UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #6

[LadyEdgeworth]

2:10pm

A shift handover for August 3, 2015, the night shift, is shown to the court. Letby is named as a designated nurse.
Letby is the designated nurse for both Child E and Child F in nursery room 1 that night.
The list shows three babies in room 2, one in room 3, and four in room 4. There is also a baby in the transitional care unit.

2:12pm

Letby's note for 8pm at August 3 is written, written at 4.51am retrospectively, to say: "Mummy was present at start of shift attending to cares."

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, November 14

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

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

2:16pm

A further Letby note reads: 'Prior to 9pm feed, 16ml 'mucky' slightly bile stained aspirate' recorded for Child E.
The neonatal fluid chart for the 9pm column records, under milk feeds, 'omitted', and the word 'discarded' is in a non-specific line. For aspirates, the note '16ml mucky' is made.
To the right of that, at the 10pm column, is '15ml fresh blood' on aspirates.
The two columns for that chart are signed by Lucy Letby's initials.

2:17pm

The phone records showing the calls made from Child E and Child F's mum to the father are also shown, including calls at 9.11pm and 10.52pm.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, November 14

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

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

2:19pm

An observation chart is shown for Child E.
The 'cares' row has one tick, recorded at 7pm, signed by Letby's colleague from the day shift.

2:25pm

Dr David Harkness records readings from 9.40pm, written at 10.10pm, 'asked to see patient re: gastric bleed'.
'Large, very slightly bile-stained aspirate 30 mins ago.'
14ml of blood vomit is also recorded.
Letby records: "At 10pm large vomit of fresh blood. 14ml fresh blood aspirate obtained from NG tube. Reg Harkness attended. Blood gas satisfactory..."
Child E was 'handling well'.
Letby's further note: 'Mum visited again approx 10pm. Aware that we had obtained blood from his NG tube and were starting [treatment]...'
Dr Harkness noted Child E was 'alert, pink, well perfused', with an abdomen which was 'soft, not distended' and no bowel sounds.
The note adds 'G I [gastrointestinal] bleed ? Cause'

2:28pm

A neonatal fluid balance chart is shown to the court, with no name or notes for the 11pm column.
Letby's retrospective nursing notes said: 'NG tube on free drainage. Further 13mls blood obtained by 11pm. Beginning to desaturate and perfusion poor. Oxygen given via Neopuff'.
Child E was said by Letby to be 'cold to the touch' and was beginning to 'decline'.
Dr Harkness noted '13ml blood-stained fluid from NGT on free drainage.'
Child E's blood pressure was 'stable' and saturates' remained 60-70%', and 'making good respiratory effort', and was 'crying'.
A plan of action, including x-rays and medication, was made.

2:30pm

A note for 11.30pm on the observation chart has no record of a heart rate made, and blank readings for cot temperature, and no initials recorded. Blood pressure and respiratory rate are recorded.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, November 14

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

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

2:33pm

Child E then collapsed at about 11.40pm.
Letby recorded, retrospectively: "11.40pm became Bradycardiac, purple band of discolouration over abdomen, perfusion poor, CRT 3secs.
"Emergency intubation successful and placed on ventilator..."
Dr Harkness records, in clinical notes at this time, written retrospectively, 'Sudden deterioration at 11.40pm, brady 80-90bpm, sats 60%, poor perfusion, colour change over abdomen purple discoloured patches'.
The note adds, after an improvement in sats, 'purple discolouration in abdomen remained', and a plan of action noted for Child E.

2:35pm

Further notes by Letby: 'Required 100% oxygen, saturations 80%, SIMV 22/5 rate 60. Further saline bolus and morphine bolus given. 2nd peripheral line sited..."
"Once [Child E] began to deteriorate, midwifery staff were contacted."
The latter note is written, retrospectively, at 4.51am.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, November 14

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

 

[Tortoise]

10% extract Lucy Letby told mum of 'murdered' baby to leave the room, court hears

[...]

Letby, 32, remained at a workstation to the side of Baby E's incubator as the mother went to the infant and tried to calm him by placing one hand on his head and another on his stomach'.

[...]

Nearly two hours later she was told to return to the neonatal unit urgently, and to alert her husband to the fact that Baby E had collapsed.

[...]

The mother told the court that all the time she had been back in the post-natal ward she had been 'packing and waiting and waiting because I was following the rules. I was told that if there was a problem I'd be told.

[...]

Letby watched from the glass-panelled dock as she gave her evidence.

[...]

She told Ben Myers, KC, defending, that the blood had been on Baby E's lip, extending down towards his chin and partly on his neck. 'It was smudged. It didn't look completely dry, and it was dark'.

 

[merrypason]

"Letby's note for 8pm at August 3 is written, written at 4.51am retrospectively, to say: "Mummy was present at start of shift attending to cares.""

I wonder why she wrote this almost 9 hours later, if it happened at the start of the shift, and she only had 2 babies to care for that night.

Also odd because she made other notes in that time?

"A further, 'acute deterioration' for Child E, is noted by Letby at 12.36am. 'Resus commenced as documented'."

 

[Music2022]

Dr David Harkness records readings from 9.40pm, written at 10.10pm, 'asked to see patient re: gastric bleed'.

So the baby was bleeding before 9.40, and LL did call a doctor?
The way it’s reported is very difficult to follow. Dr Harkness was a junior back then and the registrar was female that night, no?

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

2:41pm

A further observation reading for Child E, made by Letby, is taken at 12.15am, with a heart rate 'down from where it had been earlier', and a drop in temperature, recording he was on 100% oxygen.
A consultant paediatrician arrives at the neonatal unit at 12.25am.
An x-ray is taken at 12.27am, relating to the chest and abdomen.
A further, 'acute deterioration' for Child E, is noted by Letby at 12.36am. 'Resus commenced as documented'.
The consultant paediatrician noted CPR commenced, along with ventilations, and medications.

2:48pm

A blood transfusion is started for Child E at 12.50am, and several adrenaline doses are administered.
Letby's note, for 1.01am, reads 'chest compressions no longer required'.
For 1.15am, Letby notes 'further decline, resus recommenced'.
CPR was discontinued at 1.23am - 'resus discontinued when [Child E] was given to parents. [Child E] was actively bleeding...'
The time of death was recorded as 1.40am on August 4.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, November 14

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

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

2:50pm

Letby's note: 'both parents present during the resus. Fully updated by nursing and medical team throughout. Parents wished for [Child E] to be baptised....
'Child E was bathed by myself and photographs taken as requested, both were present during this. Consent obtained for [hair] and hand/footprints...'

2:52pm

The official documented report for the incident is made by Letby - 'unexpected death following gastrointestinal bleed. Full resus unsuccessful'.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, November 14

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

 

[Marantz4250b]

It's his job to ask these questions. Horrendous is a subjective description. The crying did not attract any other staff, no-one came running. What is horrendous to you may not be horrendous to anyone else.

I certainly have to admit that it's looking very bad for LL at present and her version of events. You make some good points though because we've already heard, from a doctor I believe, that you almost never hear babies of this age crying, let alone screaming so surely it must have attracted attention from someone, most likely several people if it's that unusual.

I really don't know what to think just now; I don't for one second think the parents are lying, there'd be no need to apart from anything else, but it seems remarkably strange that this screaming didn't raise some eyebrows.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Lucy Letby trial: Mother found baby with blood on face, jury told

The mother of a twin allegedly murdered by nurse Lucy Letby describes her experiences in hospital.

www.bbc.com

 

[merrypason]

"'Child E was bathed by myself and photographs taken as requested, both were present during this. Consent obtained for [hair] and hand/footprints.."

This note made by LL seems to contradict what the mum and dad said below? Seems like they were surprised by the photos being given to them (rather than requesting/consenting to them) and weren't aware of the concept of a memory box?

"The mum adds they were given a "memory box" by Lucy Letby which "totally surprised" her and included a memory card, a lock of his hair, a teddy, hand/footprints."

The mum says she is now aware there are bereavement procedures, such as memory boxes.

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

2:54pm

A 'checklist for staff following neonatal death' is presented to the court, for Child E.
It records what levels of 'emotional support' were offered to the parents.
Letby noted at 8.21am 'Parents resident on unit overnight. Wish to be left alone'.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, November 14

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

 

[Marantz4250b]

There needs to be a sensitivity advisor to prevent victims from being treated like this. It's possible to question without being needlessly cruel.

Barristers could discuss their intentions for cross examinations with the sensitivity advisor to come up with the best way of asking.

I get your point but it's something that would have to be undertaken with great care. If not done properly then I think it will very easy to reach the point where people can argue that their right to a fair and impartial trial has been compromised.

 

[Tortoise]

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

Jury now being shown text messages sent between Ms Letby and colleagues on the morning after Child E's death. Ms Letby to a former colleague, who cannot be named for legal reasons, says she felt 'numb'

When her former colleague says 'you seem to be having some very bad luck' Ms Letby replies: 'Not a lot I can do really he had a massive haemorrhage, could have happened to any baby x'

 

[squish]

"'Child E was bathed by myself and photographs taken as requested, both were present during this. Consent obtained for [hair] and hand/footprints.."

This note made by LL seems to contradict what the mum and dad said below? Seems like they were surprised by the photos being given to them (rather than requesting/consenting to them) and weren't aware of the concept of a memory box?

"The mum adds they were given a "memory box" by Lucy Letby which "totally surprised" her and included a memory card, a lock of his hair, a teddy, hand/footprints."

The mum says she is now aware there are bereavement procedures, such as memory boxes.

This stood out to me as well. A small thing in the scheme of things, but shows that LL rides rough shod over rules. Also that she there seems to be no oversight and no way of checking whether staff were following such rules.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

I can only suppose the prosecution are putting forward the suggestion the baby was screaming because it has just been hurt by LL and the defence are trying to suggest the baby was just screaming, not because of pain or having just been hurt. I’m a little bit surprised if this is the case that Myers didn’t try to suggest to the mother that her recollection of blood was either post death /pre bath or fabricated once the events were explained to her (with baby having had blood loss)

I suppose when you really consider it, it’s whether you believe the mother (and therefore LL purposely didn’t note the blood) or you believe the notes (and the mother saw no blood)

The registrar having no recollection of the 9pm feed being omitted is interesting because it certainly supports one theory over the other

Once again this is just my experience as a mother whose baby was in a neonatal intensive care unit for 4 months.
Once when my child was having blood taken, Me and my partner were sent out of the room. It was a trainee doctor taking the blood. She asked us specifically to leave the room, I asked one of the nurses why we had to leave as it was just taking bloods? She said as the babies are so small their veins are small and sometimes difficult to find and so the doctors like to work with no distractions. We sat on some armchairs in a different room, chatting with the said nurse. My child was crying, not screaming, but crying constantly and after 5 minutes, I questioned out loud, if everything was ok. The nurse reassured me that it was probably just difficult to find the vein as my child had also had bloods taken earlier and that can make it harder (Apparently?). After a few minutes the crying turned to screaming and yes, I would of described it as horrendous. I jumped up from the chair as did my partner and the nurse, the nurse angrily said " Right that's enough!" and stormed into the room with the doctor and my child, she came back within seconds, cuddling my child and soothing her and gave her to me to soothe. My child was very distraught but was calming as the seconds were passing.
I just wanted to highlight, that the crying uncontrollably and screaming difference was very very obvious and very disturbing, not just to me as a mother whose hormones are soaring super high to be responsive to these cries but also to a mature, decades in practice neonatal nurse.
ETA: Spelling mistakes

 

[Marantz4250b]

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

Jury now being shown text messages sent between Ms Letby and colleagues on the morning after Child E's death. Ms Letby to a former colleague, who cannot be named for legal reasons, says she felt 'numb'

When her former colleague says 'you seem to be having some very bad luck' Ms Letby replies: 'Not a lot I can do really he had a massive haemorrhage, could have happened to any baby x'

This is the kind of thing that makes me so puzzled about this case and, if guilty, what her motives were. If it's attention seeking and "me, me, me" type motivations then the text from the colleague is a wide open goal for her to make it all about her and bathe in the pity of others. She does the exact opposite though.

All very strange.

 

[squish]

I get your point but it's something that would have to be undertaken with great care. If not done properly then I think it will very easy to reach the point where people can argue that their right to a fair and impartial trial has been compromised.

Yes but there's got to be a balance, victims and witnesses should not be treated as if they are on trial. A simple re-wording like what I had suggested will ask the same thing without being unnecessarily inhumane.

 

[Tortoise]

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

The court has just been shown data from Ms Letby's social media which shows the nurse carried out a number of searches for the mother of Child E in the weeks and months that followed the infant's death - one such search was carried out at 23:26 on Christmas Day 2015