Wasn’t baby I the same baby that baby Gs father had said yesterday; he’d asked if there was a problem in the unit as at the time there he’d noticed another baby was also unstable (or something along those lines). It’s interesting how the mothers of these children have witnessed things/ known something is not right, but also the father of baby G had noticed and even asked the doctors if there was anything wrong in the unit.
UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #8
- Thread starter sleuth777
- Start date
- Status
Trying to look at this from a juror's angle, I've been mulling over whether there were other unexpected, unexplained collapses in the unit, which didn't happen when LL was on shift. I thought it could potentially be a reasonable defence, to say that the prosecution only picked cases to prosecute where LL was there.
I guess there weren't, and it was a case of harm being identified by experts without knowing who was caring for the babies. That in itself can't be explained by coincidence or confirmation bias.
Certainly the defence didn't raise it in their opening speech.
I think they would have had access to all of the 30-odd cases examined and poured over it. It's a worthy angle for the prosecution to emphasise imo.
I guess there weren't, and it was a case of harm being identified by experts without knowing who was caring for the babies. That in itself can't be explained by coincidence or confirmation bias.
Certainly the defence didn't raise it in their opening speech.
I think they would have had access to all of the 30-odd cases examined and poured over it. It's a worthy angle for the prosecution to emphasise imo.
It feels like hypervigilance to me, like it's not about who told you about the baby, but who told you about a baby that I was looking after. Who might be interested in what's happening here.
Just like the text before she was removed from duties.
'do I need to be worried about Dr G speaking to another nurse?'
MOO
Last edited:
Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2022
- Messages
- 928
- Reaction score
- 6,887
JMO. I think she is annoyed that she doesn't get to "tell the news", As if she gets excited or joy from telling the drama.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2022
- Messages
- 4,249
- Reaction score
- 31,507
If she is guilty then to my mind this indicates she's trying to work out who is communicating with whom. Generally speaking, people high on narcissism and criminals are quite paranoid people and they like to control narratives and control (and also with-hold) information. It makes them very uncomfortable if people are freely communicating and sharing information.
“If I was concerned, I wouldn’t have gone on my break. For example, if she looked unwell, or her monitor was alarming, or if she hadn’t tolerated her feed, or woke up upset.
“I was told she had been unwell while I had gone on my break.”
[...]
Shift leader Ailsa Simpson said she was with Letby at the nursing station – directly opposite the high dependency unit – when she heard a projectile vomit at 2.15am.
10% Evening Standard per copyright rules
Colleague ‘surprised at baby’s turn for the worse’, Lucy Letby trial is told
“I was told she had been unwell while I had gone on my break.”
[...]
Shift leader Ailsa Simpson said she was with Letby at the nursing station – directly opposite the high dependency unit – when she heard a projectile vomit at 2.15am.
10% Evening Standard per copyright rules
Colleague ‘surprised at baby’s turn for the worse’, Lucy Letby trial is told
10% Independent
Colleague ‘surprised at baby’s turn for the worse’, Lucy Letby trial is told
"The colleague, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said the baby’s observations were stable when she left the high dependency unit after feeding her 45ml breast milk via the NGT.
On her return, the youngster was not in the room and had been moved to the intensive care unit as fellow staff gathered around her cot, she said."
Colleague ‘surprised at baby’s turn for the worse’, Lucy Letby trial is told
"The colleague, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said the baby’s observations were stable when she left the high dependency unit after feeding her 45ml breast milk via the NGT.
On her return, the youngster was not in the room and had been moved to the intensive care unit as fellow staff gathered around her cot, she said."
10% Gazette & Herald Colleague ‘surprised at baby’s turn for the worse’, Lucy Letby trial is told
She replied: “It was unexpected.”
Mr Driver asked: “Why?”
The witness said: “Because she was fed and settled when I left her and there had not been any observations on her chart which caused me any concern.”
She replied: “It was unexpected.”
Mr Driver asked: “Why?”
The witness said: “Because she was fed and settled when I left her and there had not been any observations on her chart which caused me any concern.”
This again, the strange messaging not just between nursing colleagues, but also how she’s messaging the doctors too. I’ve never known anything quite like this in all honesty. I find it somewhat rather unprofessional IMO
I guess everybody was fed up but they were too polite to confront her.
Usually such oddities are quickly noticed in work environment and people comment among themselves.
I bet, if LL is found guilty, there will be deluge of comments from her former colleagues.
Knowing life, what we hear now is only the tip of an iceberg.
Moo
Last edited:
Just caught up on today's updates (thanks again to all who provide them).
So effing rough on the heart, the father of Baby G describing how his tiny but determined little baby would respond and smile at him and then suddenly, not respond and smile at him.
Just... no words.
So effing rough on the heart, the father of Baby G describing how his tiny but determined little baby would respond and smile at him and then suddenly, not respond and smile at him.
Just... no words.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2022
- Messages
- 77
- Reaction score
- 507
I was just reading back through some of the trial points...I just wanted to ask if was there any point/s theory raised as to why the accused seemed to be very erratic in her texts to her colleague's reference to wanting to get into room 1 I may have missed. Just feeling her texts were very erratic at that time, desperate in fact to want to get in that particular room at that particular time. Maybe she had left something in there she didn't wish to be found?
Thank you.
Thank you.
I haven’t seen (read of) thus far; but your point has crossed my mind before actually. I too have wondered whether something was left behind in that room. Or, (and this is just my opinion), controlling the events, or perhaps equipment more readily available within said room. Something feels quite uneasy with the evidence and witness testimonies so far and I can’t seem to place what it is IMO
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,288
- Reaction score
- 13,179
I have questioned it recently, but dont think I was on the thread when it was first discussed. We know room 1 has the sickest babies in but I also wondered, if guilty, whether there was another reason she wanted to go in that room after Baby A died:
Was the room more secluded? Hard for others to keep an eye on what you were doing?
Was there a particular baby in there that she wanted access to?
Was this the only room where she would have access to ventilators or certain medical instruments?
She mentioned having been in there to do meds since so she HAD had access to room 1 since Baby A's death, she just hadn't been asked to work in there.
She also says "don’t expect people to understand but I know how I feel and how I have dealt with it before"
What's "it" and when is "before"?
Thinking more on this charge for baby G.
At 2 am her nurse fed her 45 mls of breast milk.
"nursing note - 45mls of milk via nasogastric tube, with 'ph4' aspirates recorded. G was noted to be 'asleep' at this stage. The milk was expressed breast milk, plus fortifier and Gaviscon."
At 2.15 am baby G projectile vomited out of the cot.
LL then made a nursing note: "[G] had large projectile milky vomit at 2.15am. Continued to vomit++. 45mls of milk obtained from NG tube with air++. Abdomen noted to be distended and discoloured. Colour improved few minutes after aspirating tube, remained distended but soft. Reg. Ventress asked to review. To go nil by mouth with IV fluids. Dr called to theatre."
So clearly the implication is that 45 mls went into her empty stomach and 15 minutes later loads of milk was vomited and then 45 mls was aspirated from the tube.
The further implication is that LL had access to extra breast milk, because the designated nurse would have known how much breast milk the mum had provided, to feed her later (I think she was on three-hourly feeds).
I'm wondering if the prosecution thinks LL's text at 8.30 pm earlier in the shift was how she obtained the milk. Shame we didn't get the wording of it.
"LL texted colleague Kate Bissell enquiring about expressed breast milk for her designated baby for that night. The matter is clarified in the text conversation."
At 2 am her nurse fed her 45 mls of breast milk.
"nursing note - 45mls of milk via nasogastric tube, with 'ph4' aspirates recorded. G was noted to be 'asleep' at this stage. The milk was expressed breast milk, plus fortifier and Gaviscon."
At 2.15 am baby G projectile vomited out of the cot.
LL then made a nursing note: "[G] had large projectile milky vomit at 2.15am. Continued to vomit++. 45mls of milk obtained from NG tube with air++. Abdomen noted to be distended and discoloured. Colour improved few minutes after aspirating tube, remained distended but soft. Reg. Ventress asked to review. To go nil by mouth with IV fluids. Dr called to theatre."
So clearly the implication is that 45 mls went into her empty stomach and 15 minutes later loads of milk was vomited and then 45 mls was aspirated from the tube.
The further implication is that LL had access to extra breast milk, because the designated nurse would have known how much breast milk the mum had provided, to feed her later (I think she was on three-hourly feeds).
I'm wondering if the prosecution thinks LL's text at 8.30 pm earlier in the shift was how she obtained the milk. Shame we didn't get the wording of it.
"LL texted colleague Kate Bissell enquiring about expressed breast milk for her designated baby for that night. The matter is clarified in the text conversation."
Also, I wonder about her designated babies of whom we have never (thankfully) heard about.
Did she care for them well?
Did she show compassion?
Were the parents grateful?
Did she follow them on FB as well?
Im really curious.
Did she care for them well?
Did she show compassion?
Were the parents grateful?
Did she follow them on FB as well?
Im really curious.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,288
- Reaction score
- 13,179
Just quoting my own post to ask... where was Baby B at the time LL was desperate to get in room 1? Could that have been where Baby B was, or had Baby B been transferred by then?
Yes I had totally missed this from reading the evidence! How was so much vomited/aspirated when only 45mls went in? Pretty damning evidence
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,288
- Reaction score
- 13,179
Link to a video of the ward, showing room 1
video.foxnews.com
Police video presented to the jury in the Lucy Letby trial shows neonatal ward where she worked | Fox News Video
Room 1 of the hospital’s neonatal unit is where Letby allegedly injected a fatal amount of air into the bloodstream of one baby (Credit: UK Crown Prosecution Service).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
Staff online
-
FraizeAdministrator
Online statistics
- Members online
- 117
- Guests online
- 3,322
- Total visitors
- 3,439