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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #361
Awful to imagine Baby Es mother sat opposite LL in that court room knowing LLs version of events doesn't match hers at all. It really must be a very difficult thing for the parents, particularly when they must be sure she is lying (imo).
 
  • #362
12:28pm

Letby says she "cannot explain" why the blood aspirate is not recorded in the aspirate chart, but is in her nursing notes.
Letby is asked to read a note on the schedule for Child E, in which it is said Belinda Simcock gave a feed to a child in room 2 at 10pm.
Letby says she cannot recall why Belinda Simcock had come to room 1 for the 10pm readings.
Mr Johnson asks if Belinda Simcock was brought in to sign paperwork at the time of the collapse to cover for Letby's actions. Letby denies this.
Letby said Belinda Simcock had carried out the drip readings for Child E, and signed it, as specific information like that is not passed on from one nurse to another.

 
  • #363
Why has she brought up 'raw sewerage' today? Is she claiming it caused the death of this particular baby or some of the other babies? Did BM ask any of the experts whether raw sewerage could have caused the deaths (I assume not)? Just seems like another desperate, haphazard move from her.

The "Gang of Four". Raw sewage. It will be the "man on the grassy knoll", next.
 
  • #364
This just sounds desperate now, to me.
It makes no sense, why would a nurse come an hour later. Ll said it was a quiet night, so they weren’t exceptionally busy, why would that nurse wait an hour to assist.
Moo
 
  • #365
Seems as though she can’t make up her mind on this one. First the mothers timing, the bile, the nappy and now the colour on the abdomen; quite in contrast with what she’s said previously.
All my own thoughts JMO etc
I think Baby E's mum showing up a little early for the feeding really caught LL off guard that night. It caused her to make some quick decisions about her notes and she made some sloppy, risky choices. Thank Goodness this KC is picking up on all of it and putting it to her.
 
  • #366
12:31pm

Letby is asked if she recalls who rang Child E's mother when Child E collapsed.
She said it would have been a "collective decision" to contact the midwifery staff.
Letby accepts Child E's mother made a phone call at 9.11pm, but does not accept the evidence of the conversation about Child E 'bleeding from his mouth' and there was 'nothing to worry about'.
Benjamin Myers rises to say Letby cannot say what was or was not said in a phone call she was not part of.

 
  • #367
It makes no sense, why would a nurse come an hour later. Ll said it was a quiet night, so they weren’t exceptionally busy, why would that nurse wait an hour to assist.
Moo

I think the assumption we can make is that LL is gently suggesting that this nurse is the one who caused the bleeding, hence why she’s shifted the narrative to state that there was no blood until 10pm.
 
  • #368
I genuinely believe that, guilty or not, LL taking the stand is the worst thing she could have done in the interests of self survival.
 
  • #369
2m ago12:32

Letby accused of using colleagues to cover up 'sabotage'​

Lucy Letby is now being asked about further omissions to her nursing notes on the night Child E died.
"Sometimes we don't document everything," she tells the court.
She is then asked if, in the "excitement of sabotaging" Child E, she overlooked certain details.
"No," she replies.
Letby's colleague was feeding a child at 10pm in another room at the time Letby claims Child E began bleeding. (This is a source of disagreement - the prosecution has previously claimed he began bleeding an hour earlier).
"Why were you asking her to do observations on Child E?" Nick Johnson asks.
Letby says she does not recall.
"Is it so at the time of his collapse you had someone else's writing and signature on the paperwork?" Mr Johnson asks.
"No."
Then Mr Johnson says: "You got other people to write things on charts to cover up what you were doing."
"No, that is not correct," Letby replies.

https://news.sky.com/story/lucy-let...ws-blog-12868375?postid=5956624#liveblog-body
 
  • #370
@JudithMoritz
·
7m

Lucy Letby is asked about a discrepancy between her nursing notes and a separate chart. Says "That’s an error on my part. Sometimes we don’t document everything as accurately as we need to" NJKC: "Was it in the excitement of sabotaging baby E you overlooked it?" LL: "No"


@JudithMoritz
·
5m

Court sees that another nurse's initials are on the paperwork at the time of baby E's collapse. Nick Johnson KC says "That’s what you do isn’t it? You get other people to write things in on charts to cover up what you were doing?" Lucy Letby says "No that’s not correct"
 
  • #371
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue

Mr Johnson puts to Ms Letby that Child E's mother made a phone call to her husband at 21:11, in which she and her husband say she was upset and raising concern over the blood around their child's mouth.

Ms Letby accepts a phone call was made. But does not accept what Child E's parents have said was said during the call (as she doesn't accept there was any blood prior to 22:00)



[ So now she is calling out the grieving parents, while they sit in the court room, probably crying ?]
 
  • #372
I think the assumption we can make is that LL is gently suggesting that this nurse is the one who caused the bleeding, hence why she’s shifted the narrative to state that there was no blood until 10pm.
Interesting because that’s just what I was thinking; is this yet another colleague we’re hearing of taking blame.
Sophie Ellis, Mel Taylor, the gang of 4, hospital sewage etc. I get there were improvements needed at COHC but there seems to be a theme here that everyone is either mistaken or it’s someone else.
Moo
 
  • #373
I’m baffled to be honest. She accepts the 9.11pm phone call happened but not that the mother was there at 9pm. She accepts the mothers drawings of the blood on the baby was accurate (therefore the mother has absolutely seen this) but not that it happened at 9pm. She says drs don’t always record notes about omitting feeds? Where the dr/sho says he always records. But there is no recording and there is no recollection of omitting the feed.

Was the feed supposedly omitted because of the 16ml mucky aspirate? If there was no blood why would it be omitted at 9pm at all?

I genuinely think she’s made herself look quite silly today.
 
  • #374
12:37pm

NJ: "You killed [Child E], didn't you?"
LL: "No."
NJ: "Why in the aftermath were you so obsessed with [Child E and F's mother]?"
LL: "I don't think I was obsessed."
Letby says she "often" thought of Child E and Child F.
Mr Johnson says the name of Child E and F's mother was searched for nine times, and the name of the father once.
Letby said she searched "to see how [Child F] was doing."
One of the searches was when Child F was on the neonatal unit.
Letby said the other searches were made after Child F had left the unit, so "collectively" what she had said was correct.
Mr Johnson says Letby was looking for the family's reaction. Letby disagrees.
One of the searches is on Christmas Day. "Didn't you have better things to do?"
Letby said the family were on her mind.

 
  • #375
Awful to imagine Baby Es mother sat opposite LL in that court room knowing LLs version of events doesn't match hers at all. It really must be a very difficult thing for the parents, particularly when they must be sure she is lying (imo).
I really feel for them. It would take a hell of a lot of restraint to sit there calmly and listen to her
 
  • #376
2m ago12:32

Letby accused of using colleagues to cover up 'sabotage'​

Lucy Letby is now being asked about further omissions to her nursing notes on the night Child E died.
"Sometimes we don't document everything," she tells the court.
She is then asked if, in the "excitement of sabotaging" Child E, she overlooked certain details.
"No," she replies.
Letby's colleague was feeding a child at 10pm in another room at the time Letby claims Child E began bleeding. (This is a source of disagreement - the prosecution has previously claimed he began bleeding an hour earlier).
"Why were you asking her to do observations on Child E?" Nick Johnson asks.
Letby says she does not recall.
"Is it so at the time of his collapse you had someone else's writing and signature on the paperwork?" Mr Johnson asks.
"No."
Then Mr Johnson says: "You got other people to write things on charts to cover up what you were doing."
"No, that is not correct," Letby replies.

Lucy Letby trial latest: Ex-nurse says 'raw sewage' and 'plumbing issues' in hospital could have contributed to baby deaths
“Sometimes we don’t document everything” can now be interpreted in a whole different way; eg, bleeding at 9 as claimed by the prosecution and baby Es mother.
JMO
 
  • #377
12:37pm

NJ: "You killed [Child E], didn't you?"
LL: "No."
NJ: "Why in the aftermath were you so obsessed with [Child E and F's mother]?"
LL: "I don't think I was obsessed."
Letby says she "often" thought of Child E and Child F.
Mr Johnson says the name of Child E and F's mother was searched for nine times, and the name of the father once.
Letby said she searched "to see how [Child F] was doing."
One of the searches was when Child F was on the neonatal unit.
Letby said the other searches were made after Child F had left the unit, so "collectively" what she had said was correct.
Mr Johnson says Letby was looking for the family's reaction. Letby disagrees.
One of the searches is on Christmas Day. "Didn't you have better things to do?"
Letby said the family were on her mind.

how can she say it “collectively” explains the searches. If she was searching the family while baby f was on the unit, she could ONLY be looking for reactions to the death of baby E, or photos or the like.
 
  • #378
12:41pm

Mr Johnson tells the court he is now looking at the case of Child G. He will go 'out of sequence', chronologically, and deal with Child F at a later point.
Letby says she cannot recall what Child G's due date would have been [Child G having been born at a gestational age of 23 weeks and 6 days on May 31, with the date of one of the events "not standing out" to her.
A message from Letby's phone to a colleague: "Due date today!"
Letby says she knew at the time [September 21, 2015].
Letby says the date of the event for Child G was "a coincidence".

12:43pm

Letby says Child G had "extreme prematurity" which had complications requiring additional care.
Letby disagrees that Child G was "fine" by the time she came to the Countess of Chester Hospital, saying she had a number of ongoing issues.

 
  • #379
I’m baffled to be honest. She accepts the 9.11pm phone call happened but not that the mother was there at 9pm. She accepts the mothers drawings of the blood on the baby was accurate (therefore the mother has absolutely seen this) but not that it happened at 9pm. She says drs don’t always record notes about omitting feeds? Where the dr/sho says he always records. But there is no recording and there is no recollection of omitting the feed.

Was the feed supposedly omitted because of the 16ml mucky aspirate? If there was no blood why would it be omitted at 9pm at all?

I genuinely think she’s made herself look quite silly today.
Absolutely
 
  • #380
Now12:44

Letby accused of 'being obsessed' with Child E's mother​

Letby accepts Child E's mother made a phone call at 9.11pm, at which time she told her husband she had seen bleeding around her son's mouth.
The prosecution claims this as proof Child E started bleeding much earlier than the nurse says. Letby has previously told the court she believed Child E's mother must have visited the unit much later than she says. The prosecution says the call time disputes this.
"She told her husband Child E was bleeding from the mouth. You don't accept that?" Nick Johnson, prosecution barrister, asks.
"No," Letby replies.
The prosecution claims Child E's mother was told by Letby there was nothing to worry about and to leave the neonatal unit.
Mr Johnson: "You killed Child E, didn't you?"
Letby: "No."
Mr Johnson: "You injected him with air."
Letby: "No."
Mr Johnson: "Just as you had done with other babies before."
Letby: "No."
Mr Johnson: "Why in the aftermath were you so obsessed with Child E's mother?"
Letby: "I don't believe I was obsessed with Child E's mother."
She is then asked about why she searched for her repeatedly on Facebook.
"I often thought about [children E and F]," Letby says.
She searched for their mother nine times, and their father once. Letby said she did this to see how Child F was - he was the surviving twin.
But one of the searches took place after the death of Child E and while his twin brother was still in the neonatal unit.
Mr Johnson says she was "looking for a reaction".
Searches include one that took place at 11.26pm on Christmas Day.
"Didn't you have better things to do?" the prosecution asks.
She says she often thought of them and believed she had a good relationship with their mother.

https://news.sky.com/story/lucy-let...ws-blog-12868375?postid=5956663#liveblog-body
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
63
Guests online
2,275
Total visitors
2,338

Forum statistics

Threads
632,755
Messages
18,631,216
Members
243,278
Latest member
En0Ka
Back
Top