UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #23

[May72031]

Mr Johnson asks how Letby could spot something Ashleigh Hudson could not, as mentioned from her police interview.

LL: "I had more experience so I knew what I was looking for - at."

NJ: "What do you mean looking 'for'?"

LL: "I don't mean it like that - I'm finding it hard to concentrate."

Don’t mean it like what Lucy? NJ didn’t suggest she meant anything by ‘I knew what I was looking for’ Did she slip up and tell NJ that she was watching baby I looking for the symptoms of collapse…

She quickly corrected ‘for’ to ‘at’, but the Freudian slip had already been made IMO

Ouch.

If this was part of a TV programme or film, a little musical cue would indicate to viewers that this was noteworthy. Then perhaps cut away to the defence lawyer who can be seen shaking their head...

 

[JosieJo]

Exactly - I don't think we can infer much from a misplaced preposition. You only have to look at a forum such as this to see how misuse of words/poor grammar can change the meaning of a post completely.

Anyway, I think it's simply explained by saying "I knew the signs to look for if a baby wasn't well."

To me it's only about the grammar etc ..its that she changed it quickly then refused to answer etc ..

 

[ColourPurple]

But you also said "in a way I've not seen before in a trial" which implies that you think there's something unusual going on there when there clearly, imo, isn't.

Me saying I haven't seen something before in a trial means... I haven't seen something before in a trial. There's no hidden meaning.

 

[Blondiexoxo]

To me it's only about the grammar etc ..its that she changed it quickly then refused to answer etc ..

Exactly, IMO it’s how she must have been conscious of the slip as she had to quickly change it to ‘at’ and then… silence.

Also, it’s how (in the CS reporting) she apparently said ‘I don’t mean it like that’ then ‘I can’t concentrate’ when NJ hadn’t suggested that she meant anything, he just asked what do you mean by looking ‘for’? Couldn’t she have answered ‘I know the signs to look for when a baby is in distress’ or something to that effect? Instead she says ‘I don’t mean it like that’ when NJ hasn’t even assumed what ‘that’ is he just asked what do you mean?
MOO

 

[Sundial]

Perhaps. Or this is showing the stark contrast between a highly educated word smith (like any KC who uses and analyses words with laser like precision) and a lay person who doesn’t , and who uses clumsy, general terms to describe things which can have more than one interpretation.

I have wondered this, if I’m being honest; was it a genuine slip of the tongue and nothing untoward to it- It’s difficult to know for sure.
That being said, there was that weird sort of feeling that hung there just after she said it, tried to correct it and failed, the silence and then suddenly needing a break right at that moment and then adjournment. That to me was very strange.
Moo

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Maybe, or maybe she's just... "over-tired"

She's definitely being treated with kid gloves, in a way I've not seen before in a trial. She already had short hours and regular breaks and now there's the ending things early. If it's the only way to get through the cross examination though, then so be it.

Maybe there’s something going on we’re not privy to, a vulnerability perhaps? We’ve heard about PTSD, anxiety and depression. Would any of these be a reason for the defence to request that allowances be made for during her time on the stand?

MOO

 

[Dotta]

"Yes,' said Letby, 'I had more experience. I knew what I was looking for'.

She immediately corrected herself, replacing 'for' with the word 'at'.

Mr Johnson responded with a sigh.
'Ah. 'I knew what I was looking for'. What did you mean by that?'

Looking distressed, Letby replied:
'I didn't mean it like that. I'm finding it hard to concentrate'.

She added:
'I'm not sure of the dates at the moment'.

The defendant remained silent in her chair,
her eyes sometimes darting from side to side,
at other times closing for a few seconds,

as the trial judge, Mr Justice Goss, intervened to call an early halt to the day's proceedings."

Lucy Letby five 'murdered babies after their parents went to get rest'

The infants were named by prosecutor Nick Johnson KC as the neonatal nurse faced a fifth day of cross-examination at Manchester Crown Court.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Blondiexoxo]

"Yes,' said Letby, 'I had more experience. I knew what I was looking for'.

She immediately corrected herself, replacing 'for' with the word 'at'.

Mr Johnson responded with a sigh.
'Ah. 'I knew what I was looking for'. What did you mean by that?'

Looking distressed, Letby replied:
'I didn't mean it like that. I'm finding it hard to concentrate'.

She added:
'I'm not sure of the dates at the moment'.

The defendant remained silent in her chair,
her eyes sometimes darting from side to side,
at other times closing for a few seconds,
as the trial judge, Mr Justice Goss, intervened to call an early halt to the day's proceedings."

Lucy Letby five 'murdered babies after their parents went to get rest'

The infants were named by prosecutor Nick Johnson KC as the neonatal nurse faced a fifth day of cross-examination at Manchester Crown Court.

www.dailymail.co.uk

BBM- Is she directly facing the jury? If so, it sounds like she was avoiding looking at them at this point.
MOO

 

[notsure]

Exactly, IMO it’s how she must have been conscious of the slip as she had to quickly change it to ‘at’ and then… silence.

Also, it’s how (in the CS reporting) she apparently said ‘I don’t mean it like that’ then ‘I can’t concentrate’ when NJ hadn’t suggested that she meant anything, he just asked what do you mean by looking ‘for’? Couldn’t she have answered ‘I know the signs to look for when a baby is in distress’ or something to that effect? Instead she says ‘I don’t mean it like that’ when NJ hasn’t even assumed what ‘that’ is he just asked what do you mean?
MOO

How could she not be aware of it when the fellow immediately pounced? She's used to his style by now. It must be intimidating, whether guilty or innocent.

 

[notsure]

To me it's only about the grammar etc ..its that she changed it quickly then refused to answer etc ..

We don't know the exact words she used. The reporting is not always word-for-word.

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Exactly - I don't think we can infer much from a misplaced preposition. You only have to look at a forum such as this to see how misuse of words/poor grammar can change the meaning of a post completely.

Anyway, I think it's simply explained by saying "I knew the signs to look for if a baby wasn't well."

Yet she didn’t say that, instead she said ‘I didn’t mean it like that’ when NJ hadn’t actually accused her of slipping up and letting out something that could be construed as incriminating. He only asked ‘what do you mean by looking for?’ It’s LL who has assumed he was trying to get at something, we don’t know whether he was even getting at something either. He could have just been asking a question, ‘what do you mean by you know what to look for?’.

I’d have expected her answer to be something along the lines of what you suggested about knowing the signs of a baby being unwell. But instead she got defensive ‘I didn’t meant it like that, I’m finding it difficult to concentrate’ then refused to answer any more. LL is the one who first assumed NJ was trying to suggest she let something slip IMO.

 

[GoodDayToYouSir]

Thing is ...at that time she wasn't looking "for" anything...she was casually chatting and glanced over.

Sure, but as a medical professional even just out and about in the world, you see things in the people you encounter which non medical people do not.

So you could be in a shop being served by someone , and you notice their clubbed fingernails, which you recognise is often a sign of heart disease . Or you notice their eyeballs have a yellow tinge which indicates liver failure. It’s not that you are going out actively looking for these things , but your trained eye notices them.

And I imagine when you are on duty , that trained eye becomes even more acute when it alights upon patients . You may “glance” over at a baby while chatting, but your trained eye immediately picks up on any signs of medical distress (pale skin in this instance ).

I took LL to mean that her trained eye was more developed that the more junior colleague .

But This goes back to what I said in a previous post about LL being clumsy with her speech. The incompleteness of her response to NJ has created this avoidable “gotcha” moment , when if she had been more thorough and precise in her answer - “I am trained to spot these signs and as a more experienced nurse than my colleague, I may notice signs which she doesn’t “- , this wouldn’t have become such an issue.

 

[notsure]

To me it's only about the grammar etc ..its that she changed it quickly then refused to answer etc ..

Do you mean it isn't only about the grammar, etc.?

Good example of how we all make slip-ups that change the meaning of what we want to say, even when we're not under pressure of cross-examination

 

[Blondiexoxo]

How could she not be aware of it when the fellow immediately pounced? She's used to his style by now. It must be intimidating, whether guilty or innocent.

Because he didn’t accuse her of letting anything slip, he just asked her what she means by saying she knows what she’s looking for…

Whether innocent or guilty, IMO she was so caught up in bragging about how she’s so much better than other nurses that she wasn’t thinking about the words coming out of her mouth. Whether a genuine slip of the tongue or a subconscious one, she was putting down another nurses abilities and bigging herself up. Even though she said that incompetencies, mistakes, failings weren’t a factor in child I’s death, she still had to mention how she’s so much more experienced than AH and she ‘knows what she’s looking for…at’

MOO

 

[JosieJo]

Do you mean it isn't only about the grammar, etc.?

Yes my grammar is ironically incorrect

 

[notsure]

Yes my grammar is ironically incorrect

The point I was making is that it's easy to say the wrong thing occasionally, even when not under pressure.

 

[Dotta]

I really do not understand some ppl jumping on Mr NJ KC for seemingly being "aggressive, intimidating, pouncing", etc.

He is a PROSECUTOR, and this is not some Church Rosary Club meeting.

He asks the DEFENDANT specific questions concerning the circumstances of the deaths of victims of (alleged) CRIMES.

Some ridicule his erudition -
do people really want prosecutors who cannot even form a proper sentence?

I guess prisons would be empty with meek and not so bright Prosecutors.

JMO

 

[notsure]

I really do not understand some ppl jumping on Mr NJ KC for seemingly being "aggressive, intimidating, pouncing", etc.

He is a PROSECUTOR, and this is not some Church Rosary Club meeting.

He asks the DEFENDANT specific questions concerning the circumstances of the deaths of (alleged) victims.

Some ridicule his erudition -
do people really want prosecutors who cannot even form a proper sentence?

I guess prisons would be empty with meek and not so bright Prosecutors.

JMO

Not at all - simply saying that it must be hard for a less intellectually rigorous person to keep up with such a formidable opponent.

 

[Dotta]

Not at all - simply saying that it must be hard for a less intellectually rigorous person to keep up with such a formidable opponent.

Dura Lex, sed lex.

The Law is harsh
But it is the Law.

 

[Charlot123]

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, May 25 - cross-examination 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,…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

NJ: "Do you agree it is accurate?"

LL: "No...there would be more light visible. The cot would potentially be nearer to the light.

LL: "I think it was nearer to the workbench than that."

Mr Johnson asks how big Child I's hands would be - Letby says they would be small.

Mr Johnson says Child I would be almost entirely obscured.

LL: "Just her hands and her face."

NJ: "Which would be covered by that tentlike structure."

LL: "Not entirely no."

Mr Johnson asks how Letby could spot something Ashleigh Hudson could not, as mentioned from her police interview.

LL: "I had more experience so I knew what I was looking for - at."

NJ: "What do you mean looking 'for'?"

LL: "I don't mean it like that - I'm finding it hard to concentrate."

Don’t mean it like what Lucy? NJ didn’t suggest she meant anything by ‘I knew what I was looking for’ Did she slip up and tell NJ that she was watching baby I looking for the symptoms of collapse…

She quickly corrected ‘for’ to ‘at’, but the Freudian slip had already been made IMO

Suddenly she can’t concentrate and court adjourns til Tuesday. But she hasn’t wriggled out of that one…

MOO

Not a native English speaker here, but in many languages, “looking for” and “looking at” would require different words for translation. “Looking for” implies, “searching”, “looking at” - viewing, seeing, regarding. French “chercher” and “regarder” would be good examples. In fact, there is something opposite in the meanings, as “look for” implies not seeing it yet, “looking at” means, it is in front of you. (The only similarity being, in both cases you might be seeing it, but either not registering, or not realizing what you are seeing). However, one needs to hear how LL speaks. Some people tend to drop sentences mid-way, out of tiredness, distraction, or preoccupation with something else.