UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #8

[Tortoise]

Is it possible she kept a journal / diary either on paper or on a device or on a private blog? That maybe she reviewed periodically and reflected on or even angsted / obsessed about?

Some people I know, especially academic types, write down such a lot of day to day information and thoughts and keep it on a semi permanent basis but review it and contemplate it a year or two down the line. I think they like to analyse progression of projects and endeavours but also enjoy looking over the past for personal reasons. Also FB / social media works a bit like that - the ‘memories’ photographs pop up or the ‘on this day you were…’.

JMO MOO

I think it's very likely that she kept notes of events, in her diary, even though in this instance her defence is she did nothing.

The Facebook prompt I'm less inclined to believe because they haven't reported that she searched baby K's parents before that date.

MOO

 

[Tortoise]

Dbm
I cant find the link.

"Mr Johnson says when Letby's home was searched in 2018, a handwriten log of drugs administered during Child M's collapse was found, and she had made a note of the collapse in her diary."

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

 

[Dotta]

"Mr Johnson says when Letby's home was searched in 2018, a handwriten log of drugs administered during Child M's collapse was found, and she had made a note of the collapse in her diary."

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

Wow! THANKS!
<modsnip>

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

Wow! THANKS!
Im very careful not to get another TO haha

hahaha understandable!

It's also mentioned here

UK - Lucy Letby Trial - Media, Maps & Timeline *NO DISCUSSION*

Lucy Letby is on trial in the UK, charged with the murders of 7 infants and the attempted murder of 15 other infants. Media, Maps & Timelines can be posted here. *NO DISCUSSION* in this thread or your post will be removed.

www.websleuths.com

"The court is then shown an image of Letby's diary from the time, in which she had made a note of the incident.
Letby "denied the notes were a souvenir"

 

[Anxala]

If LL is found guilty of these alleged crimes my guess is I don't think we will ever know the motivations for those actions, if she is guilty. And if there were reasons given they might not make any sense to most people. The alleged crimes seem so shocking and strange.

I'm prepared for disappointment and not knowing why, in the event of such a verdict. Life's just like that sometimes - alleged killers don't necessarily provide insight into all the "whys and wheres" afterwards, and I don't think we would truly understand LL's alleged actions and her alleged explanations to the police, whichever way the verdict goes.

This is just my opinion of course.

I think yours is the most realistic albeit most frustrating view/outcome.

My continued fence sitting is at the mercy of and deeply rooted in a need to understand why LL - if guilty - did what she did because I can't start to believe she did what what she did until I know *what it is that motivated her and made her do it.

It's a catch 22 scenario.

I appreciate that it's a shortcoming on my part. I can objectively see the evidence mounting up against her - to not acknowledge that would be head-in-the-sand obtuseness at this stage - but I know I personally will still need the *latter before I can even start to begin to believe the former.

I think it's going to remain my stumbling block.

 

[crystalline]

There is so much to consider. Multiple births are often born early regardless of any assisted conception. (Clomid tablets for instance also increase the possibility of multiple births) Once a child is born that child's medical records are their own - for instance, I don't believe it would say on the child's medical records this is an assisted conception/IVF/donated egg/sperm donor/Clomid baby etc. It would say obviously known allergies or any genetic conditions etc. Therefore unless the staff look into the parent's medical notes (which they really shouldn't be) or the parents verbally tell them - or they hear from other medical colleagues (again they shouldn't really be discussing this) they wouldn't know, there is no ongoing medical need to know.

What I'm saying is no matter how a child is conceived - this wouldn't be noted on the child's official medical records as it's a confidential treatment that was provided to the parents, so I don't see why this would be discussed on any handover. To find this information (unless given by the parents voluntarily) medical staff would need to look into the parent's notes.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

"Mr Johnson says when Letby's home was searched in 2018, a handwriten log of drugs administered during Child M's collapse was found, and she had made a note of the collapse in her diary."

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

I've said this before, and it's possibly a bit far out, but is there any possibility that LL herself was 'playing detective' as she herself suspected something seriously underhand was going on?

 

[ColourPurple]

There is so much to consider. Multiple births are often born early regardless of any assisted conception. (Clomid tablets for instance also increase the possibility of multiple births) Once a child is born that child's medical records are their own - for instance, I don't believe it would say on the child's medical records this is an assisted conception/IVF/donated egg/sperm donor/Clomid baby etc. It would say obviously known allergies or any genetic conditions etc. Therefore unless the staff look into the parent's medical notes (which they really shouldn't be) or the parents verbally tell them - or they hear from other medical colleagues (again they shouldn't really be discussing this) they wouldn't know, there is no ongoing medical need to know.

What I'm saying is no matter how a child is conceived - this wouldn't be noted on the child's official medical records as it's a confidential treatment that was provided to the parents, so I don't see why this would be discussed on any handover. To find this information (unless given by the parents voluntarily) medical staff would need to look into the parent's notes.

Maybe she sometimes found out the babies' and parents' "back stories" by looking them up on Facebook?

 

[ColourPurple]

I've said this before, and it's possibly a bit far out, but is there any possibility that LL herself was 'playing detective' as she herself suspected something seriously underhand was going on?

If keeping notes of babies collapsing was the only thing she was alleged to have done then I guess that could be a possibility, but on top of all the other things we've heard, no I don't think it's likely that she was just playing detective.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I think yours is the most realistic albeit most frustrating view/outcome.

My continued fence sitting is at the mercy of and deeply rooted in a need to understand why LL - if guilty - did what she did because I can't start to believe she did what what she did until I know *what it is that motivated her and made her do it.

It's a catch 22 scenario.

I appreciate that it's a shortcoming on my part. I can objectively see the evidence mounting up against her - to not acknowledge that would be head-in-the-sand obtuseness at this stage - but I know I personally will still need the *latter before I can even start to begin to believe the former.

I think it's going to remain my stumbling block.

I'm also a fence sitter in this case and struggle to see what possible likelihood or motivation LL could have and I look forward to hearing the full evidence and arguments. Personally, I think it's going to be very difficult for the prosecution to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.

IMO *if* she has done this, then perhaps it's been some form of very serious mental health problem. I wouldn't want to say more than this right now but I have witnessed the type of thing I'm thinking of at close hand and it could be one explanation. JMO MOO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Maybe she sometimes found out the babies' and parents' "back stories" by looking them up on Facebook?

Do most people not have their info on FB set to private these days? I'm always surprised to see links to people's FB pages and one can see their posts and friends and family lists etc...

 

[Sundial]

There is so much to consider. Multiple births are often born early regardless of any assisted conception. (Clomid tablets for instance also increase the possibility of multiple births) Once a child is born that child's medical records are their own - for instance, I don't believe it would say on the child's medical records this is an assisted conception/IVF/donated egg/sperm donor/Clomid baby etc. It would say obviously known allergies or any genetic conditions etc. Therefore unless the staff look into the parent's medical notes (which they really shouldn't be) or the parents verbally tell them - or they hear from other medical colleagues (again they shouldn't really be discussing this) they wouldn't know, there is no ongoing medical need to know.

What I'm saying is no matter how a child is conceived - this wouldn't be noted on the child's official medical records as it's a confidential treatment that was provided to the parents, so I don't see why this would be discussed on any handover. To find this information (unless given by the parents voluntarily) medical staff would need to look into the parent's notes.

Exactly my thoughts.

 

[Dotta]

And I guess she might have been (allegedly) experiencing some kind of mental breakdown/personal crisis during this time.

With emotions in turmoil, anything could have (allegedly) triggered deadly attacks.

Her strange texts about the necessity of entering Room1are the examples of odd, unbalanced mental/emotional state.

But it is only my opinion.

 

[Sundial]

Maybe she sometimes found out the babies' and parents' "back stories" by looking them up on Facebook?

Possibly, but on the other hand, out of most of those she’s searching; HOW would she get that information? Privacy settings etc on social media what is the likelihood ALL of them would have their pages completely open for public viewing. If it was a small cluster, maybe, just maybe, she would be able to know. But given how many families, I find it hard to believe she would get her information from each of their “open to view by the public” pages. Moo

 

[ColourPurple]

I'm also a fence sitter in this case and struggle to see what possible likelihood or motivation LL could have and I look forward to hearing the full evidence and arguments. Personally, I think it's going to be very difficult for the prosecution to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.

IMO *if* she has done this, then perhaps it's been some form of very serious mental health problem. I wouldn't want to say more than this right now but I have witnessed the type of thing I'm thinking of at close hand and it could be one explanation. JMO MOO

I think we're all struggling to understand why anybody would do the things she is accused of, but the medical experts are sure that somebody did those things. Somebody deliberately injected air into babies and somebody deliberately poisoned at least one baby that we've heard about so far with insulin. So somebody felt motivated to do that for whatever reason (and they may not even know why themselves). We might not understand why they would do that, but they did. The question is whether that "somebody" was LL.

 

[ColourPurple]

Possibly, but on the other hand, out of most of those she’s searching; HOW would she get that information? Privacy settings etc on social media what is the likelihood ALL of them would have their pages completely open for public viewing. If it was a small cluster, maybe, just maybe, she would be able to know. But given how many families, I find it hard to believe she would get her information from each of their “open to view by the public” pages. Moo

We're going back a few years when all this happened, but even today some people have their Facebook set to public.

 

[Sundial]

We're going back a few years when all this happened, but even today some people have their Facebook set to public.

Sure, I agree with you. But hypothetically, I am skeptical information could be obtained on the majority of searches from sm alone when there are so many families. If we think about the cases for example A-Q, she’s searching pretty much all of them, but I find it hard to think the likelihood out of these cases that each one of their pages would be on public viewing to gather information, especially when she would have had access to it at work.

She states herself when interviewed, she knew about ivf from the handover. I’m just not that convinced imo she’s getting information from A-Q ALL from public viewing pages. Especially when she’s also reeling off hoards of medical information none of the other nurses have thus far in text exchange.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Possibly, but on the other hand, out of most of those she’s searching; HOW would she get that information? Privacy settings etc on social media what is the likelihood ALL of them would have their pages completely open for public viewing. If it was a small cluster, maybe, just maybe, she would be able to know. But given how many families, I find it hard to believe she would get her information from each of their “open to view by the public” pages. Moo

I would like to know a lot more about this searching and what it comprised and how many others names or data was searched. Where was she getting the info from? Using their names or email addresses or mobile phone numbers to search for accounts?

Is it possible the hospital itself or the unit or ward has an FB presence / 'check in' so the parents themselves may have liked or followed a page or joined a support group or charity connected and she's seen their info there? Maybe they donated to a fundraiser or something? I can't imagine going on FB would be in your mind if you've just had a premie but hey who knows.

Surely 'looking up' parents would be a very hit and miss event anyhow and not actually result in seeing their FB pages?

 

[Dotta]

We can argue about alleged motives till we are blue in the face, but with ZERO info about her due to sub j.(I never seem to remember this particular English word),we are just wandering like "kids in the fog".

Moo

 

[ColourPurple]

Sure, I agree with you. But hypothetically, I am skeptical information could be obtained on the majority of searches from sm alone when there are so many families. If we think about the cases for example A-Q, she’s searching pretty much all of them, but I find it hard to think the likelihood out of these cases that each one of their pages would be on public viewing to gather information, especially when she would have had access to it at work.

She states herself when interviewed, she knew about ivf from the handover. I’m just not that convinced imo she’s getting information from A-Q ALL from public viewing pages. Especially when she’s also reeling off hoards of medical information none of the other nurses have thus far in text exchange.

I don't think she would have got it all from social media either, or that all the parents would have public social media pages. My original post was in response to somebody questioning whether all the background info would be given in the handover. I said "maybe sometimes" she got info from Facebook searches.