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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #561
Judith Moritz

@JudithMoritz
·
16s

Nick Johnson KC asks why the nurse didn't check baby H's chest drain
Lucy Letby: I did check the drains
NJKC: You removed the (chest) drain and that is the reason why she desaturated just after her father had left... because you were sabotaging her that night weren’t you?
LL - No
 
  • #562
So.. he’s saying she has falsified desats leading up to midnight. That she has told dr ventress these happened which is why dr v has recorded them. But the father and grandmother were with the baby until around midnight and he has no recollection of the desats happening while he was there.

There’s also some kind of mystery as so whether the sho was present before midnight as LL says they were, but no one else (sho included) testified they were there.

Is that about right?
 
  • #563
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
4m

Mr Johnson puts it to Ms Letby that the reason Child H desaturated just after midnight was because she was 'sabotaging' her by removing a chest drain - she says 'no'
 
  • #564
11:24am

Mr Johnson asks about Letby's error, as mentioned in her evidence, about the timing of the blood transfusion being completed. Letby said on May 15 the '0200 blood transfusion completed' should be 3am.
Letby says she has "miswritten" it from looking at the charts.
A blood infusion therapy chart is shown, in Letby's writing, which has in the time ended column what appears to be '0205' corrected to '0305'.
NJ: "The same mistake in two different places?"
Letby says she "couldn't say with clarity" adjusting the time after she had written her nursing notes.
NJ: "What happened after 0305?"
LL: "I don't recall."
NJ: "Really?...[Child H] had a cardiac arrest."
Letby is asked "how on earth" she made the 0205 error.
LL: "Because we're human people, we make mistakes."
Letby says the error is "mine" on the nursing notes, but the timings were otherwise accurate.
Letby says she cannot remember Child H's father being present.
The father recalled "mottling running out of her skin towards her fingers".
Letby says she agrees there was mottling on Child H's skin, but not that it was moving.

11:27am

A blood gas chart for September 26 is shown to the court for Child H.
Letby agrees the reading at 6.44am is a "good" blood gas reading.
Mr Johnson says Child H had had a "miraculous recovery".
Letby: "Yes."
NJ: "Were you pleased?"
LL: "Of course I was pleased."
NJ: "Or were you frustrated that you had failed in your attempt to kill her?
LL: "No."

 
  • #565
Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
·
1m

Mr Johnson has asked about Child H's cardiac arrest in the early hours. Her father, in agreed evidence, said while medics were performing CPR he saw 'mottling running out of her skin towards her fingers' - Ms Letby accepts there was mottling, but not that exact description

Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
1m

Mr Johnson says 'having been at the brink of fatal collapse three or four hours earlier, (Child H)had a miraculous recovery…were you pleased?' 'Of course I was pleased', Ms Letby says. Johnson asks if she was 'frustrated that your attempt to kill her had failed', 'no' she says
 
  • #566
Judith Moritz

@JudithMoritz
·
25s

Baby H was given CPR.
NJKC: Having been at the brink of fatal collapse about 3 or 4 hours earlier she had a miraculous recovery.
LL: Yes
NJKC: Were you pleased?
LL: Of course I was pleased.
NJKC: Were you frustrated by the fact your attempt to kill her had failed?
LL: No
 
  • #567
IMO LL has started off slightly cocky-
She is then asked about the help her colleague gave her.
"I can't remember every detail and I think it would be unrealistic if I could remember every detail," she tells the court.


Yes it’s unrealistic if you’d remember every detail, but it’s also unrealistic to be adamant there was a SHO present at the time of baby H’s collapse when you admit you ‘cannot recall every detail’ and when there is no note of one being there, no evidence of one being present atall. That is also unrealistic IMO.

Strange statement to make, almost makes it sound like she’s trying to appear ‘realistic’…..

MOO
 
  • #568
11:30

Letby 'sabotaged' Child H just after baby's father left neonatal unit​

The prosecution claims Letby has falsified the medical notes for Child H after the fact, making it appear as if she was deteriorating before she collapsed in the early hours.
"You were falsely creating the impression to the registrar, your friend, that Child H was a child who had been presenting problems over the proceeding hours," Nick Johnson, the prosecution barrister, says.
Child H's father left around midnight, so the prosecution claim he would have noticed if what was happening in Letby's nursing notes was the reality of the situation.
Letby refutes this.
Child H had chest drains inserted and Letby has previously said their insertion, and how they were secured, may have contributed to the infant's problems, and collapse later that shift.
"Why were you not checking the drains?" Mr Johnson asks.
"I was checking the drains," Letby says.
"Because you removed the drain," Mr Johnson says.
"No," says Letby.
"And that is the reason why Child H desaturated just before midnight just after her father left," Mr Johnson says.
"No," says Letby.
"Because you were sabotaging Child H that night, weren't you?" Mr Johnson says.
"No," says Letby.


11:32

Letby: 'People makes mistakes'​

Letby is now asked what happened at 3am on 26 September 2015.
"I don't recall," she says, before clarifying: "I don't recall the exact timings of everything that has happened."
"The child for which you were responsible had a cardiac arrest," Nick Johnson, the prosecution barrister, says.
"Okay," she replies, quietly.
She is asked again about another piece of medical paperwork where the time has been entered wrong.
"We are human and people make mistakes," she says.
"I agree the time is wrong," she continues, before adding that the timings were correct on her other notes.
Child H's collapse was "so serious" she needed CPR and there were fears she had sustained brain damage.
The infant made a "miraculous" recovery - Mr Johnson asks Letby if she was pleased by this.
"Of course I was pleased," she replies.
"Or were you frustrated by the fact your attempt to kill her had failed?" Mr Johnson asks.
"No," says Letby.

 
  • #569
11:30am

The second event is being discussed. For the night of September 26-27, Lucy Letby was the designated nurse for two babies in room 2. Nurse Christopher Booth was the designated nurse for Child G in room 2, and Nurse Shelley Tomlins was the designated nurse for Child H in room 1.
Elizabeth Marshall is the designated nurse for four babies in room 3, including Child I.
The court hears a seriously ill baby was brought into the unit during the night.

 
  • #570
Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
·
3m

We're now moving to the night shift of 26 September 2015, another shift on which the Crown say Ms Letby attacked Child H

Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
1m

On this shift, Nurse Shelley Tomlins was the designated nurse for Child H in room 1. Ms Letby was caring for two other babies in nursery 2. Ms Letby has previously told the court that she 'didn't have much to do' with Child H on this shift
 
  • #571
So.. he’s saying she has falsified desats leading up to midnight. That she has told dr ventress these happened which is why dr v has recorded them. But the father and grandmother were with the baby until around midnight and he has no recollection of the desats happening while he was there.

There’s also some kind of mystery as so whether the sho was present before midnight as LL says they were, but no one else (sho included) testified they were there.

Is that about right?

Yes plus the way I read it the baby's observation chart didn't reflect any problems before midnight.

This seems quite damning
 
  • #572
Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
·
1m

Mr Johnson has asked about Child H's cardiac arrest in the early hours. Her father, in agreed evidence, said while medics were performing CPR he saw 'mottling running out of her skin towards her fingers' - Ms Letby accepts there was mottling, but not that exact description

Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
·
1m

Mr Johnson says 'having been at the brink of fatal collapse three or four hours earlier, (Child H)had a miraculous recovery…were you pleased?' 'Of course I was pleased', Ms Letby says. Johnson asks if she was 'frustrated that your attempt to kill her had failed', 'no' she says

Baby AB’s fathers statement about the mottling is agreed evidence. How can she now try and refute agreed evidence when it’s agreed as truth by the court?

I’ve noticed that every time NJ accuses LL Of harming a baby she replies ‘no’ there’s not much protesting of innocence going on IMO, a one worded answer of ‘no’ isn’t exactly proclaiming innocence. Is she not allowed to add more to her answer and say something like I would never and have never tried to harm any child in my care?

All MOO
 
  • #573
Baby AB’s fathers statement about the mottling is agreed evidence. How can she now try and refute agreed evidence when it’s agreed as truth by the court?

I’ve noticed that every time NJ accuses LL Of harming a baby she replies ‘no’ there’s not much protesting of innocence going on IMO, a one worded answer of ‘no’ isn’t exactly proclaiming innocence. Is she not allowed to add more to her answer and say something like I would never and have never tried to harm any child in my care?

All MOO
She can say as much as she likes as long as it relates to the question.
 
  • #574
I personally think this is one of the strongest cases so far. The obs show the baby was doing well and was stable. The dad was there until around midnight and confirms to his recollection baby was stable and no major desats.

The only suggestion she was declining comes from LL either writing about the desats or telling dr v about them. There’s no proof they existed despite there supposedly being an sho?

Then the fact that she rapidly declined to the point of needing a blood transfusion and has a cardiac arrest, combined with a chest drain being partially out/needing to be put back in the correct place almost immediately after dad left..

I’m not sure how anyone could think this was anything but a strong case, and if events happened as the prosecution are suggesting then, that’s one calculated and clever play to get to the end result.

Edited to add, she’s really not very good at recording notes accurately or in the proper amount of detail! For someone super confident in their competency, she’s not that competent.
 
  • #575
I personally think this is one of the strongest cases so far. The obs show the baby was doing well and was stable. The dad was there until around midnight and confirms to his recollection baby was stable and no major desats.

The only suggestion she was declining comes from LL either writing about the desats or telling dr v about them. There’s no proof they existed despite there supposedly being an sho?

Then the fact that she rapidly declined to the point of needing a blood transfusion and has a cardiac arrest, combined with a chest drain being partially out/needing to be put back in the correct place almost immediately after dad left..

I’m not sure how anyone could think this was anything but a strong case, and if events happened as the prosecution are suggesting then, that’s one calculated and clever play to get to the end result.
It appears to have started with baby E, when LL wrote in the notes that the SHO who wasn't on the ward that night had reviewed the decision to omit the feed. The registrar was on the ward, but for some reason LL didn't call him.

We've had such crumby reporting for baby H previously that all these details are new to us and puts the case into a different light, IMO.
 
  • #576
11:37am

The court hears Letby, in her evidence to defence on May 15, said she did not have much to do with Child H on the night shift.
Letby said she was reliant on medical notes as she did not recall "with any great detail" that night for Child H.
Dr Matthew Neame was the registrar that night, with Dr Jessica Scott the night SHO.
Letby accepts she had got "confused" in her defence statement between the events of this night and the previous night.
She rules out staffing levels as a contribution in Child H's deterioration.
She says she cannot comment on medical incompetencies as she was not Child H's designated nurse and was not present for much of the shift, and rules out a doctor or nurse making mistake(s).

 
  • #577
With the inconsistencies that aren’t being addressed satisfactorily by LL, I maintain that she’s made a mistake taking the stand. Just saying “no” or “I can’t recall that” isn’t enough.
 
  • #578
Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
7m

Mr Johnson says this was another shift on which Ms Letby 'wanted to be in nursery one', she says 'no'

Dan O'Donoghue

@MrDanDonoghue
·
5m

Mr Johnson is going over the neonatal review (who was working on unit), Ms Letby spots a nurse on there that was not working night shift but day shift - Mr Johnson says 'yes', then says 'do you have an eye for detail', she says 'yes'
 
  • #579
Gosh, she's a cool customer isn't she?
 
  • #580
Mr Johnson is going over the neonatal review (who was working on unit), Ms Letby spots a nurse on there that was not working night shift but day shift - Mr Johnson says 'yes', then says 'do you have an eye for detail', she says 'yes'
Darn it, she could have blamed her if she'd been on shift!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
151
Guests online
1,431
Total visitors
1,582

Forum statistics

Threads
636,831
Messages
18,704,812
Members
243,931
Latest member
daveyir
Back
Top