UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #4

[Tortoise]

10:35am

The trial is now resuming, with Nicholas Johnson KC prosecuting.

10:36am

Claire Hocknell, intelligence analyst employed by Cheshire Police, is continuing to provide the jury with a walkthrough of the electronic evidence bundle in relation to Child B.

10:39am

A nursing note made by one of Letby's colleagues on Wednesday, June 10 at 8.09am recorded that the family were "very upset" after the non-fatal collapse of Child B at 12.30am the previous night.
Child A, the twin brother, had earlier died on the evening of June 8.

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 19

 

[JosieJo]

I think, though, that it's evidence that both sides accept exists/happened but not necessarily what it means?

As @Tortoise stated the analyst was on the stand .. normally the defence would cross examine at that point to ensure the jury knows if its not "a search" but as @tortSaid they may cross examine later...especially as there are so many alleged victims

 

[Marantz4250b]

As @Tortoise stated the analyst was on the stand .. normally the defence would cross examine at that point to ensure the jury knows if its not "a search" but as @tortSaid they may cross examine later

I think that that may be the case. We're so used to seeing immediate cross-examinations on TV dramas (especially American ones) but I'm not entirely sure that that is how it happens here.

 

[Tortoise]

I believe this portion of the trial is still dealing with the ‘agreed evidence’

The agreed evidence referred to was witness statements (mother, father, grandmother) read to the court by the prosecutor, relieving them from the obligation to go in the witness box to give their evidence.

The Analysts' evidence from the witness stand is not in the agreed facts. IMO.

 

[JosieJo]

I think that that may be the case. We're so used to seeing immediate cross-examinations on TV dramas (especially American ones) but I'm not entirely sure that that is how it happens here.

Yes it does normally..here it's complex because of this trial

 

[Tortoise]

10:45am

A message sent from Lucy Letby on Whatsapp to a colleague at 12.04pm included the request: "Will you let me now if any change with [Child B]."

10:53am

The colleague's response said the shift had been "manic", and there had been "no change" with Child B.
Letby enquired again about Child B that night, at 10.08pm, and was informed Child B was "looking really good".

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 19

 

[Tortoise]

10:58am

A text message at the end of June, from Letby, said: "I had a mini meltdown last night about what's happened at work...
"I just need some time off with mum and dad."
The message was sent following the deaths of Child A, C and D and the non-fatal collapse of Child B.

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 19

 

[BuzzC]

The agreed evidence referred to was witness statements (mother, father, grandmother) read to the court by the prosecutor, relieving them from the obligation to go in the witness box to give their evidence.

The Analysts' evidence from the witness stand is not in the agreed facts. IMO.

I’ve misunderstood then.

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Tortoise]

11:10am

Ms Hocknell is asked by the defence about Letby's Facebook searches.
She is asked whether Letby searched on Facebook for the parents of children other than those listed in the charges.
Ms Hocknell confirms that is the case. "There are a lot of searches for different people."

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 19

 

[Tortoise]

Very strange for the defence to be asking about the facebook searches when she's only given evidence this morning about LL's text messages. It seems to answer our question though about when the defence can cross-examine this witness's evidence.

 

[Marantz4250b]

11:10am

Ms Hocknell is asked by the defence about Letby's Facebook searches.
She is asked whether Letby searched on Facebook for the parents of children other than those listed in the charges.
Ms Hocknell confirms that is the case. "There are a lot of searches for different people."

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 19

This is one of the things which has been brought up on here. So, searching for these particular people isn't out of the ordinary for her.

 

[Tortoise]

11:12am

Further agreed evidence is now being read out to the court.

11:16am

The consultant doctor who looked after the mum of Child A and Child B said he had no recollection of the delivery, but could recall the pre-existing conditions the mum had and the "intensive input of care" she received as a result.
He said the mum was classed as a "high risk" pregnancy.

11:19am

The consultant recalls in his statement he first met the mum on June 7.
"An extensive plan" of care had in place for her by other consultants.
He was later informed of a "deterioration" in her blood results and a rise in her blood pressure.
The decision was made to transfer the mum to a labour ward to stabilise the pressure.

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 19

 

[Marantz4250b]

Very strange for the defence to be asking about the facebook searches when she's only given evidence this morning about LL's text messages. It seems to answer our question though about when the defence can cross-examine this witness's evidence.

Perhaps it's the end of her evidence and the defence are asking about the things they think are relevant. Personally, I'm not seeing much which paints LL in a bad light as regards the texts. In some cases quite the opposite.

 

[JosieJo]

This is one of the things which has been brought up on here. So, searching for these particular people isn't out of the ordinary for her.

Lots of different people is not very clear ...I would have expected the defence to ask ...did she look up other parents
Most people will search for people they know in ordinary circumstances.

It does seem to clarify though that the defence do not dispute that she "physically searched"

 

[Tortoise]

11:23am

The consultant added further medication was administered to try and stabilise the blood pressure, and the decision was taken to deliver with the permission of the mum.
The mum was transferred into the theatre for delivery.

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 19

 

[Marantz4250b]

Lots of different people is not very clear ...I would have expected the defence to ask ...did she look up other parents
Most people will search for people they know in ordinary circumstances.

It does seem to clarify though that the defence do not dispute that she "physically searched"

The question was whether she looked up the parents of children other than the ones in the cases at issue. The witness confirmed that she did.

That, to me, seriously undermines any theory that she was doing it as some weird thrill after the events. No, it doesn't dismiss it entirely but it is significant.

 

[JosieJo]

Regarding Facebook searches ..having dealt with many deaths in my career I cannot say I've ever searched for deceased families on Facebook...but my Facebook would show many "social" searches.

But obviously people are different..imo it just doesn't post her in a good light when she is on trial for thise involved

 

[annpats]

But it depends on what LE were looking for. LL's "searches" (like, click on loupe sign, and enter the name), or merely her "visits" to the baby parents' pages. The pages can be accessed via the search, or via "people you might know" section. If you are just checking "visits" to someone's page, you may not necessarily see how the page was found, or accessed.

Digital forensics would reveal how she went to the pages and whether they were suggested 'friends' on Facebook or she typed their names in and hit search.

But she was looking up so many parents on quite a few different occasions (even Christmas Day!) it is of my opinion she was typing their names in and hitting search.

MOO.

 

[JosieJo]

The question was whether she looked up the parents of children other than the ones in the cases at issue. The witness confirmed that she did.

That, to me, seriously undermines any theory that she was doing it as some weird thrill after the events. No, it doesn't dismiss it entirely but it is significant.

Sorry yes I didn't explain myself properly the analyst didn't answer that question...she just said she searched for "lots of different people " ...I'm wondering why the defence didn't push for an exact answer .. unless just reporting

 

[JosieJo]

Sorry yes I didn't explain myself properly the analyst didn't answer that question...she just said she searched for "lots of different people " ...I'm wondering why the defence didn't push for an exact answer .. unless just reporting

Sorry reading back it does say she confirms it