accepts Child A and Child B had air administered.
LL: "No."



Why doesn't she accept it, if she couldn't have caused it?

 

[esther43]

Yeah it was Alison Ventress saying something about others whose faces don’t fit either. She wasn’t a nurse though.

@WaxLyrical I'm pretty sure Sophie E was in the 'gang' at the time of the house move'. I recall her taxying LL and saying 'hows the house pal?' - think she was angling for an invite to the unpacking party.

 

[Tortoise]

So today was a bit strange. Rather than following the trial on my laptop with a Dowling Live feed open all day on my office computer I was out with my boss inspecting properties in Oxfordshire with no way of accessing updates to the trial because my phone is very old and the battery dies very quickly and my contract is rubbish for data.
Then as we were travelling back to London I hear a brief news report on the car radio stating that today in court Lucy Letby claimed that 4 consultants at the hospital had a "conspiracy" against her to cover up hospital failings and my jaw hit the floor. Has she lost the plot completely? She's trying to defend herself from the most horrifying criminal charges this nation has ever seen with (quite literally) a "conspiracy" theory?!
But then I get back home and actually look at the live updates from the testimony and find out that instead of questioning the defendant about this outrageous accusation, the prosecutor actually wants to move on from it pretty bloody quickly and instead spends about an hour asking very similar questions about the handover notes to those he did yesterday?
Someone. Please make this trial make the remotest bit of sense to me!

He said he will address her claims, of hospital failings, as they work through her evidence for each baby.

The questioning about the handover sheets was important (IMO) for highlighting how she doesn't take responsibility for relatively minor transgressions in context to the charges. It goes to credibility.

 

[Twittens]

So today was a bit strange. Rather than following the trial on my laptop with a Dowling Live feed open all day on my office computer I was out with my boss inspecting properties in Oxfordshire with no way of accessing updates to the trial because my phone is very old and the battery dies very quickly and my contract is rubbish for data.
Then as we were travelling back to London I hear a brief news report on the car radio stating that today in court Lucy Letby claimed that 4 consultants at the hospital had a "conspiracy" against her to cover up hospital failings and my jaw hit the floor. Has she lost the plot completely? She's trying to defend herself from the most horrifying criminal charges this nation has ever seen with (quite literally) a "conspiracy" theory?!
But then I get back home and actually look at the live updates from the testimony and find out that instead of questioning the defendant about this outrageous accusation, the prosecutor actually wants to move on from it pretty bloody quickly and instead spends about an hour asking very similar questions about the handover notes to those he did yesterday?
Someone. Please make this trial make the remotest bit of sense to me!

Anyone who's ever worked in the NHS might think that doctors scapegoating nurses for problems on the ward isn't so very far-fetched. If the prosecution wants to move on from anything that paints that picture, perhaps they think so too - or at least worry that the jury might empathise with that point of view.

Just one way of making sense of it anyway.

 

[Tortoise]

Anyone who's ever worked in the NHS might think that doctors scapegoating nurses for problems on the ward isn't so very far-fetched. If the prosecution wants to move on from anything that paints that picture, perhaps they think so too - or at least worry that the jury might empathise with that point of view.

Just one way of making sense of it anyway.

They're not moving on from it.


10h ago12:17

Letby says 'conspiracy group' of colleagues blamed her for baby deaths and collapse​

Lucy Letby is asked about people she worked with in the neonatal unit, and if she had problems with any of her colleagues.
Nick Johnson KC questions Lucy Letby on a "conspiracy group" against her - four of Letby's colleagues, including doctors, who raised concern over a possible link to Letby's presence and incidents involving babies on the unit.
"What is the conspiracy?" Mr Johnson asks.
"That they have apportioned blame on to me," Letby replies.
Asked what the motive would be, she says: "I believe to cover failings at the hospital."
Mr Johnson indicates he'll give Letby the opportunity to explain what hospital failings were involved in each case against her.

Lucy Letby murder trial latest: 'Killer' nurse becomes emotional as she is accused of enjoying baby dying

 

[katydid23]

Depression does distort reality the same as medication for it. That’s kind of the point of it. Doesn’t make you hallucinate but does make you more positive than you would otherwise be. Otherwise seeing things in a more positive light = distortion. an example of what depression can do, can make a very very Negative mountain of what’s actually a very slightly negative molehill.

ive said why I think someone could store them and move them from house to house without really properly understanding, tatfits with normal behaviour for her regardless of just how wrong it is.

i really don’t think the prosecution have proven anything with them. They pointed at two single and isolated examples of something and tried to weigh it against the rest of the evidence, 99% of it. The prosecution haven’t proven anything about the one they said was retrieved from the bin. Indeed they pointed at the example in the memento box as an example of a trophy but then pointed to the rest of them being folded rather than pristine. Suggesting they are not important to her. If they all had of been in the rose box I could understand. I will wait to hear more on their location as I still can’t believe it Hasnt been mentioned where they were all found. I still think the folder is a viable route.

I think the evidence points to her not really attaching any significance to them hence why they were not destroyed even when it’s a good idea after the redeployment And why they were found at all, said that since the start along with the “not good enough“ note. It’s presence indicates it wasn’t something she thought she should be worried about.

I disagree with the premise that the prosecution 'hasn't proven anything with them.' They may not have proven exactly what they meant to her or why she was so engrossed by them---but I think they successfully showed that she had a strange obsession with the handover sheets to the extent that she ferried them around, from pockets to bags and folders, and from house to next house, moving them around in spite of breaking strict protocol to do so.

I totally disagree that the evidence points to her 'not attaching any significance' to them. The first handover, being pristine and kept in a flowered memento box, being treasured and moved from pillar to post destroys that notion.

I don't see how the fact that they were not destroyed is then used as 'evidence' they were not something she was attached to. If she wasn't attached to them they would not have been in her possession in the first place and moved with her here and there. JMO

 

[bobbymkii]

They're not moving on from it.


10h ago12:17

Letby says 'conspiracy group' of colleagues blamed her for baby deaths and collapse​

Lucy Letby is asked about people she worked with in the neonatal unit, and if she had problems with any of her colleagues.
Nick Johnson KC questions Lucy Letby on a "conspiracy group" against her - four of Letby's colleagues, including doctors, who raised concern over a possible link to Letby's presence and incidents involving babies on the unit.
"What is the conspiracy?" Mr Johnson asks.
"That they have apportioned blame on to me," Letby replies.
Asked what the motive would be, she says: "I believe to cover failings at the hospital."
Mr Johnson indicates he'll give Letby the opportunity to explain what hospital failings were involved in each case against her.

Lucy Letby murder trial latest: 'Killer' nurse becomes emotional as she is accused of enjoying baby dying

Ah OK. I'm a Dowling live feed loyalist and this wasn't explained in his feed as well as it was in this one. He could really do her case some damage if he can undermine this theory with some cutting leading questions!

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Depression does distort reality the same as medication for it. That’s kind of the point of it. Doesn’t make you hallucinate but does make you more positive than you would otherwise be. Otherwise seeing things in a more positive light = distortion. an example of what depression can do, can make a very very Negative mountain of what’s actually a very slightly negative molehill.

ive said why I think someone could store them and move them from house to house without really properly understanding, tatfits with normal behaviour for her regardless of just how wrong it is.

i really don’t think the prosecution have proven anything with them. They pointed at two single and isolated examples of something and tried to weigh it against the rest of the evidence, 99% of it. The prosecution haven’t proven anything about the one they said was retrieved from the bin. Indeed they pointed at the example in the memento box as an example of a trophy but then pointed to the rest of them being folded rather than pristine. Suggesting they are not important to her. If they all had of been in the rose box I could understand. I will wait to hear more on their location as I still can’t believe it Hasnt been mentioned where they were all found. I still think the folder is a viable route.

I think the evidence points to her not really attaching any significance to them hence why they were not destroyed even when it’s a good idea after the redeployment And why they were found at all, said that since the start along with the “not good enough“ note. It’s presence indicates it wasn’t something she thought she should be worried about.

I don’t see how LL could have not given the handover notes a second thought, when she was actively ferrying them to and from work in the ‘Morrisons bag’ and the ‘Ibiza bag’.. when she has also admitted today that she took home one sheet because they had medications that had been administered to one of the babies on them. She admitted she made a conscious decision to take that sheet home, yet has denied purposely taking any notes home.

IMO she is presenting 2 LL’s… one competent very alert and on the ball nurse who wants to file Datix reports (but doesn’t), keep hold of tpn bags, knows the dangers of an AE, has concerns about certain colleagues conduct, would never use her phone in a clinical area, more experienced than colleagues, refutes testimony of her colleagues as not true. And another LL who is a bit ditsy ‘woops, accidentally took home 257 handover sheets’, doesn’t know the process of symptoms an AE could cause, didn’t even know what an AE was in her police interviews, used her phone on shift no matter where she is or what she’s doing. isn’t familiar with the rules on patient confidentiality, has a very poor memory that likes to ignite itself and can’t recall things that make her appear suspicious but can recall with certainty anything that makes her look good, and suddenly accepts that her colleagues testimony must be accurate.

Her attitude today on the stand wasn’t a good look for her IMO, I lost count of how many colleagues she has thrown under the bus. Even ones who she didn’t claim to be part of the ‘group of 4’ conspirators. She has dropped hints left right and centre about pretty much all of her colleagues being incompetent in some way, except for doc choc who was ‘just a friend’ even though the notes she scrawled are at odds with that claim. Her taking the stand and thinking that some of those answers she gave today sound credible, just points to her believing she is smarter and more experienced than everyone else. IMO she has probably got away with fooling people for so long that lying is just second nature now.

All MOO

 

[WaxLyrical]

"Letby tells the court she was in close vicinity to the baby but could not touch his lines as the incubator was closed."


Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
·
9h

Mr Johnson asks Ms Lebty if she believed another nurse, Melanie Taylor, was responsible for air getting into Child A's system. She says she doesn't know why Child A died, but says if nurse Taylor attached his lines and if air embolism is the cause, then yes


Recap: Lucy Letby trial, May 18 - prosecution cross-examines Letby

Mr Johnson asks if Letby accepts Child A and Child B had air administered.
LL: "No."



Why doesn't she accept it, if she couldn't have caused it?

She’s saying if the baby died of air, then it must’ve happened when the lines had been connected, by whoever connected them. But she doesn’t think/accept that happened. That’s was my understanding of it anyway. I don’t read it as her accusing MT. JMO.

 

[Tortoise]

She’s saying if the baby died of air, then it must’ve happened when the lines had been connected, by whoever connected them. But she doesn’t think/accept that happened. That’s was my understanding of it anyway. I don’t read it as her accusing MT. JMO.

My post was saying if she couldn't have caused it herself, there wouldn't be any harm to LL in accepting the cause of death.

 

[Tortoise]

Ah OK. I'm a Dowling live feed loyalist and this wasn't explained in his feed as well as it was in this one. He could really do her case some damage if he can undermine this theory with some cutting leading questions!

Yes, it's been really useful having the many different reporters in court for this part of the trial, there are many different things they've all picked up on. It just shows how much there is to cover in a day and how one or two reporters is never enough to get the full picture.

 

[mummyshark]

I have a lot of catching up to do, but I wanted to respond to this post by tortoise from the previous thread:

Mr Myers now turns to the case of Child O, one of three triplet brothers born on June 21, 2016, weighing 2,020g, at a gestational age of 33 weeks and 2 days, at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
Child P is another one of the triplet brothers.
Mr Myers recalls the events for Child O, who died at 5.47am on June 23. A post-mortem examination showed damage to the liver.

My daughter was born on 19th June 2016 at 33 weeks and 4 days, weighing 2040g. She spent 10 days in SCBU feeding and growing before she could come home. She is now a strong and articulate (if defiant!) almost 7 year old.

I know that there are always exceptions to the rule, but I wanted to put in to perspective what the expdcted outcome of a baby born at the same time, gestation and a very similar weight is.

 

[katydid23]

Anyone who's ever worked in the NHS might think that doctors scapegoating nurses for problems on the ward isn't so very far-fetched. If the prosecution wants to move on from anything that paints that picture, perhaps they think so too - or at least worry that the jury might empathise with that point of view.

Just one way of making sense of it anyway.

True and that could conceivably become a problem for the prosecution. However, LL is also calling out other nurses and even parents of the victims and pitting herself against them too.

That seems to be a bad move on her part because it tends to make her look paranoid and like she might have a victim/martyr complex.

 

[WaxLyrical]

My post was saying if she couldn't have caused it herself, there wouldn't be any harm to LL in accepting the cause of death.

There would be harm though, because then she really would be accusing MT. If she considers MT to be competent senior nurse who isn’t going to make such a fundamental error as delivering an air embolism while connecting lines, then I don’t see why she would accept it.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I don’t see how LL could have not given the handover notes a second thought, when she was actively ferrying them to and from work in the ‘Morrisons bag’ and the ‘Ibiza bag’.. when she has also admitted today that she took home one sheet because they had medications that had been administered to one of the babies on them. She admitted she made a conscious decision to take that sheet home, yet has denied purposely taking any notes home.

IMO she is presenting 2 LL’s… one competent very alert and on the ball nurse who wants to file Datix reports (but doesn’t), keep hold of tpn bags, knows the dangers of an AE, has concerns about certain colleagues conduct, would never use her phone in a clinical area, more experienced than colleagues, refutes testimony of her colleagues as not true. And another LL who is a bit ditsy ‘woops, accidentally took home 257 handover sheets’, doesn’t know the process of symptoms an AE could cause, didn’t even know what an AE was in her police interviews, used her phone on shift no matter where she is or what she’s doing. isn’t familiar with the rules on patient confidentiality, has a very poor memory that likes to ignite itself and can’t recall things that make her appear suspicious but can recall with certainty anything that makes her look good, and suddenly accepts that her colleagues testimony must be accurate.

Her attitude today on the stand wasn’t a good look for her IMO, I lost count of how many colleagues she has thrown under the bus. Even ones who she didn’t claim to be part of the ‘group of 4’ conspirators. She has dropped hints left right and centre about pretty much all of her colleagues being incompetent in some way, except for doc choc who was ‘just a friend’ even though the notes she scrawled are at odds with that claim. Her taking the stand and thinking that some of those answers she gave today sound credible, just points to her believing she is smarter and more experienced than everyone else. IMO she has probably got away with fooling people for so long that lying is just second nature now.

All MOO

I’m kind of saying her not giving them a seconds thought is what made her ferry them around. It was such a normal thing for her she didn’t think about it

like making sure all windows are shut before you go to sleep, sometimes you forget to do it.

im really curious about this conspiracy talk. It jumped out a bit and I didn’t think it was particularly well thought out. Hence the bs wording. sounded off to me.

I disagree with the premise that the prosecution 'hasn't proven anything with them.' They may not have proven exactly what they meant to her or why she was so engrossed by them---but I think they successfully showed that she had a strange obsession with the handover sheets to the extent that she ferried them around, from pockets to bags and folders, and from house to next house, moving them around in spite of breaking strict protocol to do so.

I totally disagree that the evidence points to her 'not attaching any significance' to them. The first handover, being pristine and kept in a flowered memento box, being treasured and moved from pillar to post destroys that notion.

I don't see how the fact that they were not destroyed is then used as 'evidence' they were not something she was attached to. If she wasn't attached to them they would not have been in her possession in the first place and moved with her here and there. JMO

enough to assume a strange attitude towards the notes definitely, not quite an obsession IMO. I would like more information but to me 150 over five years doesn’t even approach an obsession.

you have enough to assume that the one handover in he rose box is a memento, if the others were in it as well and ordered in some way again you would have enough to assume they were seen as important enough to organise. The one in the box is the only one you can attach importance too, it’s obviously a keepsake but it’s also easy enough to forget about. I would excuse her taking that one home, the others definitely need attention. The other Handovers you have to take into account the lack of organisation, the condition of the notes, the dates they range from, if there are clusters many other things as well but jmo

the others not being destroyed can suggest they weren’t seen as important as she would understand the risks of them being found if guilty, only suggests it though, also just stored haphazardly in the folder easy enough to forget about and not even notice on a house move. The haphazard bit is a guess. I reckon they are all over the place, upside down, back to front, not chronologically arranged, some folded, some torn, etc etc


I also think her not seeing them as important might explain why they got ferried around

 

[katydid23]

Yes, it's been really useful having the many different reporters in court for this part of the trial, there are many different things they've all picked up on. It just shows how much there is to cover in a day and how one or two reporters is never enough to get the full picture.

I found one reporter who was very thorough in his detailed description of the testimony. Here is one of his reports:

Lucy Letby: Murder accused nurse denies she has only cried for herself during trial

A tearful Lucy Letby denied deliberately harming numerous infants while on duty at the Countess of Chester Hospital’s neonatal unit

www.independent.co.uk

A tearful Lucy Letby denied deliberately harming numerous infants while on duty at the Countess of Chester Hospital’s neonatal unit​

Kim Pilling
1 day ago

She agreed with Mr Johnson that taking such sheets out of the hospital was not “normal practice” and they should be discarded in confidential waste.

Mr Johnson asked: “What is normal practice?

Letby said: “To dispose of them but there are times when they have come home with me in my pocket.”

Mr Johnson said: “There are times when you have taken them.”

Letby said: “Not with the intention of keeping them.”

Mr Johnson said: “What are your responsibilities with sensitive, personal data?”

Letby replied: “To keep it confidential.”

Mr Johnson said: “What would have happened in a disciplinary sense if the hospital management knew you had 250-odd handover sheets at home?”

Letby said: “I can’t answer that. I don’t know what the policy would be.”

Mr Johnson said: “You’re not bothered are you?


Letby said: “It’s not that I’m not bothered. They were at my home address but they were still held in confidence.”

Mr Johnson said: “What, in a bin bag in your garage?”

Letby said: “I’m the only person that lives at the property, so yes.”

Asked about a number of handover sheets found at her parents’ house in Hereford, she said her parents did not enter her bedroom.

Mr Johnson said: “They are not held in confidence, are they?”

Letby said: “I don’t believe anybody would have looked at them.”

Mr Johnson asked: “Do you obey the rules only when it suits you?”

“No,” said Letby.

Mr Johnson said: “You like telling other people what to do but you don’t quite live up to those standards yourself, do you?”

Letby said: “No.”

 

[Parker Knoll]

I find it almost impossible to second guess what she may say or do next.
It appears to be so interchangeable and different.
She wears two hats almost simultaneously.

 

[Sweeper2000]

There would be harm though, because then she really would be accusing MT. If she considers MT to be competent senior nurse who isn’t going to make such a fundamental error as delivering an air embolism while connecting lines, then I don’t see why she would accept it.

I thought the same. It’s assuming she is being defensive Or hiding something, or it’s assuming she wouldn’t be against The idea of AE if it wasn’t her getting blamed.