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

[bbsaz]

Obviously not condoning the mess up, but can see how it could easily happen

 

[Music2022]

You’d think the consultant’s phone would be saved in the memory with a name unlike the parents phone? But who knows this whole thing is such a mess that I wouldn’t be surprised they didn’t notice a genuine mistake. But it did seem suspicious to me too.

 

[merrypason]

I would have thought it quite easy to make this mistake as there is an emergency going on. They need to ring either mobile numbers or presumably 2 landlines, both with likely similar area code. I assume the consultant on call is at home?

I don't think it would be easy to mistake the number of a patient's family with an on-call consultant. Means someone would have to remember the number of the patient's family in the first instance - surely not likely given how many patients' families are contacted? The patient's family's number wasn't likely to readily available in that room, baby B had been moved out of nursery 1 already by that point.

 

[merrypason]

You’d think the consultant’s phone would be saved in the memory with a name unlike the parents phone? But who knows this whole thing is such a mess that I wouldn’t be surprised they didn’t notice a genuine mistake. But it did seem suspicious to me too.

It also makes sense now why they discussed child B's whereabouts in another room at this time (in the opening statements for child D). Wasn't sure the relevance at the time.

If LL was witnessed to be the one holding the phone up, and one of the few people in that room at the time, and had an interest in child B's family - is possible she remembered their number and called them (either accidentally or on purpose). MOO

 

[Music2022]

It also makes sense now why they discussed child B's whereabouts in another room at this time (in the opening statements for child D). Wasn't sure the relevance at the time.

If LL was witnessed to be the one holding the phone up, and one of the few people in that room at the time, and had an interest in child B's family - is possible she remembered their number and called them (either accidentally or on purpose). MOO

I wonder who dialled. Maybe a more junior nurse dialled and passed the phone over?
If it is indeed all on purpose by LL then this has to be the most sinister evil behaviour ever.

 

[bbsaz]

I don't think it would be easy to mistake the number of a patient's family with an on-call consultant. Means someone would have to remember the number of the patient's family in the first instance - surely not likely given how many patients' families are contacted? The patient's family's number wasn't likely to readily available in that room, baby B had been moved out of nursery 1 already by that point.

I assume it was a redial mess up. Weren't the parents ringing the ward hourly through the night or something

 

[MsBetsy]

It also makes sense now why they discussed child B's whereabouts in another room at this time (in the opening statements for child D). Wasn't sure the relevance at the time.

If LL was witnessed to be the one holding the phone up, and one of the few people in that room at the time, and had an interest in child B's family - is possible she remembered their number and called them (either accidentally or on purpose). MOO

That's what I'm thinking. If Letby had the parents in mind, she may have accidentally connected the Doctor to them. But is it easily done by accident? How would an extension connect to the parents phone number?

 

[bbsaz]

I wonder who dialled. Maybe a more junior nurse dialled and passed the phone over?
If it is indeed all on purpose by LL then this has to be the most sinister evil behaviour ever.

Seems an odd one because she is asking for a massive b******ing from the DR when he realises her 'mistake'.

BTW, I don't think LL has a leg to stand on at this point in the trial, but on this topic I'm not sure there's anything here other than a genuine mistake

 

[Tortoise]

notes from my timeline for baby D:

Abt. 4am – Mother and father woken up by a nurse and told to come quickly as D was poorly. Rushed downstairs and saw Dr Brunton holding D and trying to resuscitate her. Mother recognised LL from her visit to see D in the unit the evening before. LL was holding a phone to Dr Brunton’s ear. Father said the person Dr Brunton was talking to (a consultant) seemed to be confused over which baby had collapsed. Dr. Brunton kept shouting 'This is D!' He was quite agitated. 'A doctor next to him (Dr Elizabeth Newby) was tapping him on the shoulder, saying 'You've got to let her go'. Mother said LL was in the unit when D died. Mother was taken to a private room where D was, with father, another family member and a nurse she hadn’t seen before. She did not see LL again (source mother’s and father’s testimony).

 

[MsBetsy]

I assume it was a redial mess up. Weren't the parents ringing the ward hourly through the night or something

What if they accidentally dialed the wrong parent and the Doctor gave them medical information for another patient? Either way, it seems like a huge mistake.

 

[merrypason]

I assume it was a redial mess up. Weren't the parents ringing the ward hourly through the night or something

But that wouldn't be a redial if they were calling - only numbers the ward called would be a redial. And why would LL (or whoever made the call) just hit redial in an emergency of life and death - you'd have no idea who the last call was to.

Can anyone in a hospital confirm whether parents can directly call the ward or need to go through to switchboard/reception first?

 

[Jazmania]

That's awful. I assume the doctor had the parents of A and B on a most recent call list (due to being involved in B's care) and so redialled in mistake thinking it was a consultant's home number.

It does seem like there were a few failings in D's care, but I don't see how any of these failings in isolation or combination can explain her collapse. The defence is trying to argue that infection, sepsis, being taken off CPAP could have caused the death. But the experts are all saying that these would all cause a steady and noticeable decline before collapse (you'd have warning). They wouldn't cause a sudden collapse from nowhere when the baby's condition was improving.

 

[bbsaz]

But that wouldn't be a redial if they were calling - only numbers the ward called would be a redial. And why would LL (or whoever made the call) just hit redial in an emergency of life and death - you'd have no idea who the last call was to.

Can anyone in a hospital confirm whether parents can directly call the ward or need to go through to switchboard/reception first?

Not neonatal, but I've always been able to ring direct

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

How terrifying for the parents of A & B who have already gone through hell losing baby A, and poor baby B still in hospital who they're clearly desperate for good news for, to be called about baby D's condition. Heartbreaking

 

[merrypason]

The only reason I feel the call may have been made by LL is because Myers didn't cross examine Dr Brunton or the other doctors and nurses attending, on this yesterday. And if it was their fault, I bet he would have done to prove how messed up and 'sub optimal' the care had been.

ETA - Mother's testimony she saw LL holding the phone to Dr Brunton's ear. He didn't even cross examine her on that memory.

MOO

 

[MsBetsy]

How terrifying for the parents of A & B who have already gone through hell losing baby A, and poor baby B still in hospital who they're clearly desperate for good news for, to be called about baby D's condition. Heartbreaking

This is worse than I initially thought. I didn't realize the Doctor was talking to the wrong parent at first. How horrible it must have been for them!

 

[Tortoise]

At least we have clarification from Dr Brunton's testimony that he was working the night shift and not a day shift when the mother remembers LL "hovering". Now all we need to know is the doctors night shift hours, to find out if this would have definitely been after LL's shift started at 8pm, or her card swipe at 7.26pm.


"Mr Johnson asked: 'What was going on when you went in?'

She replied: 'That's a question I asked. As I was pushed in she (Letby) was sort of hovering around D, but not doing much. She had a clipboard to take notes. [...]

'I would have expected she could have just left us to it. It was the first time I'd seen D (since her birth). She just stuck around. I asked my husband to ask her to go away, to give us some privacy'. [...]

She smiled briefly as she recalled seeing her baby that evening, June 21, in the presence of Dr Brunton. 'She looked like a good pink, healthy baby'."

Mother of murdered baby tells how she watched the infant die

This doesn't give any clarity -

"Doctors at the hospital would work different shifts from the nurses, and a shift would cover the children's ward and the neonatal unit.

Paediatric consultants would be on duty from 9am-5pm, while at night there would be a paediatric consultant on call within 10 minutes of the department.

Registrars would provide senior medical cover overnight."

Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders

 

[squish]

The only reason I feel the call may have been made by LL is because Myers didn't cross examine Dr Brunton or the other doctors and nurses attending, on this yesterday. And if it was their fault, I bet he would have done to prove how messed up and 'sub optimal' the care had been.

ETA - Mother's testimony she saw LL holding the phone to Dr Brunton's ear. He didn't even cross examine her on that memory.

MOO

Good analysis regarding the defence ignoring this, I think you’re right. Also, the dad of baby D commented on the phone call mix up, and I wondered what the relevance was at the time. I think it was said for a reason.

It makes sense that the doctor would have his hands busy and ask someone else to phone. If he was trying to speak to another doctor, it would have been in LL’s interests to avoid or delay this. She could have been worried this other doctor might suggest the true cause of the collapse, or might come up with a way of saving the baby and thwart the (alleged) murder.

Weird that the wrong call happened to go to other (alleged) victims’ parents.

 

[Dcflag]

With the notes being missing for the final collapse of baby d, and LL asking how the nurse knew the med dosages.. is there an insinuation that LL had purposely taken/his the notes?

Also.. shouldn’t she know how to calculate dosages herself? Surely it shouldn’t be mysterious when another nurse does it.

 

[Legal]

Good analysis regarding the defence ignoring this, I think you’re right. Also, the dad of baby D commented on the phone call mix up, and I wondered what the relevance was at the time. I think it was said for a reason.

It makes sense that the doctor would have his hands busy and ask someone else to phone. If he was trying to speak to another doctor, it would have been in LL’s interests to avoid or delay this. She could have been worried this other doctor might suggest the true cause of the collapse, or might come up with a way of saving the baby and thwart the (alleged) murder.

Weird that the wrong call happened to go to other (alleged) victims’ parents.

Yes, very interesting. Pre-trial there are many legal discussions held about the admissibility of evidence. I mentioned before about bad character evidence. The test is whether the prejudicial effect outweighs the probative value. IF the call was made by LL (and this is just supposition as we have no information about this, but it does seem strange the defence haven't exploited it to full effect) then I imagine the effect would be extremely prejudicial, when it couldn't be proven it was anything more than an error.

Regarding the missing drug sheet, IF she's guilty then I would have no doubt in my mind that it was removed deliberately to delay treatment that and she then questioned the nurse as she was surprised (and annoyed) the nurse was able to do the calculations without the sheet. In my opinion, a murder attempt happening at the same time as a critical piece of information relating to the baby's treatment goes missing is not a coincidence. This is just my opinion and only in a situation where LL is found guilty by the jury and baby D was found not to have died naturally.