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

[notsure]

Strongest evidence yet imo. No credible explanation other than this baby was fed way more than 45mls of milk. And letby saying babies can suck in air whole vomiting? How stupid did she think the police were?

Duplicated

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

No innocent explanation, according to Dr Bohin. Then why wasn't it investigated further?

I think it’s probably with the benefit of hindsight, being able to sit down and see it all in black and white that makes it obvious. There’s a lot of moving pieces on a busy ward, the people who see the babies in the morning aren’t the ones who see them at night. I think in that situation it’s easy to not see this, as you’re not investigating it. Plus you always assume your colleagues are doing the best they can, not the absolute worst imaginable.

 

[notsure]

I think it’s probably with the benefit of hindsight, being able to sit down and see it all in black and white that makes it obvious. There’s a lot of moving pieces on a busy ward, the people who see the babies in the morning aren’t the ones who see them at night. I think in that situation it’s easy to not see this, as you’re not investigating it. Plus you always assume your colleagues are doing the best they can, not the absolute worst imaginable.

I've been watching a lot of true crime stuff lately, and normally, when there is an unexplained death, it is intensively investigated to find out the cause. It's shocking to discover that this does not apply if the death occurs in a hospital. IMHO.

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

I've been watching a lot of true crime stuff lately, and normally, when there is an unexplained death, it is intensively investigated to find out the cause. It's shocking to discover that this does not apply if the death occurs in a hospital. IMHO.

Child G did not die

 

[Tortoise]

No innocent explanation, according to Dr Bohin. Then why wasn't it investigated further?

I suspect the defence hasn't put this to the doctor and the consultant because they weren't aware of the excess milk and air aspirated. IMO

They would have relied on LL telling them, to realise that was a problem, but it's not in their clinical notes.

 

[Tortoise]

Thanks for all the updates @LadyEdgeworth

 

[notsure]

Child G did not die

I know. Were there no deaths that were not explained at the time?

 

[Jazmania]

As stupid as all the other people who didn't suspect any wrongdoing at the the time, probably.

It does seem incredible that suspicion hadn't arisen by this point in the case, especially with this one and the insulin one. But I guess someone you work with deliberately harming babies would be the last thing that would occur to most people

 

[notsure]

It does seem incredible that suspicion hadn't arisen by this point in the case, especially with this one and the insulin one. But I guess someone you work with deliberately harming babies would be the last thing that would occur to most people

It does seem incredible that something that all the medical people at the time thought was completely out of the ordinary and impossible to explain was not investigated further. IMHO.

 

[Dotta]

It does seem incredible that suspicion hadn't arisen by this point in the case, especially with this one and the insulin one. But I guess someone you work with deliberately harming babies would be the last thing that would occur to most people

I guess, if she is found guilty, there will be countless investigations and "lessons to be learnt".

Baby G has been (allegedly) robbed of normal life.
As a disabled person with cerebral palsy she will forever be dependent on everyday care provided by parents.

What will happen to her when parents die?

Will she end up in some soulless institution?

But, at least, she is alive.

Moo

 

[notsure]

I guess, if she is found guilty, there will be countless investigations and "lessons to be learnt".

Baby G has been (allegedly) robbed of normal life.
As a disabled person with cerebral palsy she will forever be dependent on everyday care provided by parents.

What will happen to her when parents die?

Will she end up in some soulless institution?

But, at least, she is alive.

Moo

Depending on the outcome of this investigation, perhaps she might be entitled to some form of compensation, which would ensure her future care. IMHO.

 

[Dotta]

Depending on the outcome of this investigation, perhaps she might be entitled to some form of compensation, which would ensure her future care. IMHO.

My friend has a daughter suffering from c.palsy.
The girl cannot move from neck down
She has to be turned in bed every 2 hours at least - day and night.
My friend resigned from work and cares for the child 24/7.
I dont think people realize what it means, how the whole life is turned upside down.
But parents devote their life to children.

 

[Tortoise]

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 9: Baby G, Part 1: “Just a little tiny thing” given just a 5% chance of survival at birth. But ‘she was a fighter.’

www.mailplus.co.uk

The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 9: Baby G, Part 1: “Just a little tiny thing” given just a 5% chance of survival at birth. But ‘she was a fighter.’​

In this episode Caroline and Liz examine what happened to Baby G, the most premature baby in this case, who Lucy Letby allegedly tried to kill three times in a fortnight.

 

[ColourPurple]

Well this I agree to because also people took to the streets in protest when Harold Shipman their beloved local GP was first arrested. Jimmy Savile was knighted by the Queen, gave marriage guidance counselling to Prince Charles, had the keys to a prison, and was given free access to hospitals as well as having a huge hit TV show.

However, there is a difference, they are men, not women, who abused and exploited their positions of trust to gratify something demonic. That is not usually a trait of women. Time will tell. We have time to see how this all unfolds. I am curious to see. I'm still a fence sitter.

Only reason I say that is usually criminally minded people don't have the emotional, psychological, mental capacity to stick with one thing and follow it through for years and years. Not because they're stupid. Many are way above average intelligence. They often get bored quickly, they move on quickly, they're on the lookout for getting their needs met in the next place. There is a lot to be said for the emotional fortitude and psychological stability of anyone who studies hard at school, then college, then university, then gets a good job, then works hard every day. Who knows... we shall see but having a solid track record is not the usual sign of a criminal in any context. There are other contexts.

As for being a decent person, we don't know enough just now but when the story first broke there were a few comments in the mainstream media that she was lovely, friendly, normal etc - neighbours, colleagues, and ex boyf family if I recall correctly (sorry can't quote links), may be mistaken of course. Obv any new stories would be held back now and we will find out more. Certainly new stuff is creeping out from colleagues, notable the manager having to ask her several times or whatever it was. We shall see.

I'm a fence sitter for now. I believe in truth and justice and that we will see that in this case undoubtedly.

Pretty sure we all believe in truth and justice hence the reason we're on Websleuths. I'm listening to everything with an open mind and at the moment IMO the prosecution are presenting a strong case but who knows what's yet to come from the defence.

With reference to your examples being men. There was a very similar case to this one, involving a woman but I'm not sure what the rules are on mentioning it by name, as the last time I did so, the post was deleted. But the case is proof that, despite your thoughts, women certainlycan be capable of doing some of the things LL is accused of (but of course isn't proof in any way that she's guilty of what she is accused of)

 

[Tortoise]

"Mr Myers refers to Dr Evans, in his report, referring to Child G being treated "inappropriately" at 2am on September 7, 2015.
Mr Myers says that is worked on the basis that Child G's tummy would have been empty or almost empty at the time, as the nurse responsible would have aspirated Child G's stomach of all milk.
Mr Myers says 'we now know' the stomach was not aspirated prior to 2am.
Dr Evans says that was not the case, as the nurse had aspirated to get a pH reading.
Mr Myers says the nurse had not aspirated the milk, as she would not have done so in a baby as young as Child G as a matter of procedure.
Dr Evans: "No, this is too simple." He says milk is a neutral pH, so if the reading is '4', then that sample was indicative of acid in the stomach.

Mr Myers refers to the report, saying a nurse empties the stomach contents through aspirates.
Dr Evans: "The pH was 4 [in the stomach], 4 is acid."
Mr Myers says Dr Evans is basing what he says upon having her stomach aspirated before the 2am feed.
Dr Evans says there would have been no milk in Child G's stomach prior to the 2am feed, as the stomach was checked for pH.

Mr Johnson [prosecutor] asks about the pH aspirate the nurse would have obtained, if the previous milk feed had not been digested/aspirated.
Dr Evans said the aspirate would have looked like undigested milk and the pH reading would have been neutral - around 7."

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Monday, December 12


This is embarrassing. I don't think the defence has an expert advising on this evidence. JMO

 

[Tortoise]

The expert's evidence about the only way this could have happened was with a syringe plunger (gravity fed milk through the ng tube would not enter a full stomach) makes this non-accidental.

It seems strange that the defence wouldn't be pointing the finger of blame towards baby G's designated nurse who fed her before 2am and then went on her break. I wonder if there has to be a time element involved which hasn't come through in the reporting, for baby G to have projectile vomited and her alarm gone off 15 minutes later.

 

[Tortoise]

Baby allegedly attacked by Lucy Letby was force fed massive amounts of milk - Banbury FM

Shortly after the vomiting episode, the court heard that Letby noted she had withdrawn 45ml of milk, together with “air++”, from Child G’s stomach.

Asked about Letby’s explanation in police interview that babies can take in a lot of air when vomiting, Dr Bohin said: “That’s not correct. Babies do not take in air when vomiting. If you are vomiting, things are coming out not coming in.”

 

[Tortoise]

'It caused her to suffer a significant amount of oxygen deprivation. It was extremely challenging for staff, and what they won't have realised (at the time) is that all of this compromised her more than they knew.

'She was never stable from the time of the projectile vomiting. After that she was a completely different baby, sadly. We know that from the scans. This was the event that compromised her overall health'.

[...]

Dr Sandie Bohin, another paediatric consultant brought in as an expert witness, said that premature babies usually vomited silently.

Since nurses had recalled 'hearing`' Baby G vomit, she wondered what exactly they had heard. 'Maybe they heard the vomit hitting the floor,' she said.

'I've not seen babies on neonatal units projecting vomiting. For me that was quite extraordinary – and it was a lot of vomit'.

Lucy Letby 'used syringe to force milk and air into baby', court told

 

[Dotta]

'It caused her to suffer a significant amount of oxygen deprivation. It was extremely challenging for staff, and what they won't have realised (at the time) is that all of this compromised her more than they knew.

'She was never stable from the time of the projectile vomiting. After that she was a completely different baby, sadly. We know that from the scans. This was the event that compromised her overall health'.

[...]

Dr Sandie Bohin, another paediatric consultant brought in as an expert witness, said that premature babies usually vomited silently.

Since nurses had recalled 'hearing`' Baby G vomit, she wondered what exactly they had heard. 'Maybe they heard the vomit hitting the floor,' she said.

'I've not seen babies on neonatal units projecting vomiting. For me that was quite extraordinary – and it was a lot of vomit'.

Lucy Letby 'used syringe to force milk and air into baby', court told

Dad said she didn't recognize him any more.
Her brain was damaged.

(It was in the DM link I sent earlier in this thread)

This case is harrowing.

 

[Supernovae]

The expert's evidence about the only way this could have happened was with a syringe plunger (gravity fed milk through the ng tube would not enter a full stomach) makes this non-accidental.

It seems strange that the defence wouldn't be pointing the finger of blame towards baby G's designated nurse who fed her before 2am and then went on her break. I wonder if there has to be a time element involved which hasn't come through in the reporting, for baby G to have projectile vomited and her alarm gone off 15 minutes later.

It's very regrettable that we didn't get any decent live reporting from the day the nurses testified because there are multiple critical points here.

Lucy Letby: Baby's deterioration was unexpected, fellow nurse tells jury (I note that it was Tom Mullen reporting that day, as he doesn't seem to even provide the minimal live tweeting the other BBC Journalists do.)

Lucy Letby: Baby's deterioration was unexpected, fellow nurse tells jury

A colleague of Lucy Letby tells the nurse's trial that a change in a baby's condition was unexpected.

www.bbc.co.uk

Her colleague, who was the baby's designated nurse, said she gave Child G a routine feed of 45ml of breast milk via tube before going for her break and the baby was stable.
She told the court she returned to find Child G had been moved to the intensive care unit and was surrounded by staff.
"If I was concerned, I wouldn't have gone," she said.
"For example, if she looked unwell or her monitor was alarming or if she hadn't tolerated her feed or woke up upset."
"There were staff with [Child G] and they told me she had been unwell while I had been on my break."

However, she agreed with Ben Myers KC, defending, that she was not trained in intensive care at the time so her duties on the night would have been appropriately passed to Ms Letby.

The court later heard from Ailsa Simpson, who was the nursing shift leader.
She said the mood on the neonatal unit had been "calm" and Child G had appeared in "good condition", but she had later heard the baby suddenly vomit at 02:15 as she was sitting with Ms Letby at a nursing station metres away.
She said the "large milky digested vomit" was "loud enough to hear" and had "gone from over the cot and on to a chair next to her".
She said an alarm also sounded, signalling the baby's oxygen levels and heart rate had dropped, and she and Ms Letby immediately went to the room.

The potential alibi from Alisa Simpson is pretty important and came up in the prosecution opening:

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

THE trial of former Countess of Chester Hospital nurse Lucy Letby, who is accused of multiple baby murders, is due to finalise its jury and hear…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

3:14pm

At 2.15am, the shift leader said she was sat with Lucy Leader when she heard Child G vomiting, along with Child G's monitor alarm going off.
They ran into her nursery. Child G had vomited violently and suffered a collapse.
The prosecution said medical records suggest the shift leader nurse's memory of being with Lucy Letby for a period of time before this event cannot be accurate.

It's interesting that Mr Myers chose to cross examine her on this point which was ostensibly in their favour.

Lucy Letby: Baby's deterioration was unexpected, fellow nurse tells jury

A colleague of Lucy Letby tells the nurse's trial that a change in a baby's condition was unexpected.

www.bbc.co.uk

Mr Myers questioned the accuracy of her memory of the shift alongside statements she had made to police years later.
He put it to Ms Simpson that she did not have "images in her head" for all the events and was referring to notes, which she accepted.
She agreed that his suggestion that "seven years after the event, it's almost impossible to know how long something took" was "fair".

My best guess is that he needs the alibi to hold up at a basic level but also to be out in some modest way in terms of timing to account for whatever the prosecution think disproves it.

It's another regrettable gap in the reporting that we're none the wiser on that point or what the designated nurse conceded about the aspiration that BM thought gave them a lifeline.