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

[katydid23]

"A chart is displayed to the jury about the presence of staff on duty at the time the babies were "attacked", with Letby present for all 24 incidents listed between 2015 and 2016.

The majority of incidents are at night-time. No other member of registered nurse and/or nursery nurse staff is present for more than a total of seven incidents."

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

So, the defense is not going to blame the deaths upon other employees, if she was the only nurse present in 2/3 of the cases. It looks like they will have to try and prove that the deaths and illnesses were naturally occurring illnesses for the most part. JMO

 

[katydid23]

"Medical staff on the unit managed to revive Baby F and he was later transferred to another hospital."

Lucy Letby's colleagues say they didn't give insulin to alleged victim

Three former colleagues of Lucy Letby (pictured) told Manchester Crown Court today that they had never given insulin to a baby that was allegedly poisoned by the nurse at the Countess of Chester Hospital.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Thank goodness they got him out of there. I cannot even imagine how devastated those poor parents would have been, to lose both of their newborns.

If it turns out to be true that one nurse targeted both babies, it will make the jury see them as especially coldhearted and callous. JMO

 

[Tortoise]

Thank goodness they got him out of there. I cannot even imagine how devastated those poor parents would have been, to lose both of their newborns.

If it turns out to be true that one nurse targeted both babies, it will make the jury see them as especially coldhearted and callous. JMO

She is accused of attacking three sets of twins and two from one set of triplets.

The two triplets died, and two of the twins died.

In fact twins L & M are the same allegations as twins E & F; twin L was allegedly given insulin and M an alleged injection of air.

 

[Tortoise]

Just to confuse things - from opening speech -

Early on August 4, Child E had died. Later that day, the pharmacy received a prescription for a TPN bag for Child F, the twin brother.
A confirmation document was printed, at 12.32pm, for Child F. The pharmacist produced a handwritten correction to say it was to be used within 48 hours of 11.30pm that day.

2:30pm

The TPN bag was delivered up to the ward at 4pm that day.
On that night shift, the designated nurse for Child F, in room 2, was not Letby.
Letby had a single baby to look after that night, also in room 2.
There were seven babies in the unit that night, with five nurses working.

2:33pm

Letby and the designated nurse signed the prescription chart to record the TPN bag was started and administered via a long line at 12.25am.
A TPN chart is a written record for putting up the bags, and was used for Child F. It includes 'lipids' - nutrients for babies not being given milk.
Letby signed for the TPN bag to be used for 48 hours.

2:40pm

There are two further prescriptions for TPN bags, to run for 48 hours.
Following the conclusion of a Letby night-shift, after the administration of a TPN bag Letby had co-signed for, a doctor instructed the nursing staff to stop the TPN via the longline and provide dextrose (sugar to counteract the fall in blood sugar), and move the TPN to a peripheral line while a new long line was put in.
All fluids were interrupted at 11am while a new long line was put in.


I just hope it all becomes clearer when the doctor looking after F that day gives evidence, and the experts who reviewed all the records, particularly the professor. It seems the nurse doesn't have a clear recall.

 

[notsure]

Thank goodness they got him out of there. I cannot even imagine how devastated those poor parents would have been, to lose both of their newborns.

If it turns out to be true that one nurse targeted both babies, it will make the jury see them as especially coldhearted and callous. JMO

I don't know if this comment will be permitted but, I've been thinking that losing babies is one of the worst things anyone can experience. If it turns out they were murdered, that would potentially make the parents feel worse. For that reason, I really hope she isn't guilty.

 

[ColourPurple]

From that article

"Miss Tomlins told the court she recalled a new TPN intravenous feed bag being set up for Baby E after a longline tube needed to be replaced because it had 'tissued'.

This would have come from the padlocked fridge on the unit. Nurses had access to bespoke TPN bags for individual babies and stock bags for more general use or where there was no time to wait for a bespoke bag. [...]

Asked what type of feed bag would have been used on August 4, Miss Tomlins replied: 'It would depend on whether there were any more bags made up for him.

'If we had run out I assume we would have just attached to one of our stock bags and ordered more for him. It took a few hours for them to come from the pharmacy'."

So if she's correct, and they did change the bag, the 2nd bag must have had insulin in too, as the low blood sugar continued till they stopped that bag. Yet LL wouldn't know that they were going to change the bag or which TPN bag they would use, or whether another baby would use a bag in the meantime.

 

[ColourPurple]

Just to confuse things - from opening speech -

Early on August 4, Child E had died. Later that day, the pharmacy received a prescription for a TPN bag for Child F, the twin brother.
A confirmation document was printed, at 12.32pm, for Child F. The pharmacist produced a handwritten correction to say it was to be used within 48 hours of 11.30pm that day.

2:30pm

The TPN bag was delivered up to the ward at 4pm that day.
On that night shift, the designated nurse for Child F, in room 2, was not Letby.
Letby had a single baby to look after that night, also in room 2.
There were seven babies in the unit that night, with five nurses working.

2:33pm

Letby and the designated nurse signed the prescription chart to record the TPN bag was started and administered via a long line at 12.25am.
A TPN chart is a written record for putting up the bags, and was used for Child F. It includes 'lipids' - nutrients for babies not being given milk.
Letby signed for the TPN bag to be used for 48 hours.

2:40pm

There are two further prescriptions for TPN bags, to run for 48 hours.
Following the conclusion of a Letby night-shift, after the administration of a TPN bag Letby had co-signed for, a doctor instructed the nursing staff to stop the TPN via the longline and provide dextrose (sugar to counteract the fall in blood sugar), and move the TPN to a peripheral line while a new long line was put in.
All fluids were interrupted at 11am while a new long line was put in.


I just hope it all becomes clearer when the doctor looking after F that day gives evidence, and the experts who reviewed all the records, particularly the professor. It seems the nurse doesn't have a clear recall.

I think this is the most confusing case I've followed on here. There's the mystery of the crossed out TPN bag (which I think was the one delivered at 4pm) but then no record of where the TPN bag that replaced the crossed out one came from or who prescribed it. Then we've got the Dr instructing nursing staff to just put that TPN bag on a peripheral line while they changed the long line. But then this nurse saying they changed the TPN bag,

 

[Tortoise]

One thing is for sure, based on Dr Beech's evidence, baby F was given insulin and it wasn't prescribed for him. That wasn't accidental.

The defence accepts he was given insulin.

IMO

 

[ColourPurple]

I don't know if this comment will be permitted but, I've been thinking that losing babies is one of the worst things anyone can experience. If it turns out they were murdered, that would potentially make the parents feel worse. For that reason, I really hope she isn't guilty.

The thing is though, if LL isn't guilty then somebody else is. The medical experts have concluded that somebody poisoned babies with insulin and somebody injected babies with air.

 

[notsure]

The thing is though, if LL isn't guilty then somebody else is. The medical experts have concluded that somebody poisoned babies with insulin and somebody injected air into them.

I'm not sure that the experts' retrospective conclusions will be considered authoritative to the extent that there is not doubt that they are correct.

 

[Marantz4250b]

A short summary of some of yesterdays evidence here

Lucy Letby trial: Accused nurse went salsa dancing night after ‘murder bid’

LUCY LETBY went salsa dancing the night after she allegedly attempted to murder a baby boy, a court has heard.

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

Just adds a little bit more to the text conversations

I see that the Standard has changed the pic of her in their story headings.

 

[Tortoise]

I'm not sure that the experts' retrospective conclusions will be considered authoritative to the extent that there is not doubt that they are correct.

blood test results are conclusive though.

 

[Dotta]

I see that the Standard has changed the pic of her in their story headings.

Interesting that she is taking notes.
We might be even given surprise of seeing her on the stand.
I can't wait.
Moo

 

[notsure]

blood test results are conclusive though.

Nobody drew that conclusion at the time, though, having seen the blood test results.

 

[ColourPurple]

I'm not sure that the experts' retrospective conclusions will be considered authoritative to the extent that there is not doubt that they are correct.

I'm guessing the defence are going to have medical experts who come to different conclusions or offer alternative explanations, but then they won't have been present at the time either, so both lots of experts are in the same boat.

The fact that Drs who were present agree with the conclusions of the medical experts we've heard from so far might sway the jury I guess.

 

[ColourPurple]

Nobody drew that conclusion at the time, though, having seen the blood test results.

The test results for insulin levels for Baby F took a week to come back, so weren't available at the time.

 

[JosieJo]

Has anyone seen a Chester Standard write up for today ?

 

[Tortoise]

Nobody drew that conclusion at the time, though, having seen the blood test results.

Perhaps because he'd fully recovered and moved to a different hospital it wasn't thought worthy of review. I've no idea what any of them was thinking, but it doesn't change the blood results.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Of course dancing is not suspicious or indicative of guilt.

Dancing is however pretty symbolic if the jury decides she'd murdered a baby the day before and was attempting to murder his brother that day.

Maybe it's theoretically exculpatory evidence too, which the prosecution has a duty to present, showing she wasn't worried about anything. As would be buying a house.

It's also about balance of evidence, if there's evidence she claimed to be crying and was saying the deaths were too much to cope with, it's a relevant contrast to note she was dancing after another death.

IMO

The situation of her home has been brought up before, both on here and in the early press articles when she was first arrested. Did she actually own this house? I mean the one she was living at when arrested.

When I initially heard of this case it was when she was charged and I then read the articles of her initial arrest and it seemed to me that she may have been renting this house. Having got a sense of the general drift of things, though, it appears that she may have actually owned it. If so it seems a bit out of the ordinary for a 25 year-old woman to be owning a three bed semi. Not that that implies guilt or anything.

I do wonder, though, whether, if she owned it, she bought with a boyfriend/partner. Given that one of the underlying suspicions as to why she may have allegedly done what she is accused of is that she was worried about being alone and never having a family then buying a house with someone would tend to undermine that somewhat.

 

[notsure]

The test results for insulin levels for Baby F took a week to come back, so weren't available at the time.

But there were alleged attempts at harming babies after those results came back, I think. Somebody would have reviewed those results, presumably.