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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #601
12:41pm

Letby, when asked, rules out staffing levels as a problem that led to Child I's deterioration on September 30.
For September 30, Letby was looking after Child I and two other babies in room 3 on her long day shift.
Letby rules out medical incompetencies or mistakes made by medical staff that led to Child I's collapse on September 30.
Letby is asked to look at Child I's medical records from September 26-29, and observations early on Letby's shift on September 30.
Letby agrees Child I was stable at this time.
A temperature of 36.1C is recorded for Child I at 11am, and the 'hot cot' temperature was turned up.
Letby denies by this time she had "fallen out" with medical colleagues Ashleigh Hudson, Melanie Taylor and one other.

12:45pm

The ward round posted a "positive picture" for Child I on September 30. Letby agrees.
Child I was due her immunisations, as noted on the ward round. Mr Johnson says this positive picture was similar to Child G, when Child G was about to have her immunisations.
Mr Johnson asks what became an obstacle to that. Letby replies it was Child I vomiting and having to be transferred to room 1.

 
  • #602
Alright, I'm throwing in the towel....husband just woke up and gave me the evil side eye---I need to get to sleep ---it's almost 5 am...Gnight...
 
  • #603
Judith Moritz

@JudithMoritz
·
1m

Nick Johnson KC says that before baby I collapsed for the first time, she had been showing "very positive signs". He says "this was a baby that was doing well, demanding milk and taking it from a bottle". Lucy Letby agrees.
 
  • #604
1m ago12:47

Letby 'raised concerns' about Child I's treatment​

Letby says she raised concerns about Child I to "senior nursing staff", telling them the infant "was not getting the treatment she perhaps needed".
She is accused of attempting to kill the infant four times before succeeding.
Nick Johnson, for the prosecution, is now reading out a statement Letby previously made to the court, in which she said 'I didn't look after Child I a great deal.'
Letby also previously told the court many of the incidents took place while she was off shift.
She now tells the court she doesn't agree that staffing levels, medical incompetence, or mistakes by staff played a role in Child I's death.

 
  • #605
Judith Moritz

@JudithMoritz
·
2m

Nick Johnson KC reminds the court that Lucy Letby sent a sympathy card to baby I's parents after the baby's death. He suggests that the nurse knew baby I's parents so well, she'd know their routine and when they tended to come and go from the unit. Lucy Letby disagrees.
 
  • #606
12:54pm

A feeding chart is shown for Child I for September 30. Mum fed and gave cares at 10am. The note is signed by Letby.
At 1pm a 35mls feed was given via the NG Tube which had a 5ml aspirate. Letby says the 5ml aspirate "is a very minimal amount". At 4pm a further 35ml feed is given via the NG Tube. On both occasions Child I was asleep.
At 4.30pm - 'large vomit + apnoea -> N1' [transfer to nursery 1].
Letby is asked about Child I's mother's routine. Letby: "Not specifically..." she adds the mother would visit the unit regulary.
Mr Johnson suggests Letby knew the family so well through the frequent visits that she got to know their routine when they would be in and out of the unit. Letby: "I don't agree."
Dr Lisa Beebe's note showed she was asked to review Child I due to a low temperature.
The note adds: '...mum reports [low] temperature has been happening over past few days'.
The note concludes: '...monitor closely, if further concerns for sepsis, screen but appears clinically well at present'.
Letby says she does not recall the conversation. She does not recall, as the prosecution suggests, telling the doctor one concern[low temperature] and the mother another [abdomen].
She denies "providing a cover", and says she did "monitor her [Child I] closely", as noted on the doctor's plan.

 
  • #607
13:04

Infant was 'doing well' before she collapsed​

The prosecution claims Letby only liked being in the highest dependency nursery (nursery one).
"I liked being in all of the nurseries," Letby says when asked about this.
Nick Johnson, the prosecution barrister, then asks if she didn't like her new colleague on the unit.
"I don't agree with that," Letby says.
He says Letby had also fallen out with another colleague, who "wouldn't talk to you in the aftermath of [children A & B]."
(RECAP: Children A and B are twins - Child A died within 90 minutes of Letby coming onto shift. The prosecution says he 'most likely' died after being injected with air. His elder sister was attacked 28 hours later but survived.)
She again disputes this.
Paperwork from 30 September 2015 shows Child I was making good progress - and similar to Child G had been due to receive her immunisations. (This is something only done once an infant is reasonably healthy.)
"This is a baby who was doing well, who was demanding milk and taking it from a bottle at 00.30," says Mr Johnson.
"Yes," says Letby.

13:06

Letby knew routine of victim's family 'very well'​

The prosecution claims Lucy Letby knew the routine of Child I's family "very well".
She is accused of attempting to kill the infant four times before succeeding.
"The family were very attentive and present at the unit a lot," Letby says.
Nick Johnson, barrister for the prosecution, says Child I's mother would visit her new daughter after dropping her older children off at school.
"She visited regularly, yes," Letby says.

 
  • #608
Judith Moritz
@JudithMoritz
·
13s

Nick Johnson KC again looks at differences within the medical documents.
NJKC: "You were cooking the notes again weren’t you Lucy Letby?"
LL: "No, I disagree"
NJKC: "To create the impressions baby I was deteriorating just before the time at which the collapse happened?"
LL :"No"

Judith Moritz

@JudithMoritz
·
53s

Court breaks for lunch. Back at 2.
 
  • #609
Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue

Mr Johnson asks Ms Letby if she was involved in an event on 26 September at around 21:15, Child H had a desaturation A doctor on shift, Dr Neame, has previously said in evidence that when he arrived Ms Letby was treating Child H. She says she does not remember

Mr Johnson pulls up a text message, Ms Letby sent to a colleague on that shift, saying she had 'been helping' Child H's designated nurse. Ms Letby agrees this would have been in reference to her helping with Child H

Jury back in after a short break. Mr Johnson is continuing to deal with the events of 26 September

Mr Johnson puts it to Ms Letby, that as she wasn't Child H's designated nurse that night, did she see that as an 'opportunity to sabotage' her because she was 'not connected with her on the paperwork'. Ms Letby says 'no'

Mr Johnson says Child H had a desaturation shortly before 10pm as a result of Ms Lebty 'interfering' with her ET tube - she rejects this
I'm amazed by the monumental work the detectives and Prosecution put into the investigation.

All these tiny details, comings and goings of staff, poring over hospital notes, reports, phone texts, etc.
Tying all threads and reconstructing the events.

Hard and tedious work but so admirable if it brings Justice for those who could not fight for themselves :(

JMO
 
  • #610
1:08pm

Letby says she first monitored Child I's vital signs at 3pm. She said the concern raised with the doctor was Child I having a low temperature, and she had adjusted that by raising the hot cot temperature.
Mr Johnson suggests that "monitor closely" would mean more observations. Letby: "I disagree."
Letby is asked how long the 1pm 35ml feed with thickener, as listed on the chart, would take to administer. She agrees it would take "roughly" 15 minutes.
Letby's nursing note, written at 1.36pm is shown to the court: '...3x8 feeds ebm, 2bottles to 1NG Tube. abdomen appears full and slightly distended, soft to touch [Child I] straining++. Bowels have been opened. Mum feels it is more distended to yesterday and that [Child I] is quiet. Appears generally pale...Drs asked to review - to continue with current plan'
Letby says: "We monitor all our babies closely" in response to why Dr Beebe had said 'monitor closely' instead of 'do what you normally do'.
Mr Johnson: "This is yet another example of you writing nursing notes for something that didn't happen."
LL: "I don't agree."
Letby denies "cooking the notes" to show Child I was deteriorating prior to her collapse.

 
  • #611
13:09

'You are lying, aren't you?'​

More of Child I's medical records have been shown to the court.
The prosecution claims Letby "cooked the books" to give the impression Child I was deteriorating before she did.
On 30 September, Letby wrote that Child I's mother expressed concerns about the infant's swollen stomach and noted the infant was "quiet".
But the mother disputes this and has previously told the court it was Letby who expressed the original concerns.
"You are lying about this, aren't you?" Nick Johnson asks.
"No," says Letby.
"This is another example of you not producing in the nursing notes what really happened," Mr Johnson says.
"No," says Letby.

13:09

Court adjourned​

Court has now stopped for lunch.
It will resume at 2.15pm.

 
  • #612
After such sparse reporting at the time, finally we're getting to hear more details of Baby H!
 
  • #613
Alright, I'm throwing in the towel....husband just woke up and gave me the evil side eye---I need to get to sleep ---it's almost 5 am...Gnight...
Thank you to you, Tortoise et al for all the updates! Sleep well!
 
  • #614
13:09

'You are lying, aren't you?'​

More of Child I's medical records have been shown to the court.
The prosecution claims Letby "cooked the books" to give the impression Child I was deteriorating before she did.
On 30 September, Letby wrote that Child I's mother expressed concerns about the infant's swollen stomach and noted the infant was "quiet".
But the mother disputes this and has previously told the court it was Letby who expressed the original concerns.
"You are lying about this, aren't you?" Nick Johnson asks.
"No," says Letby.
"This is another example of you not producing in the nursing notes what really happened," Mr Johnson says.
"No," says Letby.

13:09

Court adjourned​

Court has now stopped for lunch.
It will resume at 2.15pm.

If this trial wasn’t already tragic and sad enough with everything heard so far; that was quite the eye opener so far today.
Definitely a common pattern with these parents leaving/going home when it happens and their versions of events is quite telling.

Now, not only dr J but also this second doctor has been into the room and she is the one there at the cot side- in this case removing the chest drain (which she said no-one was confident/experienced in- so why was she?!)

She is also cot-side when baby Es mother walked in. No-one else appears to be present in these cases but her. Quite damming IMO
 
  • #615
Letby denies by this time she had "fallen out" with medical colleagues Ashleigh Hudson, Melanie Taylor and one other.
[/URL]
RSBM

This seems to be a new line he's going down. Hopefully we hear more!

Child I was due her immunisations, as noted on the ward round. Mr Johnson says this positive picture was similar to Child G, when Child G was about to have her immunisations.
Mr Johnson asks what became an obstacle to that. Letby replies it was Child I vomiting and having to be transferred to room 1.

Wow! something I don't think we were aware of before either!
 
  • #616
RSBM

This seems to be a new line he's going down. Hopefully we hear more!



Wow! something I don't think we were aware of before either!

All new to me. Well, well.
 
  • #617
I'm amazed by the monumental work the detectives and Prosecution put into the investigation.

All these tiny details, comings and goings of staff, poring over hospital notes, reports, phone texts, etc.
Tying all threads and reconstructing the events.

Hard and tedious work but so admirable if it brings Justice for those who could not fight for themselves :(

JMO
What's really mind blowing to me is that we might not have heard all this extra detail we're hearing now had LL not decided to take the stand!
 
  • #618
I don't understand why she is disputing the agreed evidence? If she truly didn't agree with it, it wouldn't have been agreed
 
  • #619
I guess one of the many things that has me gripped here is that all of these supposed coincidences all involve LL being around. She described some of them as ‘innocent coincidences’, but how many bad things have to happen to children with one person being linked to all of them before you begin to question it?
 
  • #620
I don't understand why she is disputing the agreed evidence? If she truly didn't agree with it, it wouldn't have been agreed
I think it’s agreed as factual evidence by both her own defence and the prosecution. Not sure whether *she* would have agreed to it, but legal discussions between both prosecution and defence appear to agree to the evidence- except she seemingly doesn’t.

At least that’s how it appears to me.
JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
2,614
Total visitors
2,746

Forum statistics

Threads
632,815
Messages
18,632,123
Members
243,302
Latest member
Corgimomma
Back
Top