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

[Kemug]

One of those, tripped and fell onto the syringe things...

Like the captain of the Costa Concordia tripped and fell into the lifeboat! But I digress.

 

[Supernovae]

It's emblematic of the fragility of the prosecution's case. The idea that she switched off the monitor is something the police have been pursuing since 2020. It becomes the major plank of an attempted murder charge or at least the main concrete bit of evidence of that charge and it falls apart when one witness reads about it online.

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

I think the monitor thing is more significant than people are perhaps recognising. It was a major plank, if not the main plank of the second attempted murder charge:

If the two doctors told the Nurse that it was them who turned off the monitor/didn't turn it back on, why did she not tell LL this at the time? Also I'm a little confused at the timeline of this -

Consultant doctor fitted the canula, he says
"could not recall" if Child G's monitoring equipment was switched off during the cannula fitting, but "it is his practice to transfer the sensor from one limb to another or if temporary detachment is required to reattach the monitor as soon as possible."
He added if Child G was not stable he would not have left her.
At this point the Nurse had left
then
After the doctors (why is this multiple now when it was just the Consultant a second ago) had gone, the nurse responded to Lucy Letby's shout for help. When she attended, Child G's monitor had been switched off (power was off).

Then two doctors apologise to the Nurse and tell her whoops it was both of us who didn't switch it back on, but she doesn't tell LL or seemingly anybody else about this?

 

[katydid23]

It's emblematic of the fragility of the prosecution's case. The idea that she switched off the monitor is something the police have been pursuing since 2020. It becomes the major plank of an attempted murder charge or at least the main concrete bit of evidence of that charge and it falls apart when one witness reads about it online.

I don't see that as fragility of the prosecution's case. There is so much more to it than one monitor having been turned off.

The keys to their case involve someone giving these babies insulin to poison them. And forcing air into their veins, etc. The monitor being off or on is not crucial evidence, one way or the other, imo.

IF the doctor had switched it off, the next nurse to arrive should have or would have turned it back on. LL apparently did not do so when she entered the room. I think that's strange. But by itself, not indicative either way.

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

Also, have we been told where Child G was when she was screened and cannulated?

Because "A nurse took over the care from Letby at 11.30am, as Letby was looking after two other children in room 4."

If Child G was not in room 4, and LL had two other children to care for in room 4, why was she away from those babies and first to 'discover' Child G unwell behind the screens?

I am actually very confused who was with Child G or who was meant to be when this happened, as it says a Nurse took over LL, but then the Nurse is noted as leaving, then the doctor(s) leave too and LL shouts for help?

 

[AnnesCuthberts]

'Letby said: “It’s hard isn’t it. When mum came in today she was like oh I’m so pleased you’ve got her which I thought was a little strange as I don’t know her that well but wonder if she just felt reassured to have a nurse.”'

Sounds like fishing for compliments.

Agreed, and also IMO disparaging to the mum. Assuming mum did say that to LL, I can't think of anything more normal than a parent expressing happiness that their child is being looked after by someone they're comfortable with. If I were a nurse and heard that, I'd be beaming with pride that someone could trust me to such a degree. Complete amateur speculation here, but part of me wonders if there's something telling in that. Is there a level of "I'm above this person, I know better than to trust a stranger..." feeling? Almost slightly gloating? MOO. I could well be reading things into it that aren't there. Either way, I'm in complete agreement here this is absolutely LL fishing for compliments.

Then two doctors apologise to the Nurse and tell her whoops it was both of us who didn't switch it back on, but she doesn't tell LL or seemingly anybody else about this?

I find this surprising as well, especially as we're seeing the scope of things on the ward that are being discussed via texts and how casually it all seems discussed. The other text I quoted was while LL and a colleague seemed to be expressing dislike of the nursery nurses actions "wishing she had told someone". Part of me finds it hard to believe that doctors not switching on a monitor wouldn't have been brought up by someone, somewhere, even in a similar way to the discussion of the nursery nurse.

 

[katydid23]

Mother ‘told Lucy Letby she was pleased she was caring for baby girl’

A MOTHER told Lucy Letby she was “so pleased” she was caring for her baby girl on a shift when the nurse allegedly tried twice to kill her, a…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[katydid23]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Liz Hull is apparently back in court today. But she rarely tweets from the trial. She posts an article the next day instead.

Donoghue doesn't seem to be reporting from there today either. No big loss though...

 

[Tortoise]

It's emblematic of the fragility of the prosecution's case. The idea that she switched off the monitor is something the police have been pursuing since 2020. It becomes the major plank of an attempted murder charge or at least the main concrete bit of evidence of that charge and it falls apart when one witness reads about it online.

I'm not understanding how it's a major plank of the allegation of attempted murder? If the machinery was keeping her alive that would be different, but they're not saying the monitor being off is what caused her collapse. In fact they don't say LL turned it off, they say "Someone had switched off the monitor when Child G collapsed, and she was 'discovered' by Lucy Letby", while acknowledging that the doctor couldn't recall. It's still a possibility that LL did switch it off because I'm sure the prosecution wouldn't float the idea if they know the doctors will testify they turned it off. We don't actually know the circumstances of two doctors saying they apparently both turned it off to the nurse. But it's not key anyway, to the attempted murder allegation of injecting air or milk to the baby.

MOO

 

[Tortoise]

Also, have we been told where Child G was when she was screened and cannulated?

Because "A nurse took over the care from Letby at 11.30am, as Letby was looking after two other children in room 4."

If Child G was not in room 4, and LL had two other children to care for in room 4, why was she away from those babies and first to 'discover' Child G unwell behind the screens?

I am actually very confused who was with Child G or who was meant to be when this happened, as it says a Nurse took over LL, but then the Nurse is noted as leaving, then the doctor(s) leave too and LL shouts for help?

LL's texts say she was in room 4

LL: “Due imms today too. I got her screened this morning after she vomited.
Nurse: Was she still in 4 then?
LL: “Yup and had NN (nursery nurse) all weekend. Looked rubbish when I took over this morning then she vomited at 9 and I got her screened”

I don't know about morning, she seems to be altering the sequence of events there, with opening speech saying the baby was cannulated at 3.30pm, so not at the time of the 10.20am vomiting.

She's even moved the vomiting closer to the time of the handover than it really was.

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

LL's texts say she was in room 4

LL: “Due imms today too. I got her screened this morning after she vomited.
Nurse: Was she still in 4 then?
LL: “Yup and had NN (nursery nurse) all weekend. Looked rubbish when I took over this morning then she vomited at 9 and I got her screened”

I don't know about morning, she seems to be altering the sequence of events there, with opening speech saying the baby was cannulated at 3.30pm, so not at the time of the 10.20am vomiting.

She's even moved the vomiting closer to the time of the handover than it really was.

Thank you! The timeline is a little muddy here for me because as you say, her texts seem to indicate different timescales to what we've been told previously.

So LL was the only nurse in room 4 with her own 2 babies to look after, and Child G who was screened and cannulated.

 

[Tortoise]

Thank you! The timeline is a little muddy here for me because as you say, her texts seem to indicate different timescales to what we've been told previously.

So LL was the only nurse in room 4 with her own 2 babies to look after, and Child G who was screened and cannulated.

I don't think we've been told she was the only nurse in room 4, we only know the designated nurse left and LL shouted for help from behind the screen so she came back. It's a strong possibility I think. The other thing is why did the designated nurse leave without checking her baby's monitor and baby was stable?

 

[Dotta]

I’m confused, what do you mean by the FB searches? Did I miss something?

FB=FaceBook

 

[Tortoise]

She's even moved the vomiting closer to the time of the handover than it really was.

replying to myself here just to add that she seems to be moving the vomiting closer to the 'inferior/inexperienced' staff on at the weekend.

This was a Monday morning.

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

I don't think we've been told she was the only nurse in room 4, we only know the designated nurse left and LL shouted for help from behind the screen so she came back. It's a strong possibility I think. The other thing is why did the designated nurse leave without checking her baby's monitor and baby was stable?

Yes sorry should have stated that was my inference rather than a fact.

So: A nurse takes over from LL as designated nurse for Child G, LL remains in room 4 in charge of two other babies.
At 3.30pm a consultant doctor was called to cannulate Child G. Privacy screens were erected and Child G was on a trolley, with the monitor still attached.
The nurse went to care for another baby.
Consultant doctor fits the cannula, he cannot remember if the monitor was off but says if it was transferred to another limb or turned off it is practice to turn it back on and if Child G was not stable he would not have left her.
Then he leaves the room too.

Nurse is not mentioned as coming back until LL shouts for help, so it does seem Child G was left alone with LL at this point. But as you say, the monitor being on or off isn't too important as it's not assisting Child G to breathe or anything vital. Even if LL did not turn it off herself, she did not have turned it back on either to allegedly attack Child G

 

[JosieJo]

I think the monitor thing is more significant than people are perhaps recognising. It was a major plank, if not the main plank of the second attempted murder charge:

I do think the prosecution look foolish but I do not think the monitor is a major plank

The prosecution obviously ran with it based on wrong information but without it...

Why was it Lucy there alone again during a collapse?

How long was the baby left alone after Dr left ?

A big one for me ..if the baby had deteriorated how did Lucy notice she was deteriorating without an alarm sounding it wasn't her baby ? Especially as there was a privacy screen

Also if she discovered a baby without a monitor why did she not text it to her colleagues or mention it?

I think because it's a multiple charge for this baby it will not effect anything as the first alleged attack is so strong.

I would have liked to hear more though about who the Dr's were and how and why this wasn't picked up earlier

 

[Dotta]

Why was LL so eager to put this "privacy screen"?
Provided that "screening" means exactly this?

My imagination may run riot again but...

Privacy screen + monitor turned off
(as not turned on by the nurse as it should normally be) - sounds sinister

Moo

 

[notsure]

Looks like Dan O'Donoghue is reporting today after all

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

 

[notsure]

https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue

Lucy Letby's trial resumes at Manchester Crown Court this morning. We're continuing to hear evidence in relation to Child G. Ms Letby is accused of attempting to murder the baby three times at the Countess of Chester Hospital in September 2015

Ben Myers KC, defending, is questioning a former nursing colleague of Ms Letby about the events of 21 September 2015. Child G had projectile vomited and had difficulty breathing on the morning of that day.

Yesterday, the nurse told the court that Ms Letby shouted for help with Child G on the afternoon of 21 September. The nurse responded and noticed that the monitor had been switched off, which was "not normal protocol", but refuted any suggestion Ms Letby had turned it off.

She explained to Mr Myers that two doctors had apologised to her, as they had not switched the monitor back on. She agreed that the monitors should have been turned back on.

Dr Peter Fielding, who was a senior house officer on the Countess of Chester neonatal unit in 2015, is now in the witness box

 

[katydid23]

I do think the prosecution look foolish but I do not think the monitor is a major plank

The prosecution obviously ran with it based on wrong information but without it...

Why was it Lucy there alone again during a collapse?

How long was the baby left alone after Dr left ?

A big one for me ..if the baby had deteriorated how did Lucy notice she was deteriorating without an alarm sounding it wasn't her baby ? Especially as there was a privacy screen

Also if she discovered a baby without a monitor why did she not text it to her colleagues or mention it?

I think because it's a multiple charge for this baby it will not effect anything as the first alleged attack is so strong.

I would have liked to hear more though about who the Dr's were and how and why this wasn't picked up earlier

"A big one for me ..if the baby had deteriorated how did Lucy notice she was deteriorating without an alarm sounding it wasn't her baby ? Especially as there was a privacy screen..."

Yes, good point.

Apparently, there was no alarm for LL to answer if the screen was off. So why would she go check on the baby in that room if there was no alarm to warn her and a screen to prevent her from seeing anything ?