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

[notsure]

I’ve just caught up with today’s events and WOW! The Prosecution is doing a fabulous job of showing how she is the only person who tells the truth MOO

Every person on that ward would have a different memory of events, imo.

 

[katydid23]

I’m really not convinced about the prosecution’s strategy so far. So much focus on how she’s texting at work: yes, she’s unprofessional (I think that’s has probably already been accepted as fact by the jury based on previous evidence ), but by making such a big deal out of how she was bored and texting , aren’t you creating the impression that she was too distracted to properly do her job and care for the babies, so mistakes were more likely to be made? Ie giving the jury material to find her guilty of man slaughter not murder ?

I don't think so because the deaths have been attributed to purposeful assaults---not accidents or negligence.

I think he is attacking her character and integrity because he has to chip away that 'nice nurse Lucy' narrative that was so prominent at the start.

 

[Anxala]

However, the trial has already heard that colleagues, and supervision, for the most part, thought well of her, and considered her a decent nurse. The defence counsel will be able to intimate, in closing argument if not before, that the prosecution is really petty and grasping at straws, and that none of this is proof of the crimes of murder or attempted murder.

Oh I agree. I was just commenting on what I thought the prosecution's angle was.

That she was well regarded by her colleagues and seen, generally, as a competent and hard-working nurse is a fact that no amount of prosecution 'nit-picking' can change. And some of it really was nit-picking, I thought.

And, as you say, it's certainly not evidence of guilt.

 

[ShireChe]

I don't think so because the deaths have been attributed to purposeful assaults---not accidents or negligence.

I think he is attacking her character and integrity because he has to chip away that 'nice nurse Lucy' narrative that was so prominent at the start.

Yes. I agree this is exactly what the prosecution are doing.

Yes the consultants had suspicions, but there was also generally positive indications of her nursing work and commitment to the job. If the prosecution can say 'well actually, she wasn't really a good nurse, or commited and liked to break rules' then it tears down a pillar of the defence.

And I think it will more than likely resonate hugely with the jury who lets not forget are not medical experts

 

[DinerMite]

Today was pretty difficult to read because it truly hit home as to what has happened (allegedly) imo.

My first reaction was simply: "Oh Lucy" with a headshake.

 

[ColourPurple]

I suspect, at least from today, there’s going to be an incident where he will allege she was messaging during a resus she was a part of or in a timeframe she was doing something important (like a feed).

The only possible ones I can think of are in relation to Baby Q where she uses "lol" in two text messages, but I'm not sure timewise how they fit in with the timings of any resus attempts by anyone for Baby Q:


Letby records for family communication at 1pm: 'Parents visited shortly after [Child Q] had been screened and commenced on CPAP. Mum upset++ and dad has since stated mum upset that she was not contacted on postnatal ward about need for intervention.'

Letby adds she explained the situation and apologies were given.

Letby messages a nursing colleague about the situation on the neonatal unit, adding: 'All going on lol'

Letby also messages a doctor colleague between 12.18-1.16pm.


and.

Letby messages a nursing colleague via Whatsapp at 6.40pm 'Girls all rushing around outside', adding one of the nurses was 'stressing', and the situation was 'madness lol'.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, March 31

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

 

[Diddly1]

I’m sure Dr Shipman’s patients thought he was ‘a good egg’ before he wasn’t!

 

[esther43]

Yes. I agree this is exactly what the prosecution are doing.

Yes the consultants had suspicions, but there was also generally positive indications of her nursing work and commitment to the job. If the prosecution can say 'well actually, she wasn't really a good nurse, or commited and liked to break rules' then it tears down a pillar of the defence.

And I think it will more than likely resonate hugely with the jury who lets not forget are not medical experts

Really good point.

 

[esther43]

Where has it been reported she’s on medication for the points you mention? Or is this speculation?

ETA apologies; I believe she did actually mention it briefly at the start of taking the stand. Although, it is purely what she says and not whether it is fact or not. Who knows. Moo

Who isn't on medication for anxiety and depression? the meds should help, it's certainly not going to affect memory unless she abuses the program of meds.

 

[notsure]

Who isn't on medication for anxiety and depression? the meds should help, it's certainly not going to affect memory unless she abuses the program of meds.

On the contrary, antidepressants and tranquillisers can significantly affect memory and cause memory loss.

And anxiety and depression can themselves affect the memory.

 

[Tortoise]

Every person on that ward would have a different memory of events, imo.

Which are the events which staff, other than LL, differ over?

 

[notsure]

Which are the events which staff, other than LL, differ over?

My reply was in the context of the post I was replying to.

 

[Tortoise]

My reply was in the context of the post I was replying to.

I realise that. You referred to every person on the ward having a different memory of events, so I wondered what you meant specifically. The prosecution has presented a cohesive narrative amongst other nurses and doctors, IMO.

 

[notsure]

I realise that. You referred to every person on the ward having a different memory of events, so I wondered what you meant specifically.

I meant that different people can have different memories of events that occurred several years previously.

And of course, if people are able to confer on past events, they tend to confirm each others' memory bias - it's a known phenomenon in forensic psychology.

 

[Tortoise]

I meant that different people can have different memories of events that occurred several years previously.

I agree. So I take it you're not saying the others on the ward all have different memories as regards the events under trial. It's just a theoretical possibility that could happen.

 

[notsure]

I agree. So I take it you're not saying the others on the ward all have different memories as regards the events under trial. It's just a theoretical possibility that could happen.

I edited my post, as you did your previous one. I think the bit I added explains my meaning.

 

[Tortoise]

She named them as Stephen Brearey, the leading paediatric consultant at the Countess of Chester Hospital, and one of his senior colleagues, the TV doctor Ravi Jayaram.

She said that they had been joined in a 'conspiracy' against her by consultant John Gibbs and a female doctor who cannot be named for legal reasons.

Nick Johnson KC, prosecuting, had taken Letby through a list of 19 doctors who had been involved in the care of the seven babies she is alleged to have murdered and ten more she is said to have tried to kill.

[...]

The list of doctors put to Letby included the male registrar she is said to have flirted with.

When she agreed she had no problem with him, Mr Johnson asked: 'Were you in love with him?'

Letby replied: 'I loved (first name) as a friend. I was not in love with him.'

[...]

Mr Johnson reminded Letby that a fellow nurse who had taken the measurement said in evidence that she would have disposed of the printout in the unit's confidential waste bin.

He then asked: 'When did you fish it out of the bin?'

[...]


Mr Johnson said: 'If the jury conclude, let's say, that babies five, eight, ten and 12, were all attacked, you are the only common feature, it would have to be, you are the attacker?'

Letby replied: 'That's for them to decide.'

Lucy Letby tells trial 'gang' of consultants 'conspired to get her'

Alleged baby killer Lucy Letby (right, in court sketch) claimed today that a 'gang of four' consultants conspired to 'get her' over for deaths on a neonatal unit so they could cover up failings at the hospital.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Anxala]

Regarding use of mobile phones, I don't think they ever asked any of the other nurses about what they did. I did post on here back at the very beginning of the trial that it would be interesting to know how LL's texting compared with that of other nurses/doctors, but other posters commented that was irrelevant to the current case, as it's LL on trial, not them.

Well it's the prosecution that's making it relevant and bringing this 'txting while working' issue up in order to paint LL in a negative light so LL imo is perfectly within her rights to say that it was common practice. That's not throwing anyone under a bus, that's just LL telling it like it very likely was at the time.

I don’t know why I find it so funny that they keep reporting that Nick J is on his feet. Like, get the man a chair or something!

Prosecutors have to pace about! For the drama! You can't be dramatic when you're sitting down.

That black gown is made for drama and needs to be able to swish about.

From what's been reported, LL seems to be standing up to the cross-examination very well. If it were me, I would be a gibbering wreck at this point.

I think so too.

Although I do say this as someone who wants her to be innocent: not cleared of charges because a jury can't make its mind up; just innocent of the charges against her.

So I'm still, despite everything (and I am very aware of what 'everything' is currently looking like), viewing her through that 'on the fence to the end' lens.

 

[Tortoise]

And of course, if people are able to confer on past events, they tend to confirm each others' memory bias - it's a known phenomenon in forensic psychology.

Do you know anybody conferred? There seems to be a bit of a suggestion in this that they all ganged up on LL and aligned their stories. And they all knew which babies deaths/collapses were deemed suspicious and they would be questioned over in advance of having police interviews.

As I recall, nurse Mel Taylor testified she didn't mention where LL was when she was being questioned by police about baby C, because she didn't know it was relevant to mention it.

 

[notsure]

Do you know anybody conferred? There seems to be a bit of a suggestion in this that they all ganged up on LL and aligned their stories. And they all knew which babies deaths/collapses were deemed suspicious and they would be questioned over in advance of having police interviews.

As I recall, nurse Mel Taylor testified she didn't mention where LL was when she was being questioned by police about baby C, because she didn't know it was relevant to mention it.

No, of course I don't know! Nobody here knows anything.

Edited to add: "Discuss" would probably be a better word. I agree, "confer" might imply conspiracy. I think it likely that colleagues might have spoken together about these events at some point. It would be odd if they hadn't.