It will be interesting to hear about what happened when she was first suspected.
This is all very easy to say but, if Dr Jayaram was really "...beginning to notice the coincidence between the unexplained deaths and serious collapses and the presence of Lucy Letby,.." then why was this allowed to continue? Yes, I'm aware that he's said words to the effect that he did raise the issue but was "fobbed off", or similar, but this seems rather thin to me.I wonder who Baby K's designated nurse was when thishappned? As it sounds similar to what happened with Baby C
"Although he did not have a view into Nursery 1 - where the most vulnerable babies are treated - Dr Jayaram was aware the designated nurse was not there, a fact backed up by door swipe data. Lucy Letby was the only nurse in room 1, alone with Child K. Mr Johnson said: "Feeling uncomfortable with this because he was beginning to notice the coincidence between the unexplained deaths and serious collapses and the presence of Lucy Letby, Dr Jayaram decided to check on where Lucy Letby was and where [Child K] was.
"As he walked in, he could see Letby standing over Child K's incubator. He could see Child K's oxygen levels were falling. However, the alarm was not sounding and Lucy Letby was making no effort to help."Dr Jayaram went straight to treat Child K and found her chest was not moving, he asked Letby if anything had happened to which she replied, 'she’s just started deteriorating now'." Dr Jayaram found Child K's breathing tube had been dislodged.
Child K was very premature, and had been sedated and inactive. The tube had been secured by tape and attached to Child K's headgear. Mr Johnson: "It's well recognised if you handle a child you can dislodge the tube accidentally, but any experienced staff member would recognise that."Dr Jayaram was troubled as the levels were falling and Nurse Letby had been the only person in the room."
'TV doctor Ravi walked in on Lucy Letby 'attacking 98-minute-old baby''
A CONSULTANT paediatrician at the Countess of Chester Hospital walked in on neonatal nurse Lucy Letby 'trying to kill' a 1lb 8oz baby that had been…www.northwaleschronicle.co.uk
ETA same with child I
"Mr Johnson said for Child I, born in Liverpool Women's Hospital in August 2015, Letby made four attempts to kill her, succeeding on the fourth attempt.On the final occasion, Mr Johnson said it was at 1.06am when a nurse, having left the nursery temporarily, responded to Child I's alarm and saw Lucy Letby at the incubator. Child I was very distressed and wanted to intervene, but Letby assured her that they would be able to settle the baby. Child I then collapsed."
Agreed. And if you suspected someone of harming babies, wouldn't you have a word with people to keep an eye on her? At the very least.
I think the poster has jumped ahead to a baby who was allegedly attacked in February 2016. We are currently hearing evidence for babies E&F, one who died/one who nearly died in August 2015. Dr Jayaram hasn't been on the stand since the beginning of trial.
Snipped and bolded by me.
I wonder if she (allegedly) was hoping to watch them die?Interesting how there’s quite a few reports from witnesses where she appears to just be “stood” next to these babies incubators; along with the witness testimony for baby E as given by the mother; she was standing there also, not doing anything to help whilst the poor tot had blood round his face
LL had maybe “accidentally” taken the records home again….
Yes, this is my point. I'm not saying that the good Dr is fabricating anything but, good lord, if you think that a nurse is harming patients then you'd do something about it. And, for what it's worth, I don't buy the story that a respected and experienced doctor would easily be fobbed off.
I directly quoted from another post where he was quoted. It's his direct quote that I was bringing up.
It does seem peculiar, although according to that report there were no babies in room 1, so perhaps that's where they were. Room number missing from the records, if they know they were in the unit?
Yes, I know, that was a quote from the opening speech. He hasn't given evidence yet for that incident.
So the (possible) second bag could have been a TPN bag that was already made up for him and, presumably, kept in the fridge with his details on it. Given there were multiple prescriptions written, it seems possible that there were multiple bags prescribed and delivered to the unit for Baby F. If this were the case, both bags could have been contaminated, not knowing which would be used but knowing who the recipient would be.
I completely agree and wondered the same. Poor documentation perhaps? It has been mentioned already by doctors who testified they “should have” noted things in the records but it wasn’t.. but added it would have been discussed (treatment etc). When we consider the mottling/discolouration wasnt initially recorded at the start, record keeping alone in this unit seems rather shoddy.
It generates a rather bad feel (imo), but it seems to be a bit of a recurring theme others had testified (included baby Es mother); standing there watching and not acting. Just hearing/reading that part alone feels particularly darkI wonder if she (allegedly) was hoping to watch them die?
