UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #5

[Sweeper2000]

Would anyone with experience be able to tell us if baby c was likely to exhale co2 and show “signs of life” after 40 mins of resuscitation efforts if air in the stomach was the cause of the collapse? I understand how excessive pressure from the stomach causes lung compression but thought that gas might reduce enough to allow breathing again?

I’m also wondering how in the case of child c that the staff wouldn’t notice that the lungs were not operating normally due to compression by the stomach? I’m sure that would be noticed maybe not the stomach part?. Also if CPAP belly is routinely aspirated with the understanding of the complications if it isn’t then why wasn’t the same thing expected here? Not saying child c was CPAP.

Someone mentioned upthread that processes in a newborns lungs continued to operate and would allow for air in veins to eventually exit and the baby would eventually recover. Is that why embolisms in adults could be more fatal because that process has stopped? Would explain the recoveries in what mostly seems to be premature babies.

 

[Legally Bland]

4:13pm

Dr Gibbs said he wants to clarify that he is not blaming the parents for requesting to allow Child C to be baptised, and the wait that followed for a priest and vicar to arrive.
He said the problem was that Child C's heart and lungs restarted following the token efforts to resuscitate, and he could not think why that was the case.
"Whatever catastrophic event that had happened [to Child C] had reversed, or begun to reverse.
"I don't understand that from a natural disease process."
He said it was right the parents requested for a priest to arrive for baptism. He adds the difficulty was that Child C's heart and breathing restarted following that.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, October 31

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

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[Sweeper2000]

It’s all very brutal and sad. Lots of respect for people dealing with this kind of thing daily. Much love

 

[JosieJo]

2:40pm

Dr Davis said she would have examined the "bigger picture", in that Child C handled well, had a soft abdomen, and there were bowel sounds.
"There was no suggestion we should do anything different."
Dr Davis said there were no other signs of NEC.
Mr Myers said the bile aspirates could be a symptom of something else.
Dr Davis says Child C was examined for other symptoms, but was still "well", and his bowels were not yet open.
Dr Davis adds: "He had a lot of challenges, but he was doing well."
Mr Myers: "He had the potential, as a small baby, to deteriorate rather rapidly?"
Dr Davis: "Yes.

2:44pm

Dr Davis said Child C "was not getting sick" despite the readings of dark bile aspirates.
"It is not something we should ingore, it's something we would keep an eye on...but I don't think there was anything else we should have done."
She adds that dark bile is "not normal", but "not uncommon" in premature babies.
Mr Myers said Child C was not seen by a consultant until three days after he was born, on June 13, and "the appropriate step" would have been for Child C to see him before then.
Dr Davis said such a step would have been discussed prior to June 13.

2:50pm

Mr Myers said the collapse of Child C happened before Dr Davis had a chance to review him. Dr Davis agrees.
Mr Myers refers to the circumstances of Child C's collapse.
He asks if a tertiary unit would have had advanced practitioners capable of intubating a baby.
Dr Davis said they would have had more staff available, but cannot comment on Arrowe Park. She says from her experience in a teritary centre, there would be advanced nursing practitioners, but they would not work night shifts.

2:53pm

Dr Davis said there would be a risk-benefit discussion for whether a baby would be in a level 2 unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, or a level 3 unit such as Arrowe Park.
She said there would be risks in transporting a baby in an ambulance to that tertiary centre.
She adds bed availability would not be an issue as they could always transport out of the region if necessary.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, October 31

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

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

Thanks for the updates

 

[JosieJo]

4:13pm

Dr Gibbs said he wants to clarify that he is not blaming the parents for requesting to allow Child C to be baptised, and the wait that followed for a priest and vicar to arrive.
He said the problem was that Child C's heart and lungs restarted following the token efforts to resuscitate, and he could not think why that was the case.
"Whatever catastrophic event that had happened [to Child C] had reversed, or begun to reverse.
"I don't understand that from a natural disease process."
He said it was right the parents requested for a priest to arrive for baptism. He adds the difficulty was that Child C's heart and breathing restarted following that.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, October 31

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

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

This is so sad..if Baby C had been targeted by LL they still desperately tried to live. This just adds to the scenario that it was not a normal deterioration or collapse.

I'm also now wondering if the unusual attempts of the baby to survive even after some time in the family room was why LL may have kept wanting to pop back in.
It also may explain why a person involved may want to get the baby into the cot and out of the parent’s arms

 

[mart321]

Been following this thread a since the beginning and felt compelled to reply. This is 100% what I thought as soon as i read about this child. LL continued to come back in to the room when told to leave and also made the parent feel uncomfortable.
Now we know about the medical condition of child C and how the baby was fighting for life and how unusual this was, even when taken into the family room with parents. LL then offers to take the baby from the parents which shocked them.

I feel there is a link between these 2 events, like she could not settle. Was LL taking a risk by ignoring what she was told to do? Was it because of the how unusual the babies medical condition was.

 

[JosieJo]

Been following this thread a since the beginning and felt compelled to reply. This is 100% what I thought as soon as i read about this child. LL continued to come back in to the room when told to leave and also made the parent feel uncomfortable.
Now we know about the medical condition of child C and how the baby was fighting for life and how unusual this was, even when taken into the family room with parents. LL then offers to take the baby from the parents which shocked them.

I feel there is a link between these 2 events, like she could not settle. Was LL taking a risk by ignoring what she was told to do? Was it because of the how unusual the babies medical condition was.

This is exactly the same possible scenario that came to me today.
Welcome

 

[Tortoise]

I've just seen The Mail is doing a weekly podcast. This is Episode 2. I'll try and get the links for the other episodes.

October 24, 2022

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 2: A scrawled post-it note​

This week, Caroline and Liz begin outside the crown court where Liz goes over the opening statements of both the prosecution and the defence. The prosecution accuse Lucy Letby of being ‘a poisoner’ and ‘constant malevolent presence’ on the unit, while the defence say the case against her is based entirely on coincidence and assumption, describing her as a hard working nurse who only tried to help the babies in her care. We’ll also hear from David Banks, a media law expert, who explains the fine line journalists tread when reporting ongoing trials.

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 2: A scrawled post-it note

www.mailplus.co.uk

 

[Tortoise]

Episode 1

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 1: Nurse on trial​

In this first episode of The Trial of Lucy Letby, Caroline and Liz go over the background of the case that has grabbed the attention of people all over the world. We’ll find out how the jury has heard that staff at the Countess of Cheshire Hospital grew suspicious of the nurse back in 2015 after an unexplained rise in deaths and serious collapses of babies in the neonatal unit.

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 1: Nurse on trial

www.mailplus.co.uk

 

[Tortoise]

Episode 3

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 3: Baby A​

In this episode, Liz and Caroline continue their examination of the trial, which is focusing on each baby in turn. They look into what the prosecution say happened to Baby A – the first alleged victim. A premature twin boy, he died 24 hours after his birth in June 2015. We’ll also hear about a significant rash found on some of the alleged victims and hear text messages Lucy Letby sent to colleagues after Baby A’s death.

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 3: Baby A

www.mailplus.co.uk

 

[Tortoise]

Episode 4

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 4: Baby B​

In our continuation of the Trial of Lucy Letby, Liz and Caroline focus on the case of Baby B, the twin of Baby A. She was allegedly attacked 27 hours after her brother, but survived. We’ll hear testimony from nurses and doctors who successfully resuscitated Baby B when she collapsed. Liz and Caroline also chat to experienced journalist Kim Pilling, who works for the Press Association and has one of just a handful of media seats in the actual courtroom.

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 4: Baby B

www.mailplus.co.uk

 

[Tortoise]

Today's DM article - 10%

Nurse B, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said her fellow Band 6 nurse Melanie Taylor was the one meant to offer the family a memory box [...]

But she had only done so 'partly'. The rest of the process was carried out, unbidden, by Letby.

[...]

But when he [Ben Myers KC, defending] asked her to confirm that Letby had later gone back to N3 as instructed, she replied: 'Yes – after a number of times asking.'

[...]

Dr Katherine Davis, a paediatric registrar at the hospital, said there had been a 'prolonged attempt' to resuscitate the infant, but this was eventually abandoned.

[...]

Mr Myers, for Letby, put it to her: 'He was right on the very limits of what the Countess of Chester could deal with, wasn't he?'

Dr Davis replied: 'I think our limit was 800g, and he was 800g.'

[...]

Philip Astbury, prosecuting, asked if she had ever seen a collapse as sudden or unexpected as that of Baby C.

Dr Davis replied: 'Absolutely not.'

She said she had seen a lot of babies with significant abdominal issues, along with infants with NEC [necrotising enterocolitis], but they didn’t 'behave or die in the way that' Baby C did.

Lucy Letby: 'Baby killed by nurse showed signs of life for FIVE HOURS'

A baby allegedly murdered by nurse Lucy Letby showed intermittent signs of life for five hours after a medical crash team called off their desperate attempts to resuscitate him, a court heard today.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Jules2021]

My personal suspicion is that her alleged victim selection sometimes had something to do with the Facebook searches.

For example, she could have tried to judge which families would be non-confrontational and not prone to feeling suspicion, to avoid difficulties for herself. Or possibly, babies whose parents use Facebook a lot, so that regular updates on their tragedies could be enjoyed.

Yeh I'm so interested in her personality and what she was like. So how much can they show of what she did on fb? Can they tell how long she spent looking at a profile or how many pics she looked through? Seems like they can find out virtually everything else. Was it a quick one minute snoop or she spent an hour looking through these families photos?

Apologies to the mods for the earlier subjudice-I thought I was being pretty careful with what I said but I guess not, won't happen again.

 

[notsure]

Terribly sad and harrowing reading about Baby C in today's coverage. Feel so sorry for the families and the jury having to hear this.

 

[Sweeper2000]

They really don’t have much dirt on her, they found her diary. The only thing the prosecution’s taken from that is a note of “child m” collapse but they did find notes with “adrenaline” administered to child m. If there is nothing in the diary to do with potential victims and they have made a big deal of the note and arguably innocuous fb searches they really don’t have much to throw shade with.

 

[squish]

Been following this thread a since the beginning and felt compelled to reply. This is 100% what I thought as soon as i read about this child. LL continued to come back in to the room when told to leave and also made the parent feel uncomfortable.
Now we know about the medical condition of child C and how the baby was fighting for life and how unusual this was, even when taken into the family room with parents. LL then offers to take the baby from the parents which shocked them.

I feel there is a link between these 2 events, like she could not settle. Was LL taking a risk by ignoring what she was told to do? Was it because of the how unusual the babies medical condition was.

Regarding trying to take the baby away from the parents before he'd died. I wonder if LL was worried the parents would notice some kind of sign or symptom on the baby, which could have been why she was so eager to get the baby off them.

 

[notsure]

Regarding trying to take the baby away from the parents before he'd died. I wonder if LL was worried the parents would notice some kind of sign or symptom on the baby, which could have been why she was so eager to get the baby off them.

Has it been confirmed that it was definitely LL that took the baby? I recall mention of a non-specified nurse...

 

[Cluedoneit]

Just rereading LL’s text to her colleague regarding Baby C , I’ve copied it below, but on my iPad so can’t highlight and format it. I’m confused with the “…” is this meant to cover the other nurse’s identity or is it insinuating that LL herself persuaded the parents to have hand and footprints? If it’s the latter, this becomes very interesting in the light of her supervisors testimony that she had to remind LL to stay out of the family room and leave the family to the assigned nurse- what Was LL’s motive in writing this to her friend?

11:15am

Letby messaged the colleague: "Parents sat with [Child C] in the family room...persuaded them to have hand and footprints but they just wanted to go home."
The colleague responds: "That is so sad, don't know what to say."
Letby: "There are no words, it's been awful."
The colleague: "It's a really tough week, especially for you."

 

[Sundial]

"The nurse explains she asked Lucy Letby to focus back on a baby in nursery room 3, but Letby went into the family room "a few times". The nurse recalled asking Lucy Letby to leave the family to Melanie Taylor.
The nurse tells the court Letby did not have any designated duties to be in the family room, and told her "more than once" not to be in the family room."

Another red flag IMO

Agreed. This makes no sense.. and given the death of child A and near death of child B, why would someone then want to keep going back into the family room where they have no business/not designated to be involved in yet another sad awful situation? I keep thinking back to what she had said about child A, not wanting to be in that room, but then wanting to be in that room; the sort of “ignore me” comments to colleagues and apparent “busying” herself with something which didn’t really need her attention in the family room.. and yet another child more poorly in a different room, almost abandoning her duties to be involved with child Cs parents in the family room and numerous occasions. That is so bizarre, just why would you do that?

 

[Supernovae]

We don't know the specific issues she raised the grievances over but not being allowed to do an actual nursing job could well be one. As I say, she would probably argue that other procedures should have been undertaken if they had issues about her safety. Sounds like a good reason for a grievance to me.

Besides the "confession" note, one of the notes found in her house read as follows:

“Why/how has this happened – what process has led to this current situation. What allegations have been made and by who? Do they have written evidence to support their comments?”

Lucy Letby: police found note saying ‘I killed them on purpose’, court hears

Nurse accused of murdering seven babies on neonatal ward also wrote ‘I am a horrible evil person’, jury told

www.theguardian.com

I speculated at the time that this could be a note of a conversation with a solicitor or union rep.