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

[ColourPurple]

Thanks to everyone who posted re. JJK's comments. Much appreciated. *advertiser censored*

Ok, now I wanna know what word was advertiser censored lol?

 

[Dcflag]

The whole being on the ward despite there being no swipe data thing is a possibility vs probability surely?

LL has admitted she has been on the ward hours after her shift has ended. Or come in when she’s not on shift for various reasons, and it’s been agreed that there’s no digital log of her entry.

Sure that means other people could be coming on and off the ward in the same manner with no log. But LL was also the only nurse on shift for all 22 incidences, so the probability of her having been on the ward the very few times the prosecution need her to be is much higher than say, an unidentified nurse working 7 of those 22 shifts and then being on the ward for the other 15 incidents outside of their work hours, without anyone wondering why they keep turning up at work when they’re not scheduled to work.

It’s possible, but the more probable suggestion is that LL occasionally spends extra hours after a shift on the ward, or pops in to do notes or whatever she’s doing, fairly sporadically as evidenced in court yesterday. Opposed to someone else popping in much more frequently when not working and not being noticed as unusual behaviour.

 

[marynnu]

Ok, now I wanna know what word was advertiser censored lol?

I'd like to say it was something dodgy, but no - just x times 3!

 

[Anxala]

Not at all. I have in no way said the jury are less capable than anyone else. The majority of people on here will also not be medical experts. There may come a point if the defence introduce their own experts that the jury will have to choose between competing accounts of experts. When making their decision they will look at all the other evidence too.

ETA: and in fact, while the debate on here is fascinating, it means nothing. It may give an indication or an idea about what a group of randomly selected people may potentially think, but the jury are the only ones that will be deciding and as you say they have access to far more information.

Agree with all. (Also, just to say, my second par was intended as a general comment re the jury, based on earlier posts on earlier threads, and not directed at you, sorry for not making that clearer.)

 

[Cluedoneit]

That was the part of that note that stuck with me too. Innocent or guilty, how bloody dare she assume that their parents wouldn't think about and miss them every single day. I think I said at the time, these parents had waited months to see their babies, loved them, saw them moving around on scans, felt them kicking, made plans for them, picked names for them etc etc. The fact that she could she even think that she, a nurse who looked after them for a couple of shifts, could be the only one to care or think about them, shows some serious disordered thinking!

JMO

That on top of smiling And reminiscing about Baby I’s first bath when the parents wanted to be alone with their child. I have a funny feeling that card went straight in the bin when the parents got home! JMO

 

[Tortoise]

Clearly this case is about far more than shift data and door swipes! You'd think there hadn't been any other evidence about her, the way some are viewing the fact that she has now been shown to come in when she's not on shift without it showing on the door logs, meaning others could have done the same. Most of these events happened at 1am or in the wee hours of the morning.

Nursing notes, charts and treatments signed, her texts about the babies, LL being seen there, patterns such as people leaving and LL being around, her interactions with the parents, her own admissions that it always happens to her, consultants noticing the association, and the biggest of all, the suspicious events charged all being when LL is on shift without the expert who reviewed the medical records knowing this.

JMO

 

[katydid23]

About Baby K, the baby where Dr J allegedly walked in on her doing nothing while baby collapsing---but basically she has now called him a liar.

It was said that baby K was only at COCH for 12 hours before transferring to AH and sadly dying days later

Baby K was cared for by Joanne Williams but LL was briefly asked to watch the baby when JW went to speak to the parents. That is pretty much the only time LL spent with Baby K.

Yet 2 years later she's looking up the parents on FB?

She says " you never forget the babies you care for."

Baby K was there for only 12 hours and under the care of another nurse. Why would LL be doing a search 2 years and 2 months later? This was before she was ever arrested so the searches weren't because she had been arrested and questioned. To me this adds even more weight to Dr J's claims of what he saw that day being completely true.

 

[Kemug]

It is possible IMO.
If this were the case though then once the media ban is lifted, I think we would eventually come to learn that she had some problems from an early age.

I would be very surprised if we don't.

 

[ColourPurple]

Clearly this case is about far more than shift data and door swipes! You'd think there hadn't been any other evidence about her, the way some are viewing the fact that she has now been shown to come in when she's not on shift without it showing on the door logs, meaning others could have done the same. Most of these events happened at 1am or in the wee hours of the morning.

Nursing notes, charts and treatments signed, her texts about the babies, LL being seen there, patterns such as people leaving and LL being around, her interactions with the parents, her own admissions that it always happens to her, consultants noticing the association, and the biggest of all, the suspicious events charged all being when LL is on shift without the expert who reviewed the medical records knowing this.

JMO

Exactly, and the jury will take the new info about being able to bypass the swipe in records, wonder why LL made out that it wasn't possible, before agreeing that it was, when faced with proof... and come to their own conclusions.

 

[Officer Dibble]

Didn't some of the very early press reports refer to LL being part of the "geeky" clique, the ones who weren't mad on constantly getting hammered every weekend and suchlike?

Although that doesn't really chime with holidays in Ibiza, tbh.

I don't think not getting hammered every weekend automatically puts you in the geeky category - yes for some people but no everyone who doesn't want to get hammered every weekend. JMO

 

[katydid23]

Clearly this case is about far more than shift data and door swipes! You'd think there hadn't been any other evidence about her, the way some are viewing the fact that she has now been shown to come in when she's not on shift without it showing on the door logs, meaning others could have done the same. Most of these events happened at 1am or in the wee hours of the morning.

Nursing notes, charts and treatments signed, her texts about the babies, LL being seen there, patterns such as people leaving and LL being around, her interactions with the parents, her own admissions that it always happens to her, consultants noticing the association, and the biggest of all, the suspicious events charged all being when LL is on shift without the expert who reviewed the medical records knowing this.

JMO

I also think there are a couple of 'frenzy's' where 3 babies were attacked and collapsed, back to back to back----Babies A, B and C, and Babies O, P and Q.

In both of these frenzied attack clusters, LL was easily identified as the common denominator in each incident. In the first three, she had not figured out yet how to camouflage her movements and actions. So a few people even picked up on her 'run of bad luck' at that initial onslaught.

On the final three, she had been on vacation for 8 days so there were no unexplained collapses during her absence. But on the very day she returned, there were 3 collapses---back to back to back nights. That was the final straw.

 

[Dcflag]

Clearly this case is about far more than shift data and door swipes! You'd think there hadn't been any other evidence about her, the way some are viewing the fact that she has now been shown to come in when she's not on shift without it showing on the door logs, meaning others could have done the same. Most of these events happened at 1am or in the wee hours of the morning.

Nursing notes, charts and treatments signed, her texts about the babies, LL being seen there, patterns such as people leaving and LL being around, her interactions with the parents, her own admissions that it always happens to her, consultants noticing the association, and the biggest of all, the suspicious events charged all being when LL is on shift without the expert who reviewed the medical records knowing this.

JMO

She also admitted that when she’s on the ward during these times, if she’s needed to, she will help with the care of the babies. To me, that doesn’t seem proper or correct. It means she can walk onto a ward and attend to any baby at any time, with no log or record or proof she was ever there.

Surely that isn’t a normal thing to be doing either? In an emergency maybe, but you’d then defer to the staff as soon as they’re in attendance? Is this a normal thing to be allowed to do in a neonatal profession? Pop in to write some notes and be in and out with babies?

 

[Tortoise]

Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
9m

Lucy Letby enters the witness box at Manchester Crown Court for the seventh time today. Nick Johnson KC will continue his cross examination of the nurse, who is alleged to have murdered seven babies and attempted to murder 10 others at the Countess of Chester Hospital

 

[Officer Dibble]

Exactly, and the jury will take the new info about being able to bypass the swipe in records, wonder why LL made out that it wasn't possible, before agreeing that it was, when faced with proof... and come to their own conclusions.

Good point. Let's hope they pick up on it and discuss it.

 

[Tortoise]

She also admitted that when she’s on the ward during these times, if she’s needed to, she will help with the care of the babies. To me, that doesn’t seem proper or correct. It means she can walk onto a ward and attend to any baby at any time, with no log or record or proof she was ever there.

Surely that isn’t a normal thing to be doing either? In an emergency maybe, but you’d then defer to the staff as soon as they’re in attendance? Is this a normal thing to be allowed to do in a neonatal profession? Pop in to write some notes and be in and out with babies?

I think LL did what LL wanted. JMO

 

[esther43]

Which cases do you think are too weak to have been charged? I am sincerely curious.

I thought the case against child H was weak.

I would be very surprised if we don't.

We are aware that LL was under the doctor in childhood, that she had a strong attachment to a teacher, that her animals are in some way related to her thought process of the alleged crimes and that she felt overwhelmed at times by her parents attachment to her.
Not a definitive picture by any means but an interesting collection of features.

 

[Tortoise]

3m ago10:27

Good morning - here is what we can expect today​

Sky News is back inside Manchester Crown Court where the cross-examination of nurse Lucy Letby is due to continue this morning.
It is her seventh day of giving evidence, and the second full day of cross-examination.
It is expected Nick Johnson KC will continue with the case of Child C.
Who were the children mentioned yesterday?
Child A & B: A twin boy and girl
Letby is charged with the murder of Child A and the attempted murder of Child B.
Child A, the youngest, died within 90 minutes of Letby coming on to shift. The prosecution alleges he "most likely" died after being injected with air.
His sister, Child B, was attacked 28 hours later - but survived.
Child C: A boy
Letby is accused of murdering Child C.
The prosecution alleges that air found in his gut had been purposefully injected.
Letby is accused of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder 10 others between June 2015 and June 2016.
She denies all charges against her.

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

 

[JosieJo]

I thought the case against child H was weak.
We are aware that LL was under the doctor in childhood, that she had a strong attachment to a teacher, that her animals are in some way related to her thought process of the alleged crimes and that she felt overwhelmed at times by her parents attachment to her.
Not a definitive picture by any means but an interesting collection of features.

What was the teacher thing I have missed that?

 

[Kemug]

Yes, this could be a reasonable interpretation of that note, and would include the whole sentence: I.e. I wasn’t good enough to care for them. IMO, if guilty.

So maybe the note really should read 'I "wasn't good enough" to care for them'?

 

[Tortoise]

What was the teacher thing I have missed that?

A further note is shown, with very tightly written writing in different directions, to the court. It is written by Lucy Letby.
The note 'started off as a work-based role' note, with words of 'handover', 'audit', 'workforce', 'scheduling', 'timeframe'.
A close-up of the bottom-left corner is shown, with writing in different directions.
Words include 'Bombay' [written several times] - Letby's pub quiz team name. A colleague's name is written - 'people who were important to me'. A name of Letby's high school teacher is also written.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Tuesday, May 2 - defence begins