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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #861

Defence disclosure​

15.4.—(1) This rule applies where—

(a)under section 5 or 6 of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996(5), the defendant gives a defence statement; and

(b)under section 6C of the 1996 Act(6), the defendant gives a defence witness notice.

(2) The defendant must serve such a statement or notice on—

(a)the court officer; and

(b)the prosecutor.

[Note. The Practice Direction sets out forms of

(a)defence statement; and

(b)defence witness notice.

Under section 5 of the 1996 Act, in the Crown Court the defendant must give a defence statement.


The Criminal Procedure Rules 2020


We have already been told what the defence case is, it is a legal requirement for the defence to do this by the beginning of trial.
 
  • #862
https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

The nurse is talking the court through the process of fitting a new babiven bag (used to supply fluids/medicines). She says the bags are checked by two nurses and says nothing new would be added to the bag once it was made up
 
  • #863
(I think this is baby F's designated nurse on the night he was given insulin)

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

Her note from the early hours of August 5 show that Child F 'became quieter' and was 'slightly jaundiced'....doctors administered fluids and medicines and he became 'more lively' as a result. She said that during this period his blood sugar levels were 'dangerously low'
 
  • #864
https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

The nurse observed that Child F had been 'nice and stable' but in the hours between midnight and 1am his heart/breathing rates 'suddenly' rose to a 'concerning level'
 
  • #865
I'm expecting this nurse will also be asked by the prosecution if she added the insulin, or accused by the defence, if they're allowed to do that.
 
  • #866
I've never thought LL was being scapegoated ...in fact every time anyway mentions "hospital failings" I could scream ..because its not the hospitaI on trial ...and this hospital is pretty much the same as most NHS hospitals.. but I absolutely understand its a discussion thread and people have different opinions.
Having worked in the NHS 34 years I know this is not how scapegoating works in the NHS ...not in a million years would the hospital trust want every minute detail of their "dirty washing" in the news.
In fact I feel the hospital staff and the hospital are brave ...opening themselves up to criticism to ensure justice
Yes, I think they did the right thing by initiating their own investigation before calling police. Hospital errors are one thing, but hiring an alleged murderer of babies is definitely not a good look for a hospital.

I think working in such an environment would have made it easier to get away with murder.
 
  • #867
40 minutes of silence - nothing about cross-examination of the nurse and then a detailed tweet about iv bags! :rolleyes:

This is almost as bad as tweets about the plumbing.

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

The jury are now being shown a 22minute instructional video on how intravenous bags are manufactured and prepared (this is to aid with understanding of evidence due to be given tomorrow, which the prosecution say is fairly technical)
 
  • #868
I think this case is exposing cultural issues within the NHS. It’s not up to staff to gather evidence if they suspect foul play but they absolutely should have robust whistleblowing procedures in place to allow them to express concerns anonymously and know that those concerns will be taken seriously. In fact, they should be encouraged to do so given the nature of their job and lives being at stake. Assuming there was foul play here (which, at the very least, the insulin case is pointing towards, imo), then if staff felt safer expressing concern, who knows how many staff on those units would have blown the whistle at an earlier stage, and potentially helped prevent some of these tragic deaths. There was already talk of deaths being “odd” by the time we got to Baby C.

All my opinion of course.
Well, exactly! This is hardly rocket science and, in this day and age, literally every industry which has even the tiniest element of risk of misconduct by anyone has stuff like this as good practice. It's an absolute "no-brainer" and no one is going to convince me that the NHS - and the medical industry as a whole - does not have such procedures in place. It's rare but there is certainly no shortage of murdery medical practitioners and even just the whole misconduct thing is one of the biggest NHS costs after the national drugs bill.

Also, quite honestly, I still don't buy that a doctor was fobbed-off by management for raising potential concerns about a lowly nurse.
 
  • #869
I don't think the police are scapegoating LL, that would be too ludicrous for words. If any scapegoating is going on it would have been constructed within hospital senior management and for me, that possibility is still open. JMO MOO
My take on this has always been that there is no deliberate "fitting-up" of LL going on (if she's actually not guilty) - they aren't that clever, as is evidenced by what an utter shambles the department was. If she's genuinely been mistakenly accused then it's because the hospital have allowed the investigators to go down the wrong path and not correct them. Especially if it takes the heat off their own negligence.

Agreed that an intentional, cleverly planned fit-up is a ludicrous suggestion.
 
  • #870
I think this speculation originated from her note saying “I will never get married or have a family”. People took this to mean she was infertile or something, and then started speculating if she (allegedly) killed babies out of jealousy.

But I think in context of the rest of the note, it’s a tacit acknowledgment that she will be going to prison for a long time, and therefore unable to start a family.
Speculations as to potential motive, including that one an similar, were circulating long before the note was released. Long before.
 
  • #871
I don't think I saw that bit - yes, I've been wondering what her fellow nurses thought then, and what they think now. If LL is found guilty, I suppose we can expect some "I nursed with LL" stories in the press.
And the rest! This case is so massively unusual, imo, as to be pretty much unparalleled in legal history. There are lots of people who are going to make a lot of money from this. A few will possibly base entire careers writing books on LL and the case in general.

If she's guilty, obviously.
 
  • #872
Well, exactly! This is hardly rocket science and, in this day and age, literally every industry which has even the tiniest element of risk of misconduct by anyone has stuff like this as good practice. It's an absolute "no-brainer" and no one is going to convince me that the NHS - and the medical industry as a whole - does not have such procedures in place. It's rare but there is certainly no shortage of murdery medical practitioners and even just the whole misconduct thing is one of the biggest NHS costs after the national drugs bill.

Also, quite honestly, I still don't buy that a doctor was fobbed-off by management for raising potential concerns about a lowly nurse.
"Also, quite honestly, I still don't buy that a doctor was fobbed-off by management for raising potential concerns about a lowly nurse"

Gone are the days of the Consultant being god
I can remember as a student nurse many years ago the ward Consultant coming in to carve the turkey on Christmas day and you wouldn't dream of speaking to him.

now (thankfully) those days are gone ...hospitals are not run by consultants but an executive board of directors most who have no clinical background.

Nurses roles have changed massively...many nurses have masters degrees and run their own clinics without a Dr in sight.

There are so many more consultants in posts and that God like status has gone...they are just another member of the team ... I can easily see a consultant being fobbed off
 
  • #873
  • #874
In this episode Caroline and Liz examine what happened to Baby F, a premature twin boy who Lucy Letby allegedly tried to kill with insulin. We hear how his blood sugar suddenly crashed soon after the nurse allegedly poisoned his intravenous feed and how, after she finished her shift, she went salsa dancing with a colleague. We also chat to freelance broadcaster, Matt O’Donoghue, about the skill of condensing a day’s worth of evidence into just a few minutes for television or radio.


The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 8: Baby F, Part 1: ‘He was given insulin that was never prescribed.’ - The Mail.
 
  • #875


Dan O'Donoghue


Dr Alison Ventress, who was a registrar at the Countess of Chester in 2015, is now in the witness box. She's taking the court through medicine charts recorded in the days following Child F's birth


Consultant paediatrician Dr Satyanarayana Saladi is in the witness box. He is taking the court through his notes from August 2015 when Child F was at the Countess of Chester



Dr Saladi is taking jurors through clinical notes from early August 2015 which show Child F's blood sugar levels were low. Other measures such as white blood cell levels were in the 'normal range' and the baby was 'handling well'



The medic says that there was no abnormal breathing or heartrate and no abnormal bowl sounds. He assessed the baby's condition as 'satisfactory' on the morning of August 5

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

Dr Alison Ventress, who was a registrar at the Countess of Chester in 2015, is now in the witness box. She's taking the court through medicine charts recorded in the days following Child F's birth



She explains that a dose of insulin would always be prescribed by a doctor and it would always be administered as a separate infusion, never added to another fluid



A nurse, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is now giving evidence. She is going over her notes from the morning of 3 August 2015, which show that Child F was in some respiratory distress, but was coping well.



By the end of her shift that day he was 'satisfactory' showing 'no signs of any issues'


The nurse's notes show that in the hours before Child F's heart rate surged to over 200bmp and his blood sugars dropped, he was stable and handling well


Her notes also show that Child F was, at the request of his parents, due to be moved from the Countess of Chester to another hospital, but the transport team was unavailable due to another unrelated emergency
 
  • #876


Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
·

Her notes also show that Child F was, at the request of his parents, due to be moved from the Countess of Chester to another hospital, but the transport team was unavailable due to another unrelated emergency



Another nurse, who also cannot be named for legal reasons, is now in the witness box. Again she is taking the court through Child F's breathing/heart rate charts from her night shift - all showing the infant was 'stable'



The nurse said she had 'no concerns' about Child F on the evening of August 4



We're back after a short break. A former nursing colleague of Ms Letby, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is continuing to give evidence. She's talking the jury through Child F's medical charts in the days after his birth



https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

The nurse is talking the court through the process of fitting a new babiven bag (used to supply fluids/medicines). She says the bags are checked by two nurses and says nothing new would be added to the bag once it was made up




Her note from the early hours of August 5 show that Child F 'became quieter' and was 'slightly jaundiced'....doctors administered fluids and medicines and he became 'more lively' as a result. She said that during this period his blood sugar levels were 'dangerously low'




The nurse observed that Child F had been 'nice and stable' but in the hours between midnight and 1am his heart/breathing rates 'suddenly' rose to a 'concerning level'




The jury are now being shown a 22minute instructional video on how intravenous bags are manufactured and prepared (this is to aid with understanding of evidence due to be given tomorrow, which the prosecution say is fairly technical)

Court has now adjourned for the day, back tomorrow.
 
Last edited:
  • #877
This trial is no different from a murder trial where a person has been stabbed or strangled by another and the defendant says it wasn't him, even though his phone pings put him there and other witnesses saw him there. I think it would be very unusual to only decide what you think about the evidence being reported, after the verdict. There's always a defence case, but the prosecution deals with that as they go along, it's not a surprise sprung in the second half of the trial.

MOO

This case is not a formality as in the type of case where a person is blindingly obvious guilty IMO.
 
  • #878
There are so many more consultants in posts and that God like status has gone...they are just another member of the team ... I can easily see a consultant being fobbed off

Fobbed off when the issue is deaths of tiny babies? Really? That is horrific and if so, goes to illuminate the extent of a failing institution.

It's got nothing to do with being 'god like' or not. If I worked in a supermarket as a shelf-stacker and told management I think my colleague is stealing stock, I wouldn't be expected to be fobbed off. If anyone works for the NHS and flagged up with management that harm and death is being caused by a colleague, that is just beyond belief IMO. JMO.
 
  • #879
Listening to the Mail Podcast (post #877) I've now got the full text conversation between LL and the designated nurse. The lines in red had not been reported before.


8am – LL finishes night shift

8.47am –
LL: "Did you hear what F's sugar was at 8am?"
Nurse: "No?"
LL: "1.8"
Nurse: "S***!!!!", now I feel awful but leaving it three hours didn’t seem excessive and it was only two and a half hours
LL: "Something isn't right if he is dropping like that with the amount of fluid he’s had and being 1.65kg, don’t think you needed to do it sooner, got to think of his poor heels too"
Nurse: "Exactly, he’s had so much handling. No something not right. Heart rate and sugars."
LL: "Dr Gibbs came so hopefully they will get him sorted. "He is a worry though."
Nurse: "Hope so. He is a worry."
LL: "Hope you sleep well, let me know how F is tonight please."
Nurse: "I will hun".



I think the 3 hours refers to the time between the blood sugar reading at 5am (that LL did), and 8am when the shifts changed.

From Prof Hindmarsh's evidence - Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, November 25

5.5 (11.32pm)
0.8 (1.54am)
2.3 (2.55am)
1.9 (4.02am)
2.9 (5am)
1.7 (8.09am)

"For the 5am reading, the blood sugar reading signature has the initials 'LL'."


It looks as if LL knew exactly which 3 hours she was referring to, they'd been testing it more or less hourly between 2am and 5am. The nurse was probably really encouraged by the 5am reading.

MOO
 
  • #880
Fobbed off when the issue is deaths of tiny babies? Really? That is horrific and if so, goes to illuminate the extent of a failing institution.

It's got nothing to do with being 'god like' or not. If I worked in a supermarket as a shelf-stacker and told management I think my colleague is stealing stock, I wouldn't be expected to be fobbed off. If anyone works for the NHS and flagged up with management that harm and death is being caused by a colleague, that is just beyond belief IMO. JMO.

It was the post I was responding to that used the term fobbed-off...and alluded to the god like status...not me

We are yet to hear the exact sequence of events...we do not know who it was mentioned to ...how it was reported or even what was reported

When we know I'll comment

My post was merely to respond to another post and share how consultants are not as they used to be
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
54
Guests online
2,586
Total visitors
2,640

Forum statistics

Threads
632,801
Messages
18,631,892
Members
243,294
Latest member
Safeplace07
Back
Top