UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, murder of babies, 7 Guilty of murder verdicts; 8 Guilty of attempted murder; 2 Not Guilty of attempted; 5 hung re attempted #36

[Furore]

E

If Dr. Shoo Lee doesn’t want his study to be used for nefarious reasons, doesn’t want his name to be linked with the conviction he obviously doubts, how is it “me, me, me?” And, he brought a huge panel of doctors, each of whom can speak for themselves. One is a well-known one from Harvard. It is what’s called “teamwork.”

If we start accusing Dr. Lee of being “me, me, me”, of Dr. Ravi Jay’s name pops up again. He uses “me” all the time on TV, but that’s not the problem…

Recently, Dr. Jay compared his current situation to past experience of being in a personally abusive relationship. On TV, no less. Dude, I wanted to say, you are not the victim here, don’t even compare yourself to these parents!

Worse, IMHO. After the trial Drs Jay and Breary were posturing as the whistleblowers persecuted by NHS. Think of it. I support NHS; I think it is a good system. But, NHS is struggling financially, and does need help. Drs. R@J, employed by it, IMHO, don’t seem to care about its sustainability nor the future of free healthcare in the UK. It is all so self-serving. (Here. I said it). I understand the feelings of the Brits. I, too, would stand for imperfect, but fair system. But, remember what brought the eminent Canadian neonatologist there. He came to get his answers in a true crime case.

Now about nosocomial infections. We know about them. Staph aureus, the famous pest of delivery and maternity wards. (Pseudomonas aeruginosa is an overkill, though. Nasty stuff.)

However, the question is not about nosocomial infections. The question is that if it was shown to colonize a very preemie baby’s ETT, it was likely in her tracheobronchial tree. That called for antibiotics in a frail baby with low immunity, but it was missed. (Like, Staph aureus is often in a maternity ward, but if you see it around the navel of the neonate, you give antibiotics).

Same with Streptomonas maltophilia. The problem is not that it is film-forming. The problem is that mortality rate from it is close to 38% and antibiotics should have been immediately prescribed. Yet no one caught it but they blamed Lucy for the baby’s death.

as linked in my other post, respectfully, colonisation of an ET tube is absolutely not the same as pneumonia or systemic infection - Ventilator associated pneumonia is insanely difficult to diagnose as linked in my OP and I am intrigued to hear why you should be so certain when global medical entities cannot find decent sensitive and specific criteria after decades of attempts - it truly isn’t so simple.

Moreover JMO but if a child is sick with pneumonia, there is evidence they are doing poorly before they have a collapse or cardiac arrest - many cases of infection were reviewed and screened out from being brought as criminal charges. This was a baby the existing investigators did not feel had a well explained collapse. JMO but consistent unexplained collapses on a single caregiver is a huge red flag for abuse and absolutely deserves the weight it was given in court - that is a recognised red flag in multiple guidelines in child health.

Also just my own opinion on Shoo Lee, many may disagree, but I don’t think anyone had really heard of shoo Lee or even his paper before he started arranging press conferences. It was already discussed at length in the trial that a) even in shoo Lee paper only 10% of air embolus cases had a rash b) other features of the diagnosis were related to refractory resus or abrupt onset c) air was found in the vascular tree of some babies on scans without good alternate cause. Thus the Lee paper was not the sole guide by which air embolism was suspected, and the appeal review was clear about this hence why it was rejected. But shoo Lee could not leave alone and had to stage this ridiculous intervention “to clear his name” when he was never a pivotal part of the process, it’s really quite cringeworthy to myself. One really has to be careful with non practising, titular, individuals - he has specifically gone for illustrious credentials on his self assembled panel (no selection bias there right?) because he knows what appeals to the lay person. They aren’t experts in the way the countess was run, they haven’t convinced me why this spike in poor care occurred 2015-2016 only, they aren’t experts in the state of the nhs, they never met or cared for the babies alive - the number of times an in person review changes your impression from what’s on paper…in all aspects of life. I may not agree with all the tv conduct of the other doctors at all either but that doesn’t change that my gut is to go with the people who knew the unit and felt something inexplicable was happening. For me personally shoo Lee just is really just trying to give himself some relevance, despite Court processes already examining and dismissing his “new evidence”, he’s turned to the court of public opinion.

I am not sure what mrsa has to do with the Letby cases and that may be my ignorance - did babies have positive blood cultures with mrsa? Again even if so the collapses described don’t clinically fit with sepsis.

I am fairly sure if one wanted, one could assemble 14 experts to say the cases selected couldn’t exclude murder, easily enough. The medical evidence wasn’t the only evidence used to convict Letby and much of it, with the totality of various testimonies, texts, notes, swipe data etc, she was found guilty across a number of deaths. In my heart I’m comfortable that thT is the right decision - and doesn’t mean there were poor systems or understaffing at the CoC, just that in a functioning system she wouldn’t have got away with it for as long.

Will be interesting to see what further charges will be brought etc

All JMO

 

[mrC]

this was cut from thirwell as well Lucy Letby’s mentor said there was ‘no evidence’ she committed crimes in remarks cut from inquiry

 

[mrC]

from nursing times Thirlwall Inquiry documents show former colleagues backed Letby | Nursing Times

 

[Sweeper2000]

Don't know why LL mentor thinks she can dictate what is and isn't evidence tbh. shes a nurse or something like that not a lawyer, investigator etc. or even what she considers to be evidence? we had this discussion before and covered the topic of hard evidence numerous times. no knives in the back for sure but dead babies who died mysteriously to me sounds allot like evidence.

 

[mrC]

well as a nurse might no somthing about the subject of baby care certanly more than most lawyers or policeman would

 

[Sweeper2000]

A nurse indeed is much much more likely to know that an air embolism leaves little to no evidence that it was the cause of a decline and perhaps that air itself is very difficult to trace if used as a weapon which is interesting as lucy letby said she didn't know what one was initially. maybe she was just being a bit of a bubble head or had bubbles in mind.

 

[joltz]

well as a nurse might no somthing about the subject of baby care certanly more than most lawyers or policeman would

She was reprimanded at the enquiry and had to concede that it has not her job to do this. Quite simply, she wasn't qualified to determine if the babies had come to harm or not. Her duty of care was to the babies and in this role she utterly failed. Its not a suprise that she is riding the free Letby wave because not only did she make some huge errors of judgment but she may be one of the people potentially facing charge for her actions or lack of.

 

[Marantz4250b]

this was cut from thirwell as well Lucy Letby’s mentor said there was ‘no evidence’ she committed crimes in remarks cut from inquiry

That article is paywalled so we can't read it.

As previously, though - why is it remotely relevant what this person thinks? It's merely an opinion as to how she sees it.

This person can say what they like but they are not a murder investigator so their opinion counts for nowt. Their opinion is completely irrelevant.

There was a ten month trial which outlined the entire case, after which she was convicted.

She's guilty of multiple counts of murdering babies and she's never getting out. People can come up with whatever silly arguments they please but they know, deep down and without kidding themselves, that she is 100% totally guilty.

I know it; you know it - everyone knows it!

And, just a quick edit here - even if it has been deleted from the inquiry, so what? The inquiry is NOT a debate as to her guilt or innocence. If people are giving evidence professing their belief of her innocence then it most definitely should be deleted from the record. This is not what the inquiry is about.

 

[Marantz4250b]

well as a nurse might no somthing about the subject of baby care certanly more than most lawyers or policeman would

That's not what this person was saying, though. They said (apparently) that they saw no evidence of LL committing any crimes. That may well be true but, a) this person is not qualified to comment and, b) that is merely a personal opinion based on this person's very limited interactions over a relatively short period of time.

Again, though, this is NOT what the inquiry is charged with doing.

 

[mrC]

she qualified to comment because she was there

 

[Marantz4250b]

she qualified to comment because she was there

That's not how it works. You don't become qualified in a particular subject simply by being in the vicinity.

Lucy Letby’s mentor said there was ‘no evidence’ she committed crimes in remarks cut from inquiry

Senior nurse’s statement is one of dozens severely truncated but now released in full after pressure from journalists

www.telegraph.co.uk

Check the headline Lucy Letby’s mentor said there was ‘no evidence’ she committed crimes....

What qualifies her to make that statement as if it is a fact?

She is wholly unqualified to express an opinion as to whether any crimes were committed. A ten month trial concluded that her opinion is 100% wrong. In addition, voicing such an opinion is utterly irrelevant to the inquiry as it is outwith its terms of reference.

 

[Charlot123]

in reviewing this case, two questions emerge: 1) was the NICU structure of the COCH adequate for these premature, sick babies - and this answer is known, it was not.

2) the second part, the lingering question, could Lucy have still additionally contributed to the overall bad situation, could she still be the killer? - stays unanswered. The hospital was unfit for the babies, but on top of it, LL has been convicted.

<modsnip - not an approved source>

 

[Ruthbullock]

That's not how it works. You don't become qualified in a particular subject simply by being in the vicinity.

Lucy Letby’s mentor said there was ‘no evidence’ she committed crimes in remarks cut from inquiry

Senior nurse’s statement is one of dozens severely truncated but now released in full after pressure from journalists

www.telegraph.co.uk

Check the headline Lucy Letby’s mentor said there was ‘no evidence’ she committed crimes....

What qualifies her to make that statement as if it is a fact?

She is wholly unqualified to express an opinion as to whether any crimes were committed. A ten month trial concluded that her opinion is 100% wrong. In addition, voicing such an opinion is utterly irrelevant to the inquiry as it is outwith its terms of reference.

Maybe take that up with the inquiry then- it was a question on the rule 9 questionnaires produced for the inquiry. This is why they are now being referred to in MSM and discussed.
Did they include the question in the hope that it would solidify the trial outcome and then regret the results- thus withholding over 40 witnesses who were involved with the baby’s care and supported LL.
The subsequent discussion is valid- the inquiry is supposed to be impartial (something a trial isn’t) and they attempted to withhold information and somehow the press have found out and knew the contents and have forced the inquiry to release them.

 

[mrC]

thriwell was ment to be a public televised inquiry that anyone could atend thats was what the family asked for

 

[Tortoise]

she qualified to comment because she was there

Nurse Y wasn't on duty for any of the collapses or deaths.

"51. As I was not on shift and therefore not involved in any of the deaths or collapses, I would not have attended any debriefs or discussions following these events. I expect there would have been debriefs but I was not involved. The consultant attending the incident would generally set up a suitable time for the members of staff involved to meet for a debrief if they wished to be involved."

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0107683.pdf

 

[May72031]

she qualified to comment because she was there

It doesn't mean her statement is relevant. It doesn't matter if she personally didn't see anything. She wasn't watching Letby 24/7.

 

[May72031]

BTW @mrC, are you still standing by your claim that Letby was "not on duty" when Baby C died?

 

[Ruthbullock]

Nurse Y wasn't on duty for any of the collapses or deaths.

"51. As I was not on shift and therefore not involved in any of the deaths or collapses, I would not have attended any debriefs or discussions following these events. I expect there would have been debriefs but I was not involved. The consultant attending the incident would generally set up a suitable time for the members of staff involved to meet for a debrief if they wished to be involved."

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0107683.pdf

The line before this relates to specifically certain babies and you have omitted it from your post.
She was there for the majority of collapse and deaths and talks about them in the paragraphs above.
Perhaps @Tortoise you could edit your post to make it accurate, rather than factually incorrect.

 

[Tortoise]

The line before this relates to specifically certain babies and you have omitted it from your post.
She was there for the majority of collapse and deaths and talks about them in the paragraphs above.
Perhaps @Tortoise you could edit your post to make it accurate, rather than factually incorrect.

Perhaps I missed it. Could you point me to the paragraphs where she talks about being present for any of the deaths or collapses of the babies?

 

[Ruthbullock]

Perhaps I missed it. Could you point me to the paragraphs where she talks about being present for any of the deaths or collapses of the babies?

I’ve added it for clarity- although apologise I can’t cut and paste, so a screenshot will have to suffice. It’s also worth noting as well as being a mentor to LL, nurse Y was also the person who collated the statistics for the ward ( again screenshot below)