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 #37

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #921
.

What really attracts attention is the name of a person from Alder-Hay unit. Susie Holt. How is she connected to Lucy? Did she train her? Was there something personal between them? Or is she another official?

I always felt that the arms of that case grew from Alder Hey. Could someone be very suspicious from the time of LL training? Surely? Could it be something personal? Absolutely.
Dr Susie Holt is now a consultant at Alder Hey- she may well have been training and a registrar in 2015 and rotated every 6 months at the time- her email address changes to COCH by the end of the email chain.
ETA: Page 11 has her background- she did indeed qualify in 2016, so would have been one of the doctors doing the 6 month training rotations and is now a consultant
 
Last edited:
  • #922
its another falure of discloser by the peoscution
 
  • #923
Dr. Ravi Jayaram provided testimony against Lucy Letby in her trial concerning babies other than Baby K. Specifically, he gave evidence regarding Child A, Child D, and Child M during Letby's first trial in 2022–2023.
  • Child A: Dr. Jayaram testified about responding to an emergency alert after Child A, a premature newborn twin, collapsed on June 8, 2015. He noted unusual skin discoloration and described the situation as unexpected, as the baby’s observations had been stable prior to the collapse. He later connected this to research on air embolism, which aligned with the prosecution’s claim that Letby injected air into the baby’s bloodstream.
  • Child D: Dr. Jayaram testified that after Child D’s death on June 22, 2015, he recalled discussions about similar skin discoloration observed in other cases. He mentioned discovering a research paper on air embolism after this incident, which raised his concerns about deliberate harm, though he regretted not raising this with the coroner at the time.
  • Child M: During the trial, Dr. Jayaram discussed unusual blotches observed on Child M, who collapsed unexpectedly in April 2016. He rejected the defense’s suggestion that he omitted these details from his notes due to their insignificance, emphasizing that the blotches were not a priority at the time as the baby was still recovering.
So can we now do a full U turn and go back to discussing the discrepancies between his trial statements and the evidence since, particularly what was presented at the inquiry.
 
  • #924
The leaked email says the desaturation happened at 3:50am, so I can’t see how it could refer to either of the other events.
So is there anything in that email to say she didn't call him to the desaturation after he entered the room and saw her at the incubator doing nothing?
 
  • #925
Dr Susie Holt is now a consultant at Alder Hey- she may well have been training and a registrar in 2015 and rotated every 6 months at the time- her email address changes to COCH by the end of the email chain.
ETA: Page 11 has her background- she did indeed qualify in 2016, so would have been one of the doctors doing the 6 month training rotations and is now a consultant
She was only ever employed as a consultant at COCH. It's in her evidence at Thirlwall.
 
Last edited:
  • #926
Dr. Ravi Jayaram provided testimony against Lucy Letby in her trial concerning babies other than Baby K. Specifically, he gave evidence regarding Child A, Child D, and Child M during Letby's first trial in 2022–2023.
  • Child A: Dr. Jayaram testified about responding to an emergency alert after Child A, a premature newborn twin, collapsed on June 8, 2015. He noted unusual skin discoloration and described the situation as unexpected, as the baby’s observations had been stable prior to the collapse. He later connected this to research on air embolism, which aligned with the prosecution’s claim that Letby injected air into the baby’s bloodstream.
  • Child D: Dr. Jayaram testified that after Child D’s death on June 22, 2015, he recalled discussions about similar skin discoloration observed in other cases. He mentioned discovering a research paper on air embolism after this incident, which raised his concerns about deliberate harm, though he regretted not raising this with the coroner at the time.
  • Child M: During the trial, Dr. Jayaram discussed unusual blotches observed on Child M, who collapsed unexpectedly in April 2016. He rejected the defense’s suggestion that he omitted these details from his notes due to their insignificance, emphasizing that the blotches were not a priority at the time as the baby was still recovering.
So can we now do a full U turn and go back to discussing the discrepancies between his trial statements and the evidence since, particularly what was presented at the inquiry.
Which discrepancies are you referring to?
 
  • #927
jayram was given a chance to coment on this new evdence but chose so

so hes not denying it
 
  • #928
So is there anything in that email to say she didn't call him to the desaturation after he entered the room and saw her at the incubator doing nothing?
Not in what’s been leaked. It just says the assigned nurse was at the labour ward and Letby called him about the low saturations and was at the incubator.
 
  • #929
dr jayram was given a chance to deny but chose not to do so
 
  • #930
More bluster from Letbys PR backed defense. Zzzzzzz
 
  • #931
Not in what’s been leaked. It just says the assigned nurse was at the labour ward and Letby called him about the low saturations and was at the incubator.
Now this was the initial document the consultants pulled together to give to the police, and we know Jayaram’s statements given to the police a short while later had changed to him not being called by Letby (his entry to the room being based on gut feeling instead). It’s quite possible his memory was confused at the point he was writing the document, and he was remembering one of the later desaturations where he was called. However, even that is a stretch, and just raises more questions about the reliability of Jayaram’s memory and testimony.

Also the signing off “those are my ones, over to you!” honestly makes me sick to my stomach. These are dead babies.
 
  • #932
dr jayram was given a chance to deny but chose not to do so
So? He probably wouldn't lower himself. It's another nothing burger.
 
  • #933
dr jayram was given a chance to deny but chose not to do so
I’m not sure he would be able to comment at this point, as my suspicions for a while have been, he was going to be investigated due to what was coming out in the inquiry. If he is being investigated he can not comment either way- even if he wanted to defend himself he wouldn’t be able to.
 
  • #934
If this is apparently "bombshell" evidence that is going to free Letby, then why not release the whole email? Instead we get apparent snippets, which don't prove anything and can be taken to mean a host of different things.

Must try harder
 
  • #935
So? He probably wouldn't lower himself. It's another nothing burger.
Can you explain why you think it’s a nothing burger? It was obtained via thirlwall so not disclosed until after the trial. Looks like a fairly substantial non-disclosure about an extremely important event? Either he walked in on someone taking the opportunity to kill a baby in plain sight, or he was called in to a common desaturation.
 
  • #936
🚩
The alarms story changed.
🚩
The 3.50 time changed.
🚩
The morphine sedation story changed.
🚩
The ET tube deliberately dislodged story changed.
🚩
Now about the skin discolouration descriptions Jayaram gave
 
  • #937
Now this was the initial document the consultants pulled together to give to the police, and we know Jayaram’s statements given to the police a short while later had changed to him not being called by Letby (his entry to the room being based on gut feeling instead). It’s quite possible his memory was confused at the point he was writing the document, and he was remembering one of the later desaturations where he was called. However, even that is a stretch, and just raises more questions about the reliability of Jayaram’s memory and testimony.

Also the signing off “those are my ones, over to you!” honestly makes me sick to my stomach. These are dead babies.
There is still nothing to say his entry to the room didn't happen exactly as he said, before he saw her at the incubator and upon LL seeing him calling him over to the baby desaturating.
 
  • #938
Can you explain why you think it’s a nothing burger? It was obtained via thirlwall so not disclosed until after the trial. Looks like a fairly substantial non-disclosure about an extremely important event? Either he walked in on someone taking the opportunity to kill a baby in plain sight, or he was called in to a common desaturation.


Like tortoise had said, there is nothing in the email which negates exactly what he said happened when he walked in to the room
 
  • #939
so she called him for help so he could watch her trying to harm a baby ? <modsnip: Removed snark>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #940
so she called him for help so he could watch her trying to harm a baby ? <modsnip: Removed snark>
No, she called him for help because she'd been caught doing nothing she should have been doing to help the baby.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
154
Guests online
1,492
Total visitors
1,646

Forum statistics

Threads
635,396
Messages
18,675,394
Members
243,200
Latest member
inglishmariaxx
Back
Top