UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #26

[Tortoise]

3:28pm

Mr Johnson says Letby had used the words a 'rash-like appearance' as it looked like a rash on Child B, and it was "unusual".
"Lucy Letby, we suggest, could not keep out of nursery 1. She elbowed her mate...out of the way."
Letby signed for a blood gas record for Child B at 12.51am while Child B was being resuscitated, and signed for a 1am observation reading, and co-signed for a morphine administration at 1.10am.
NJ: "She was relentless, ladies and gentlemen - she thought she had the cover of antiphospholipid syndrome [for Child B]."
Letby searched for Child A and Child B's mother again on Facebook on June 12 and September 2, 2015.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, June 20 - prosecution closing speech

The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more, is…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[Blondiexoxo]

Fully agree with your earlier post about gaslighting @Tortoise I too hope NJ pushes this further as some of her behaviours have IMO if guilty, shown a very high level of manipulation and premeditation.

The allegations and evidence to support the altering of notes, recording false events, waiting until the exact moment when no one else is around is terrifying when you consider that someone trusted to care for vulnerable babies could betray that trust in the worst way possible. Allegedly standing watching baby K desaturate is something that IMO could support the idea that she got pleasure from watching the life literally drain out of a child. IMO it’s sadistic, narcissistic, calculated and the lack of empathy someone capable of this must have IMO borders on psychopathic.

As NJ said yesterday I have no idea how the defence will get her out of this creek. When all the evidence is presented in the genius way NJ is currently demonstrating, it’s very damning and would IMO involve far too many coincidences to be purely ‘bad luck’ but that’s JMO.
All MOO

 

[Tortoise]

3:34pm

Mr Johnson says the presence of air was the cause of, or the need for, resuscitation.
Prof Arthurs says the gas was "not diagnostic" of air embolus, but added it was "the most pragmatic conclusion", Mr Johnson says. He adds the only time he saw that much gas was in the case of Child D.
Mr Johnson says medical expert evidence from Dr Andreas Marnerides had shown an air bubble was found in Child A's brain, which was "highly suggestive" of air embolus.
He found "no evidence of any natural disease" and "took the view" that the most likely cause was "air embolus".
Mr Johnson says the picture is clear, from the witnesses' accounts - including Letby's, that air embolus was the cause of Child A's death, and if that is the case, then Letby was responsible.

3:39pm

Dr Dewi Evans says, for Child A, the baby was "perfectly stable" prior to the collapse. He cited air embolus as the cause, and that conclusion was reached even before Dr Jayaram's account, as Dr Jayaram's description had not been in the notes.
He said for Child B, there was nothing that could account for that baby's collapse. He said the rapid appearance and disappearance of the skin discolouration was significant in his conclusion of air embolus.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, June 20 - prosecution closing speech

The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more, is…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[Tortoise]

Fully agree with your earlier post about gaslighting @Tortoise I too hope NJ pushes this further as some of her behaviours have IMO if guilty, shown a very high level of manipulation and premeditation.

The allegations and evidence to support the altering of notes, recording false events, waiting until the exact moment when no one else is around is terrifying when you consider that someone trusted to care for vulnerable babies could betray that trust in the worst way possible. Allegedly standing watching baby K desaturate is something that IMO could support the idea that she got pleasure from watching the life literally drain out of a child. IMO it’s sadistic, narcissistic, calculated and the lack of empathy someone capable of this must have IMO borders on psychopathic.

As NJ said yesterday I have no idea how the defence will get her out of this creek. When all the evidence is presented in the genius way NJ is currently demonstrating, it’s very damning and would IMO involve far too many coincidences to be purely ‘bad luck’ but that’s JMO.
All MOO

I would say she is unquestionably psychopathic, if she is guilty. JMO

 

[Blondiexoxo]

3:22pm

Mr Johnson turns to the case of Child B.
Mr Johnson says "we know that Letby didn't like" being in nursery room 3, and there are "many" text messages sent between Letby and four people over the course of two hours.
Five minutes after Child B desaturated around midnight on the June 9-10 shift, Mr Johnson says, Letby turned up in room 1 as she co-signed for medication. No-one signed for the observation readings for Child B at midnight. Letby has signed for a blood gas reading for Child B at 12.16am. Child B had collapsed at 12.30am.
The mother of Child A and Child B said it was "a very similar situation to [Child A]", and the consultant asked for pictures to be taken of the mottling as she had "never seen it before". By the time a camera had been sourced, the mottling had disappeared.
Dr Lambie had made a note of the discolouration at the time.
A nursing colleague said Child B "suddenly looked very ill - like her brother the night before", with the discolouration. Mr Johnson says the colleague had said: "Oh no, not again", and made a note of it, which read "changed rapidly to purple blotchiness with white patches".

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, June 20 - prosecution closing speech

The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more, is…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

NJ has a strategy here IMO, describing baby A & B’s collapses straight after baby O & P, with the same similar quotes from colleagues ‘just like her brother the night before’ when we’ve just heard how this was the case with baby P after baby O’s collapse the night before. Yesterday I wondered why he was going in this order, at first it seemed no rhyme or reason to it. Now IMO it’s becoming clear he’s highlighting the similarities of cases of multiples being targeted within a short space of time, E & F, L & M, O & P, A & B.. it’s very effective IMO when presented like this to think that 4 sets of siblings would suddenly and spontaneously collapse, each time one within hours of the other.

If guilty, IMO after baby O & P she would have almost certainly targeted their brother if he had not been moved away from the unit. The mother of baby O & P IMO may well have saved her child’s life by begging the transport team to take her surviving baby. If guilty, it’s showing a possible desire to ‘successfully’ complete the act and eliminate a full pair/ trio, I think if guilty this could have been a personal goal set after baby A & B. Personally I think if guilty, in the cases of O & P that the plan began the minute of that text she received about the triplets arriving on the unit whilst she was away on holiday.

It’s possibly a desire if guilty to create maximum impact for the parents to lose both/all their babies. In the mind of a serial killer who thrives on watching other’s experiencing pain and suffering, the ultimate goal after achieving their personal pleasure is to ruin lives. What could cause more pain than for the parents of miracle identical triplets to lose them all and never bring them home from hospital? IMO and only if guilty…

ETA - this is where the positioning of the house overlooking the cemetery with a baby memorial garden could come in if guilty. Being able to watch other parents (even if not the parents of victims) coming to bury and mourn their child could (if someone with a morbid fascination with death who also enjoys inflicting pain and suffering), prolong the experience of watching the full grieving process. Being a part of it all from the build up, the actual death, the immediate despair and then lasting grief. Watching parents lay flowers and tend to their child’s grave could lead someone if guilty of these acts to think of the parents of their victims doing the same for their children, having an insight into what they may be doing - which I think may be behind the Facebook searches if guilty - whilst knowing that you were the one ultimately responsible for the entire situation. Thus maximising the feeling of power and control. Having the power to end lives, destroy parents lives and then the control of living close enough to observe the ever lasting destruction. This is JMO
Only if guilty

All MOO

 

[Blondiexoxo]

I would say she is unquestionably psychopathic, if she is guilty. JMO

If guilty the lack of empathy, sadism, calculation, lack of remorse, indifference on the stand, repeating the attacks at such a high rate over the course of just 1 year to end up with 17 victims, the narcissism required to believe you are able to allegedly attack babies in your work environment with other colleagues around and then engage with parents offering to do memory boxes etc immediately after, the premeditation involved and advanced planning by falsifying notes then texting colleagues about the events all IMO indicates a psychopath, if guilty, a very dangerous one who almost certainly would have continued given the chance… and strangely, after the removal of LL from the unit, the sudden, unexplainable, unexpected collapses stopped.

All MOO

 

[esther43]

Nick Johnson regarding Dr Choc
'Two plusses was the best he was going to get'
Brilliant.

 

[Parker Knoll]

Perfectly put Blondie. What utterly harrowing reporting today.
The sheer ARROGANCE of thinking she could of would get away with this literally defies belief - Who is this person sitting in the dock ?
MOO

 

[JerseyGirl]

Lucy Letby trial: Nurse was 'playing god' at hospital, trial hears

Lucy Letby enjoyed "controlling things" on the ward where she allegedly murdered babies, a jury hears.

www.bbc.com

 

[Moll]

Lucy Letby was 'playing god' in neonatal unit, trial hears

Murder-accused neonatal nurse Lucy Letby was 'playing god' at the Countess of Chester Hospital, her trial was told on Tuesday (June 20).

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[magikarpmagikarp]

Since when has Neopuff been referred to as CPAP? I know that they essentially do the same job but so far as I know CPAP has always been CPAP and Neopuff has always been Neopuff. Imagine not knowing one from the other or mixing up your terms in an acute situation.

I believe this is referring to giving CPAP with a resuscitation mask via Neopuff (or self inflating bag). This is temporary CPAP. Air is flowing in as you would for giving positive pressure ventilation, but no PIP (peak inspiratory pressure, or in breath) is given. Only the PEEP (positive end expiratory pressure) is supplied. A lot of times it is used in the delivery room to support a baby who is breathing spontaneously and at an adequate rate, but is labored or has persistently low saturations. If that CPAP is enough to support the baby, then someone has the job of holding the mask on "for CPAP" while the respiratory therapist finishes setting up the CPAP to be delivered by the nasal mask/prong setup the baby wears. CPAP via resuscitation mask can also be used to help resolve a respiratory event when a baby who is not on respiratory support is making respiratory effort, but it's labored or not effective enough to bring saturations up. It is a step between blow-by O2 and positive pressure ventilation. When the baby recovers, the mask can be removed again. With that said, if the baby had an event requiring "a little CPAP," that's something that I would be reporting to the covering doctor. I think that addition to the medical record is shady as hell.

JMO.

 

[esther43]

If guilty the lack of empathy, sadism, calculation, lack of remorse, indifference on the stand, repeating the attacks at such a high rate over the course of just 1 year to end up with 17 victims, the narcissism required to believe you are able to allegedly attack babies in your work environment with other colleagues around and then engage with parents offering to do memory boxes etc immediately after, the premeditation involved and advanced planning by falsifying notes then texting colleagues about the events all IMO indicates a psychopath, if guilty, a very dangerous one who almost certainly would have continued given the chance… and strangely, after the removal of LL from the unit, the sudden, unexplainable, unexpected collapses stopped.

All MOO

If guilty the lack of empathy, sadism, calculation, lack of remorse, indifference on the stand, repeating the attacks at such a high rate over the course of just 1 year to end up with 17 victims, the narcissism required to believe you are able to allegedly attack babies in your work environment with other colleagues around and then engage with parents offering to do memory boxes etc immediately after, the premeditation involved and advanced planning by falsifying notes then texting colleagues about the events all IMO indicates a psychopath, if guilty, a very dangerous one who almost certainly would have continued given the chance… and strangely, after the removal of LL from the unit, the sudden, unexplainable, unexpected collapses stopped.

All MOO

I agree he defo seems to be going for the multiples. Interesting that he weaved in a small part of the note today.
I wonder if he'll end on 'i killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them'

 

[Dotta]

3:01pm

Dr Jayaram was 'taken to task' by the defence, Mr Johnson says, as he had not mentioned the discolouration in notes. He said he had not realised the significance of it at the time, and only realised it when later examples came up in other babies.
Mr Johnson says the accusation by the defence that Dr Jayaram had made it up is "smoke and mirrors" to distract jurors from the truth.
He says there is other evidence, not disputed, to back Dr Jayaram's account.
He refers to Letby's July 2018 police interview. Letby had referred to the rash for Child A as a 'rash like' 'reddy-purple' 'more on the side that had his line in - it was his left'.
NJ: "How did Lucy Letby remember that? Because it wasn't actually in her notes - just like Dr Jayaram and Dr Harkness."
Mr Johnson says Letby referred to it as 'normal mottling' and Child A was 'more pale than mottling'. Mr Johnson says that is "a lie".
Mr Johnson says if Letby accepts that as "unusual", it "causes real problems for her defence". He says Letby used the word 'blotchiness' for Child A in police interview. Letby had said 'mottling' and 'blotchiness' were interchangeable.

3:06pm

Mr Johnson says Letby had said in cross-examination, if it was agreed Child A had died of an air embolus, then it would have been administered by colleague Melanie Taylor, and not by her.
NJ: "We suggest Lucy Letby was as good as accepting that [Child A] died of an air embolus.
"But it doesn't end there."
Mr Johnson says Letby's nursing colleague, a friend, came into the unit when Child A collapsed and did CPR for Child A, and noted a 'strange skin discolouration' she had "never seen before". He says the colleague described "blotchiness" - the same word Letby had used in her defence.
The colleague was challenged on the description for Child A's skin discolouration, that it might have been mixed with the description for Child B.
She said she had not been influenced by what anyone had said.
Mr Johnson says the nursing colleague was not accused of making it up. He says it is the defence's case to picture the "doctors are bad".

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, June 20 - prosecution closing speech

The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more, is…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

The treatment of the Doctors, Consultants and Experts by Defence was sickening IMO.
I was disgusted when I read the reports during these past months.
Sorry to be blunt, but that was and is MY OPINION

 

[esther43]

I believe this is referring to giving CPAP with a resuscitation mask via Neopuff (or self inflating bag). This is temporary CPAP. Air is flowing in as you would for giving positive pressure ventilation, but no PIP (peak inspiratory pressure, or in breath) is given. Only the PEEP (positive end expiratory pressure) is supplied. A lot of times it is used in the delivery room to support a baby who is breathing spontaneously and at an adequate rate, but is labored or has persistently low saturations. If that CPAP is enough to support the baby, then someone has the job of holding the mask on "for CPAP" while the respiratory therapist finishes setting up the CPAP to be delivered by the nasal mask/prong setup the baby wears. CPAP via resuscitation mask can also be used to help resolve a respiratory event when a baby who is not on respiratory support is making respiratory effort, but it's labored or not effective enough to bring saturations up. It is a step between blow-by O2 and positive pressure ventilation. When the baby recovers, the mask can be removed again. With that said, if the baby had an event requiring "a little CPAP," that's something that I would be reporting to the covering doctor. I think that addition to the medical record is shady as hell.

JMO.

Ah, I can see what you are saying about it being referred to as a little CPAP if baby was on O2 or had no respiratory support.
Maybe I saw the distinction between CPAP and Neopuff more because my daughter was on CPAP whilst requiring Neopuff occasionally. So notes would read on CPap required Neopuff, or similar!

 

[marynnu]

If guilty the lack of empathy, sadism, calculation, lack of remorse, indifference on the stand, repeating the attacks at such a high rate over the course of just 1 year to end up with 17 victims, the narcissism required to believe you are able to allegedly attack babies in your work environment with other colleagues around and then engage with parents offering to do memory boxes etc immediately after, the premeditation involved and advanced planning by falsifying notes then texting colleagues about the events all IMO indicates a psychopath, if guilty, a very dangerous one who almost certainly would have continued given the chance… and strangely, after the removal of LL from the unit, the sudden, unexplainable, unexpected collapses stopped.

All MOO

Or she's barking mad, to use a technical term.

 

[MachinaCollecta]

This reporting is unbearable, the heinous attacks are unbelievable and the poor families are listening to it all. God Bless them all.
MOO

I’m finding it really hard to read. I cannot even BEGIN to imagine how they’re feeling.

 

[Honeybirdette]

She elbowed her mate out the way? I missed that. WTF

 

[Dotta]

She elbowed her mate out the way? I missed that. WTF

Figuratively speaking

 

[Dotta]

By the way...

(If guilty...)

There must be something really wrong in the system if early concerns were blatantly "swept under the rug" and later increasing anxiety ignored.

But I guess it will be examined in due time.

JMO

 

[esther43]

By the way...

(If guilty...)

There must be something really wrong in the system if early concerns were blatantly "swept under the rug" and later increasing concerns ignored.

But I guess it will be examined in due time.

JMO

I've been thinking the same dotta. Parents must be furious learning about all this behind the scenes stuff.