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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #821
I think "I bathed your baby" was an attempt at kinship made by a person not understanding how the mother would perceive it.

If she is found guilty (as of today, I am unsure) I think there will be several motives, not one. I don't know what LL felt towards the parents (complex and ambiguous, probably, but not necessarily hate; a huge voyeuristic element here), and there might have been the element of Munchausen by proxy, yes, but she might have enjoyed creating brutal havoc in the hospital because she was angry with it.

ETA: I looked up some peculiar behaviors and ran into obsession with reality TV. Would not be surprised if LL checking the Facebooks of unconsolable, grief-stricken parents had some element of it.
I thought it was interesting when the nurse testified that after the death of a child, the staff usually give the parents privacy to grieve. Yet Letby went into the room as the mother bathed her dead child, in what should have been a private moment. The mother later said she felt uncomfortable.

I'm not sure about motive, but I think you might be right about there being more than one. Brutal havoc, maybe, but I'm not sure it was directed at the hospital.
 
  • #822
allot of speculation about her character when there is nothing to suggest it indeed quite the opposite. A nurse who who knew her on the ward since her university placements in 2011 said “she was a highly qualified and dedicated neonatal nurse”. I am confident any slights of character would have been noticed.
 
  • #823
A lot of us have been somewhat puzzled over the past few years, first by LL being arrested, and then by her not being granted bail for the past nearly 2 years. Of course we did not know of all the evidence LE had. One thing we have only just learnt is that it seems that there was a significant number of staff who were very suspicious of her (anyone know how many?) - not that I'm saying that LE would not have pursued the case if that wasn't so, but it may have added weight to their investigation. JMO
 
  • #824
They were suspicious of the spike in collapses and deaths not with Lucy specifically. They became suspicious of Lucy after finding out she was the only nurse present supposedly in most of the cases but not all after reviewing the notes. Remember the defence stating her presence was the only recurring element.
 
  • #825
I thought it was interesting when the nurse testified that after the death of a child, the staff usually give the parents privacy to grieve. Yet Letby went into the room as the mother bathed her dead child, in what should have been a private moment. The mother later said she felt uncomfortable.

I'm not sure about motive, but I think you might be right about there being more than one. Brutal havoc, maybe, but I'm not sure it was directed at the hospital.

Using Mrs. Marple's "pattern observance" - I saw it once in someone angry with authority. The havoc that followed was not with the client, but rather, everything around them. Even totally useless acts (hiding documents that could be easily reprinted) were notable. I can't say the person behaving so was incapable or crazy, rather, the opposite. But the behavior caused "what the heck?" response in everyone. So, I wonder if Lucy first being the face of the campaign, but nothing following when the campaign stopped (no promotion, nothing) created certain anger and frustration. I would not be surprised if anger was also with one of the coworkers or even a doctor, but - JMO - she was very angry.

As to this voyeuristic approach, here i can't fully disengage from the context of reality shows; however, newer studies used the same term, "voyeuristic behavior", for someone who's obsessed with celebrities' SM. IMHO, when we move into social media, we move into LL's realm. One article described "loneliness and boredom" as the driving forces for such behaviors. "Living vicariously through the lives of the people we are watching", and "creating drama" were the terms I encountered in several articles.



So, I think it was extreme, but this is what she tried to do. I don't think her note was a confession, after all, why confide? She didn't attempt self harm, and she denies any wrongdoing. I think it was another attempt at extreme drama, and this is why she left it for the people to see and discuss.
 
  • #826
They were suspicious of the spike in collapses and deaths not with Lucy specifically. They became suspicious of Lucy after finding out she was the only nurse present supposedly in most of the cases but not all after reviewing the notes. Remember the defence stating her presence was the only recurring element.
The consultant yesterday said the suspicions was for LL
Tweets from Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue

4.41 pm
Dr Jayaram told the court that when he raised initial concerns about Ms Letby he was told 'not to make a fuss' by senior managers, he said he 'wished' he had been 'more courageous' in reporting his concerns. The case has been adjourned until tomorrow
 
  • #827
A couple of thoughts on the note:

1. I totally get the 'thought download' anxiety explanation until you get to the 'on purpose' bit. Imagine you had crashed your car into someone and you were feeling guilty about it, you may say 'I did this' and 'it's my fault they are hurt' - but in what world would you ever say I crashed into them 'on purpose'? It so clearly implies intent, I struggle to fathom why an innocent person would write this.

2. Has anyone discussed the idea that it says 'No Cure for them' (rather than 'to care for them')? That is how I originally read it. The N shape is strikingly similar to 'No hope' written top right.
The “on purpose“ might actually be the words used by someone who has thought I might have hurt them by accident? suggests she may have been feeling guilty about perceived failings in the care delivered which is fitting with the notes general theme. Low self esteem “not good enough“, I“I don’t deserve to live“ “I am a horrible evil person”. She literally might just be saying the opposite of what she actually believes which does happen and often. If you look at how that note pans out it’s much more emotional and less lucid towards the second phase. Suggesting something other than a lucid and genuine state of mind. That whole note speaks of turmoil and depression rather than someone actually confessing which would be less emotional and much more straightforward. Certainly wouldn’t be preceded by the words “I haven’t done anything wrong“
 
  • #828
Regarding the possibility of false memory in relation to baby A skin ..is the Jury likely to except that possibility when LL herself states it was there ?
Given the line being used by the defence I fully expect they will say LL was also convinced it was there by the discussions afterwards.

We've now got an additional witness to add to the list I compiled the other day, a senior consultant no less, with a reputation of integrity; nothing untoward was brought up by the defence about his integrity. A consultant, a registrar doctor, and a senior nurse. The nurse, the only one of the three who was present for both collapses, apart from LL, has said (wtte) she was immediately struck that Baby B's skin looked the same as she'd seen on Baby A, which resolves the question for me.
 
Last edited:
  • #829
The consultant yesterday said the suspicions was for LL
Tweets from Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue

4.41 pm
Dr Jayaram told the court that when he raised initial concerns about Ms Letby he was told 'not to make a fuss' by senior managers, he said he 'wished' he had been 'more courageous' in reporting his concerns. The case has been adjourned until tomorrow
yes but only after the spike in deaths and collapse. It was noticed that Lucy was the only consistent presence in these otherwise unexplained cases.Nothing at all to do with her character, work standards and general perception by the staff around her. He was the doctor who noticed she was working during these cases. The defence has stated “her presence“ is the only implicative pattern.
 
  • #830
yes but only after the spike in deaths and collapse. It was noticed that Lucy was the only consistent presence in these otherwise unexplained cases.Nothing at all to do with her character, work standards and general perception by the staff around her. He was the doctor who noticed she was working during these cases. The defence has stated “her presence“ is the only implicative pattern.
Yes I agree I just wanted to clarify yhe consultants suspected LL herself before police called etc
 
  • #831
  • #832
Given the line being used by the defence I fully expect they will say LL was also convinced it was there by the discussions afterwards.

We've now got an additional witness to add to the list I compiled the other day, a senior consultant no less, with a reputation of integrity; nothing untoward was brought up by the defence about his integrity. A consultant, a registrar doctor, and a senior nurse. The nurse, the only one of the three who was present for both collapses, apart from LL, has said she was immediately struck that Baby B's skin looked the same as she'd seen on Baby A, which resolves the question for me.

Yes I totally agree .. and I struggle to see how the Jury will not "be sure" regarding baby A skin
 
  • #833
The consultant yesterday said the suspicions was for LL
Tweets from Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue

4.41 pm
Dr Jayaram told the court that when he raised initial concerns about Ms Letby he was told 'not to make a fuss' by senior managers, he said he 'wished' he had been 'more courageous' in reporting his concerns. The case has been adjourned until tomorrow
I wish the reporting had made it clear about what stage this was at.

I'm remembering that text from another nurse who said about babies A, C & D "were they that different?" And it also prompts a thought about the varied alleged methods of murder/attempted murder. IMO
 
  • #834
I wish the reporting had made it clear about what stage this was at.

I'm remembering that text from another nurse who said about babies A, C & D "were they that different?" And it also prompts a thought about the varied alleged methods of murder/attempted murder. IMO

"The consultant said that around the time of Child A’s inquest a group of clinicians had begun to raise concerns to hospital bosses about the “association we had seen with an individual being present in those situations and, how do I say diplomatically, being told we really should not really be saying such things and not to make a fuss”.

Presumably there is no way of us knowing when Baby As inquest was
 
  • #835
9:26am

Here is a round-up of what happened in court on Monday, October 24: Lucy Letby trial: Colleague nurse thought ‘not again’ when baby suddenly collapsed

10:03am

Later on Monday, consultant paediatrician Dr Ravi Jayaram gave evidence. He said the unusual skin discolouration of a baby boy “didn’t fit with anything [he] had ever seen”: Lucy Letby trial: Consultant tells court skin marks on dying baby ‘didn’t fit with anything he’d seen’

10:34am

The trial is now resuming, with someone who was a consultant paediatrician at the time of June 2015, giving evidence in court in relation to Child A and Child B.

10:37am

She said she "cannot recall" the events for Child B's collapse at 12.30am on June 10, as it was seven years ago, and her recollection would be based on the statement she had given to police.

10:40am

The court is shown clinical notes made by her, written retrospectively at 2.40am on June 10, 2015.
She was called at home at 12.36am, and arrived at the neonatal unit at 12.50am.
She recorded Child B "went apnoeic [stopped breathing]", followed by "suddenly purple blotching of body all over, with slowing of heart rate."

10:41am

The consultant says the 'purple blotching' would have been the registrar's account of events, relayed to her.

 
  • #836
"The consultant said that around the time of Child A’s inquest a group of clinicians had begun to raise concerns to hospital bosses about the “association we had seen with an individual being present in those situations and, how do I say diplomatically, being told we really should not really be saying such things and not to make a fuss”.

Presumably there is no way of us knowing when Baby As inquest was
The only reference to a date I've seen is this part

"Mr Myers also asked why the consultant had not mentioned any discolouration in a July 2015 statement to the coroner presiding over the inquest of Child A."

I think the inquest might not have actually been held until 2016 though.

This was an earlier trial update - Dr Harkness's evidence (assuming the reporter is correct):

"The defence say the skin patterns are also not referenced in Child A's inquest report from October 2016, but "pale and poor peripheral perfusion"."


Consultant tells trial skin marks ‘didn’t fit with anything he’d seen’
Nurse Lucy Letby denies the murders of seven babies and the attempted murders of 10 others.
www.expressandstar.com
www.expressandstar.com
 
Last edited:
  • #837
10:44am

The registrar also relayed Child B was bagged and tubed, and the heart rate went up, with adrenaline "not required".
The consultant noted, for her observation: "Upon my arrival purple blotching right mid-abdomen and right hand." The baby was "pink and active".

10:44am

The prosecution asks: "Do you have any independent recollection of that now?"
The consultant replies: "No."

10:51am

The consultant relays the various medical observations that were recorded at the time, including blood gases, protein levels, and heart rate.

 
  • #838
10:57am

The consultant tells the court discussions had been ongoing since the evening of June 9, in light of Child B's twin brother dying, on whether Child A and/or Child B had been affected by the mum's blood condition.
Consultants at Great Ormond Street Hospital had said they "did not feel" the mother's condition would affect the baby "in any way", while consultants at Alder Hey Hospital suggested further blood tests being carried.
Following Child B's collapse, the blood observations taken were 'good', the court heard, and meant the requested extra tests were "held off".

10:58am

Child B was restarted on antibiotics "as a precaution".
There was still concern her circulation had to return to normal, so the consultant noted more fluid was administered to help with that.

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Tuesday, October 25
 
  • #839
Yes I agree I just wanted to clarify yhe consultants suspected LL herself before police called etc
Yes that’s true but IMO speaks of a bias. ”these cases are unexplained so someone must be to blame” rather than the multiple and varied cases may be caused by medical issues. If the police investigation began with doctors reporting suspicious deaths and Lucy being present which was the only link the investigation is already skewed and perhaps pointed away from other explanations. It also follows that most suspicion was aroused after people ”noticed” the unusual skin conditions Which is what has pointed to air embolism as a potential but not proven cause of death and collapse. the unusual skin colour which apparently is under much debate whether or not it was there or even a consistent thing across the cases Might not have been unusual and might not have even been present.
 
  • #840
11:04am

The consultant's notes add: "Spoke to parents.
"Purple discolouration almost resolved.
"?? cause."
The consultant says, from looking at her notes, she was "quite puzzled" by that as there were two question marks.
The notes add: "Stabilised at present.
"[Continued antibiotics].
"[Nil by mouth].
"Repeat gas and wean as tolerated."

11:05am

The notes conclude for further tests to be repeated at 7.30am, at the end of the night shift.

11:06am

Ben Myers KC, for Letby's defence, asks about "one area" on the clinical notes talked about.

LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Tuesday, October 25
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
57
Guests online
2,778
Total visitors
2,835

Forum statistics

Threads
632,751
Messages
18,631,198
Members
243,278
Latest member
En0Ka
Back
Top