UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #9

[Marantz4250b]

It'll be interesting to see if she does Personally I'd want to take the stand if I'd been wrongly accused of doing something horrific and hadn't been able to speak publicly about it for years, but I guess everybody's different. Reading about Mark Brown taking the stand in the recent Leah Ware/Alex Morgan case that was definitely a mistake. Although this case is going to be very different as it's all taken place in a hospital and is going to rely heavily on the medical experts' opinions.

It's unusual for defendants to give evidence in person. Absolutely nothing would surprise me about this case, however.

Although unusual, I'm not sure I'd be that surprised if she did. It appears that she spoke at great length in all her police interviews and, as far as the evidence presented thus far shows, hasn't refused to answer or has taken a "no comment" stance to the questions put to her.

If she does then I suspect that her evidence alone may take weeks to get through!

 

[Becci]

My neighbour said to me the other day her friend had a baby at 27wks & was put in the NICU.
The heaviest baby in there was 5lb & passed away at xmas.
So tragic but ii was quite shocked though given his weight

 

[Kemug]

I personally hope that LL does testify. I really think it could help me make up my mind about her - though I'm probably deluding myself!

 

[Dcflag]

If she doesn’t take the stand.. she could have a statement read on her behalf right? Or have I imagined that?

 

[Parker Knoll]

No she would physically have to take the witness stand.
She would need to be cross examined.
She could of given a prepared statement to the police on the time of arrest via her solicitors but I don’t think she did.

 

[Tortoise]

If she doesn’t take the stand.. she could have a statement read on her behalf right? Or have I imagined that?

I think the police interview summaries are being provided so that the jury hears her statements that way. I don't think they'd be reading them to the jury if she was going to give evidence.

It's a shame the media is only reporting snippets.

 

[katydid23]

I wonder if they will resume the trial on Monday? I hope so or the jurors are going to start forgetting everything they already learned about.

 

[Dotta]

I think the police interview summaries are being provided so that the jury hears her statements that way. I don't think they'd be reading them to the jury if she was going to give evidence.

It's a shame the media is only reporting snippets.

If I were in such situation (God forbid) and of course innocent - I would be the 1st to ask to be put on stand - begging, crying, answering truthfully - all to prove my innocence.

In fact, they would have to drag me away from this stand.
I firmly believe that one has to defend oneself.

As in saying:

"Can you count?
So...
Count on yourself!"

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

I'll copy over her police interview summaries for each child so far, and the prosecution opening speech for further details.

 

[Tortoise]

LL's Police Interviews

Child A

Evidence:


Nicholas Johnson KC, for the prosecution, explains to the jurors he will now read a summary of the police interview Lucy Letby had in respect of Child A and Child B.
The wording of the summary has been agreed between the prosecution and defence.
For the case of Child A - the first interview took place in July 2018.
Letby was allowed to look through the case notes, and was asked if she remembered the specific shift. She replied: "Yes."
Letby gave details of the handover and the long line administration.
She said she checked the fluids and a nurse colleague "had the bag out".
She said they noticed Child A was "pale and mottled", and a crash call was put out.
She said full resuscitation attempts followed.
She said Child A had been "a little bit jittery in appearance" and believed that was due to low blood sugar levels.
She said a colleague was there with the fluids at the handover.
She was asked why the fluids were a priority, and Letby explains Child A had gone 'a few hours' with a lack of fluids.
She said that "wasn't ideal".
She said Child A went pale after a colleague had connected the fluids. She said Child A had "gone pale" 'about five minutes' after the fluids were administered.
She said Child A had a rash-like appearance, which Letby put as being the result of an infection, or being cold.
"He was more pale than the areas of the mottling."
She was asked if anyone had seen the mottling. Letby replies: "Yes."
She said they were advised to stop administration of the fluids.
Child A was then not breathing, and Dr Harkness was called over.
Letby said she could not recall Child A's resuscitation, but recalled Dr Jayaram had entered the room.
She said the death of Child A "had been difficult" for her, and said there was a support network among the nursing team.
She said she could not recall who attached the fluids line, but believed it was her nursing colleague Melanie Taylor who had connected the fluids.
She said photos were taken of Child A in accordance with the parents' wishes on their phone, along with a lock of hair and hand/footprints.
She agreed she had been taught to prime lines so air could not get in them.
She denied having done so via Child A's long line or UVC.
She said she didn't know exactly what an air embolism was.
She said her relationship with the child's parents was "strictly professional" and could not explain or remember why she had searched the mum's name on Facebook several times in the following weeks.
She explained, for a later search, she may have been searching for their names for an update on Child B.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 26

Prosecution opening speech:

When interviewed by police regarding the circumstances over Child A's death [in July 2018], Letby said she had given fluids to Child A at the time of the change of shifts.
She said within "maybe" five minutes, Child A developed 'almost a rash appearance, like a blotchy red marks on the skin'.
She said she had wondered whether the bag of fluid "was not what we thought it was".
In an interview in June 2019, Letby said she had asked for all fluids to be kept from the bag at the end to be checked...
It was suggested by police that Letby had administered an air embolus. She replied it would have been very hard to push air through the line.
In a November 2020 police interview, police put to her that Letby had tracked the family of Child A on Facebook. She said she had no memory of doing so but accepted it if there was evidence on her computer doing so.

https://www.chesterstandard.co.uk/news/23035356.recap-prosecution-opens-trial-lucy-letby-accused-countess-chester-hospital-baby-murders/

 

[Tortoise]

LL's Police Interviews

Child B

Evidence:

For Child B, Letby explained the discolouration was a different appearance to that of Child A.

Child B's appearance was observed before resuscitation attempts began.
She did not recall having had any concerns for Child B, or any alarm going off for her.
She confirmed she would have handled Child B to an extent for medication and to attach lines.
She said she did not recall how upset Child A and B's parents were at the time.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 26


Prosecution opening speech:


In police interview [in July 2018], Letby was asked about the circumstances regarding the connection of a liquid feed bag at 12.05am. She said she had looked at paperwork for the lipid syringe (an addition to the liquid feed bag to children not being given milk), and said the prescription was "not her writing" but "she had signed for it" and "ideally it should have been co-signed by somebody".
Letby told police she had conducted observations on Child B, but the other nurse was the allocated nurse.
Letby also said it was the other nurse who had alerted her to the problem with Child B.
In a June 2019 police interview, Letby said it was her signature on the blood gas record at 12.15am, just before Child B collapsed.
In November 2020, Letby was asked by police about a handover sheet relating to Child B found at her home address in a search. The sheet showed she had been the designated nurse for two babies in a different room that night.

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

 

[Tortoise]

LL's Police Interviews

Child C

Evidence:

When interviewed about child C, the defendant said she remembered him because he was a small baby.

Letby recalled he deteriorated not long after his first feed by one of the nurses but said she had no involvement in that.

Her only involvement with child C was when she was asked to help with the resuscitation attempt, she told police.

She added she had a “vague recollection” of taking child C’s hand and foot prints for a memory box while the infant was sat with his parents but “couldn’t be certain”.

Letby went on to say she found the boy’s death “quite hard because he lived several hours (after the collapse)” and she had “not seen that before”.

Detectives also asked her about a conversation in which a nurse was said to have asked child C’s parents if they wanted him to be taken away in a ventilator basket while he was still alive.

She replied she had no recollection of making that comment and questioned whether the parents had said she was the nurse who said that, the court heard.

She said it was “very sad” for the parents.

Letby, originally from Hereford, denies administering air to child C.

She accepted she made Facebook searches for his parents about 10 hours after their son died but could not remember doing the searches or why.

Letby told police she agreed she wanted to go the room “as it can be hard to go back into an ICU environment after having a sick baby so she preferred to go straight back in”.

Lucy Letby trial: Murder-accused nurse told police she found baby’s lingering death ‘quite hard’

Lucy Letby 'admitted it was hard when one of her baby victims lived'

Lucy Letby: Murder-accused nurse found baby's death hard, trial hears

Prosecution opening speech:

In [July 2018] police interview, Letby denied she had anything to do with Child C, other than with the resuscitation.
She could not remember why she had ended up in nursery 1.
In a second interview [June 2019], asked about texts which had been found on her phone placing her in that room, Letby said that she might have been sending them from the nurses’ station and then gone into room 1 “to do something else”.
She then agreed that she had been the only person in the room when Child C had collapsed.

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

 

[Tortoise]

LL's Police Interviews

Child D

Evidence:

The court is now hearing evidence of police interviews conducted with Lucy Letby in relation to Child D.

Nicholas Johnson KC says he is relaying a summary of the interviews.
Letby, in her July 2018 interview, said she did not remember Child D.
Looking through notes, she accepted she was in her care, but could not remember her. She said when administering medicine, two nurses would sign for medication, but it was not necessary for both of them to be present.
In June 2019, she denied administering Child D with an injection of air, and "didn't do anything" to Child D.
Asked about the Facebook searches for Child D's parents, she said she could not recall making those searches.
Asked about messages exchanged between Letby and a nursing colleague, she was asked why she had said Child D had 'overwhelming sepsis'. Letby says she could not recall, but thought from the context of the text, she thought Child D had been rescreened for infection.
She was asked why, later that day, someone had said it could have been meningitis. She said she could not remember that being said to her.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, November 11



Prosecution opening speech:

Letby, in police interview [in July 2018], said she "cannot remember" how she got involved.
She seemed to accept that she had administered medication with a syringe at 1.25am – 5 minutes before the first collapse.
In a June 2019 police interview, she said she could not remember calling back the doctor when Child D collapsed, but it was possible she had.
It was put to Letby, in November 2020, that she had searched for the parents of Child D on Facebook.
She said that she could not recall but accepted she had done so. She said she could not explain why she had done it.

Letby was asked about a text message in which she had referred to "an element of fate" being involved.
She said that it was 'fate that babies get unwell sometimes' but that she would have to know the context.

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

 

[Tortoise]

LL's Police Interviews

Child E

Evidence:

The jury hears detail of what Lucy Letby said to police about baby E when she was interviewed. She denied intending or causing any harm to the baby.


Nurse Letby recalled doing chest compressions during the resuscitation attempts on baby E, and recalled more blood coming from his mouth which "wasn’t nice to see"

Nurse Letby told police that she bathed baby E after his death with his parents’ consent, and says it was a privilege to do so. And made a memory box for them as per hospital policy.

https://twitter.com/JudithMoritz

Prosecution opening speech:

In police interview [in July 2018], Letby said she could remember Child E and he was "stable" at the time of the handover, with nothing of concern "before the large bile aspirate".
She said she and another member of staff had disposed of the aspirate and the advice was to omit the feed.
She said Child E's abdomen was becoming fuller and there was a purple discolouration, so had asked a doctor to review Child E.
She said she had got blood from the NG tube.
She was asked about the 10pm note and said if there had been any blood prior to the 9pm feed, "she would have noted it".
She said it was after 9pm that the SHO had reviewed Child E but could not recall if it was face-to-face or over the phone.
She said she could remember the mum leaving after 'the 10pm visit'.
In a June 2019 interview, she was pressed over a conversation with the SHO.
She said she had no independent memory of it.
She said she could not remember the mum coming into the room at 9pm with milk, nor Child E being upset, with blood coming from the mouth.
She said she would not have told the mum to go back upstairs.
In a November 2020 interview, Letby is asked why she had sent a text referring to Child E had queried whether he had Down Syndrome.
She said she could not remember whether there had ever been any mention of Downs in the medical notes.

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

 

[Tortoise]

LL's Police Interviews

Child F

Evidence:

BBC Tweet - https://twitter.com/MrDanDonoghue


A summary of Ms Letby's police interview, carried out in [June] 2019, in relation to Child F is read to the court. In that interview Ms Letby denied adding insulin to a TPN bag

Mail Podcast -https://www.mailplus.co.uk/radio/the-trial-of-lucy-letby/24 1534/the-trial-of-lucy-letby-episode-8-baby-f-part-2-his-heart-rate-was-high-and-his-sugar-was-low-something-wasnt-right.

LL told the police that she remembered the twins because baby E's death had affected her. She denied deliberately harming baby F or injecting him with insulin, or putting the drug into his feed. Lucy Letby did however ask police whether they had checked baby F's nutrient bag and how they knew the insulin was in it at the time.

Prosecution opening speech:

Letby was interviewed by police in July 2018 about that night shift.
She remembered Child F, but had no recollection of the incident and "had not been involved in his care".
She was asked about the TPN bags chart. She said the TPN was kept in a locked fridge and the insulin was kept in that same fridge.
She confirmed her signature on the TPN form.
She had no recollection of having had involvement with administering the TPN bag contents to Child F, but confirmed giving Child F glucose injections and taken observations.
She also confirmed signing for a lipid syringe at 12.10am, the shift before. The prosecution say she should have had someone to co-sign for it.
"She accepted that the signature tended to suggest she had administered it."
"Interestingly, at the end of this part of the interview she asked whether the police had access to the TPN bag that she had connected," Mr Johnson added.

In a June 2019 police interview, Letby agreed with the idea that insulin would not be administered accidentally.
In November 2020, she was asked why she had searched for the parents of Child E and F. She said she thought it might be to see how Child F was doing.
She was asked about texting Child F’s blood sugar levels to an off- duty colleague at 8am. She said she must have looked on his chart.

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

 

[Tortoise]

LL's Police Interviews

Child G

(evidence not heard yet)

Prosecution opening speech:

In police interview [July 2018], Letby said she remembered the nurse had been on her break when the incident happened with Child G in nursery 2. She could not remember who had been assigned to look after her.
Letby suggested the excess air in Child G after the vomiting was the result of some sort of infection, or as a consequence of the vomiting.
She said she had withdrawn the 45mls of milk after that episode, and air had come with it, and she had seen Child G vomiting.
She said she did not know why she had gone into the room, but it was possible it was as a result of hearing Child G vomiting.
Letby 'vaguely' recalled the day Child G vomited after her return to the hospital, accepting she had been the designated nurse. She had no recollection of Child G vomiting.
In a subsequent interview [June 2019], Letby accepted there were only two alternatives to the first vomiting incident - that Child G had been fed far more than should have been, or she had not digested her earlier feed.
She accepted that the clear inference to be drawn was that Child G had been given excess milk and air via the NGT. She denied responsibility for either of those eventualities.

For the second incident, Letby denied either over-feeding or injecting air into Child G's stomach.
In November 2020, Letby denied to police that she had switched off the Masimo monitor.
She was asked about Facebook searches carried done on the day of the second vomiting incident that Letby looked up the parents of Child G. She said "she had no recollection of them".
The prosecution say that, within a minute or two of looking at the mother of Child G on Facebook, she then looked at the mums of two other babies listed in the charges.
One was the mum who, the prosecution said, "interrupted the attack" by Letby on Child E.

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

 

[katydid23]

Thank You for these informative posts, @Tortoise,

I've been going over them this afternoon, to refresh my memory. Hopefully the court is back in session soon.

 

[katydid23]

In the first six cases, I wanted to get an idea of how the investigators narrowed down the focus to the alleged defendant.
So here is the description of the prosecution's explanation as to the defendant's whereabouts in the first six alleged attacks.

The first section is the brief summary, the second section is more detailed. [The data is from the posts right above, with the links posted by Tortoise.]

Brief Summary:
Baby A:
SO IN THE FIRST CASE——LL was the designated nurse and had allegedly been giving fluids to child A, and five minutes later the mottled rash was visible. Dr Harkness was called in at that time and eventually crash cart was called.

Baby B:
SO child B, the 2nd case of collapse, LL was allegedly checking the child’s blood gas reading, and signed it, so she was in there JUST BEFORE THE CHILD COLLAPSED.

Baby C:
SO LL WAS NOT DESIGNATED NURSE, for room 1, but she did eventually admit to allegedly being the only person in the room when child C collapsed.

Baby D:
In the 4th case, Baby D, she allegedly ADMINISTERED MEDS w/a SYRINGE 5 MINUTES BEFORE the first collapse.

Baby E:
So the 5th case——Baby E’s mother testified that she walked into the room at 9 pm to see LL STANDING MOTIONLESS AS THE BABY WAS SCREAMING AND BLEEDING FROM HER MOUTH. And LL allegedly told mum to go back to her room.

Baby F:
So this Baby F case was trickier than the prior 4 cases.

LL did agree that insulin had been administered and it would not have happened accidentally.

At first she said she had not been involved in his care—but confirmed she had signed for the TPN bag herself, and ‘she allegedly accepted that the signature tended to suggest she had administered it."

And she texted his blood sugar levels to another colleague. SO SHE WAS allegedly MORE INVOLVED IN THIS BABY’S CARE THAN SHE FIRST CLAIMED.

 

[katydid23]

Part 2[shortened summary of posts above posted by Tortoise]

Baby A:
Letby said she had given fluids to Child A at the time of the change of shifts.
She said within "maybe" five minutes, Child A developed 'almost a rash appearance, like a blotchy red marks on the skin'.
It was suggested by police that Letby had administered an air embolus. She replied it would have been very hard to push air through the line.

She agreed she had been taught to prime lines so air could not get in them.

She denied having done so via Child A's long line or UVC.

She said she didn't know exactly what an air embolism was

SO IN THE FIRST CASE——LL was the designated nurse and had been giving fluids to child A, and five minutes later the mottled rash was visible.


Baby B:

She confirmed she would have handled Child B to an extent for medication and to attach lines.

In a June 2019 police interview, Letby said it was her signature on the blood gas record at 12.15am, just before Child B collapsed.

SO child B, the 2nd case of collapse, LL was checking the child’s blood gas reading, and signing it, JUST BEFORE THE CHILD COLLAPSED.

Baby C:
Letby denied she had anything to do with Child C, other than with the resuscitation.
She could not remember why she had ended up in nursery 1.
…said that she might have been sending texts from the nurses’ station and then gone into room 1 “to do something else”.


She then agreed that she had been the only person in the room when Child C had collapsed.

SO LL WAS NOT DESIGNATED NURSE, for room 1, but she did eventually admit to being the only person in the room when child C collapsed.

Baby D:
she accepted she was in her care, but could not remember her. She said when administering medicine, two nurses would sign for medication, but it was not necessary for both of them to be present

Letby, in police interview , said she "cannot remember" how she got involved.
She seemed to accept that she had administered medication with a syringe at 1.25am – 5 minutes before the first collapse.

In a June 2019 police interview, she said she could not remember calling back the doctor when Child D collapsed, but it was possible she had.

In the 4th case, Baby D, she ADMINISTERED MEDS w/a SYRINGE 5 MINUTES BEFORE the first collapse.

Baby E:

She denied intending or causing any harm to the baby.

Nurse Letby recalled doing chest compressions during the resuscitation attempts on baby E, and recalled more blood coming from his mouth which "wasn’t nice to see"

she could remember Child E and he was "stable" at the time of the handover, with nothing of concern "before the large bile aspirate”….

this case is long and involved and includes the testimony from the mother and father, in which they claim the mother visited the baby’s room with expressed milk @ 9pm, but LL denies it happened at nine and says mom and dad are mistaken, and it was 10 pm.


LL said she could not remember the mum coming into the room at 9pm with milk, nor Child E being upset, with blood coming from the mouth.

She said she would not have told the mum to go back upstairs.BOTH THE PARENTS TESTIFIED OTHERWISE.


So the 5th case——Baby E’s mother testified that she walked into the room at 9 pm to see LL STANDING MOTIONLESS AS THE BABY WAS SCREAMING AND BLEEDING FROM HER MOUTH. And LL told mum to go back to her room.

Baby F:

A summary of Ms Letby's police interview, carried out in [June] 2019, in relation to Child F is read to the court. In that interview Ms Letby denied adding insulin to a TPN bag

She remembered Child F, but had no recollection of the incident and "had not been involved in his care".


She was asked about the TPN bags chart. She said the TPN was kept in a locked fridge and the and the insulin was kept in that same fridge.

She confirmed her signature on the TPN form.

She had no recollection of having had involvement with administering the TPN bag contents to Child F, but confirmed giving Child F glucose injections and taken observations.

She also confirmed signing for a lipid syringe at 12.10am, the shift before. The prosecution say she should have had someone to co-sign for it.

In a June 2019 police interview, Letby agreed with the idea that insulin would not be administered accidentally.

She was asked about texting Child F’s blood sugar levels to an off- duty colleague at 8am. She said she must have looked on his chart.

"She accepted that the signature tended to suggest she had administered it."
She was asked about texting Child F’s blood sugar levels to an off- duty colleague at 8am. She said she must have looked on his chart

The baby’s heart rate was high and his sugar was low—something wasn’t right.



So this Baby F case was trickier than the prior 4 cases.
But LL did agree that insulin had been administered and it would not have happened accidentally.

At first she said she had not been involved in his care—but confirmed she had signed for the TPN bag herself, and ‘she accepted that the signature tended to suggest she had administered it."

And she texted his blood sugar levels to another colleague. SO SHE WAS MORE INVOLVED IN THIS BABY’S CARE THAN SHE FIRST CLAIMED.


Baby G: evidence not heard yet

 

[katydid23]

Dan O'Donoghue
@MrDanDonoghue
·
Jan 11

We've been told the trial will now resume on Monday, January 16