Three bosses at Lucy Letby hospital arrested on suspicion of manslaughter
Unnamed three from Countess of Chester hospital held on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter, police say
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 #38
- Thread starter sleuth777
- Start date
-
NE NE - Chance Englebert, 25, Gering, 6 July 2019 (new father) #2- Latest: Songbird1973
There is so much going on here, people seem to want an end to the case and put all the blame on Letby.Three bosses at Lucy Letby hospital arrested on suspicion of manslaughter
Unnamed three from Countess of Chester hospital held on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter, police saywww.theguardian.com
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Messages
- 3,552
- Reaction score
- 20,087
Who are you referring to?
I think that most people simply want anyone who is criminally responsible, regardless as to what extent and level of culpability, to be made to answer for their actions or inactions.
I think my point was clear. The case need going through again as imo it was not conducting properly as is becoming clear now as senior management are now being arrested. It may be that she was guilty but the case has not been transparent.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Messages
- 3,552
- Reaction score
- 20,087
Any investigation into management (or anyone else) is totally separate to Letby's offences. The police have been quite clear in that.
The actions of other people have no effect on LL's convictions.
Letby's trial was 100% transparent and conducted entirely properly.
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2019
- Messages
- 1,005
- Reaction score
- 11,200
Lucy is still guilty …. These arrests will add more weight to her already secure & weighty guilt. IMO
I'm wondering if you are maybe confused about the manslaughter investigation alongside the murder convictions? Are you wondering if the police are showing doubt about the murders and whether this was negligent manslaughter/substandard care of the babies that caused the deaths?
I might be off-base with this, but if not, the gross negligent manslaughter investigation is not to do with the medical management of the babies, but senior executives not taking action to report to the police when the consultants first raised their concerns that these were not expected deaths and needed to be forensically investigated. The allegation would be that some murders, and attempted murders which caused life-changing injuries, might have been prevented had they acted appropriately on the consultants' concerns.
MOO
z as
And does meet the bar for corporate manslaughter IMO.
Am not 100% sure what sub justice rules mean for further discussing this so may absent self!
seconded, whether or not babies were harmed maliciously or via substandard care, there are really very clear policies on safeguarding, whistleblowing, and responsibility for alarming death rates, which were not followed - had they been done so earlier, fewer families may have been bereaved. That’s huge.
And does meet the bar for corporate manslaughter IMO.
Am not 100% sure what sub justice rules mean for further discussing this so may absent self!
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Messages
- 3,552
- Reaction score
- 20,087
The rules are that you cannot publish anything which may may endanger a future trial, essentially. Speculating as to a particular person's guilt, or not, is potentially one of those things. Suggesting that someone already convicted may have been improperly convicted, or not, is most likely another.
Mark McDonald, the barrister now representing Letby, handed two large dossiers of new expert reviews to the CCRC earlier this year.
But on Tuesday Cheshire constabulary said its criminal investigation into the former nurse, hospital bosses and the hospital itself would continue.
Hughes said: “Both the corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter elements of the investigation are continuing and there are no set timescales for these.
“Our investigation into the deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the neo-natal units of both the Countess of Chester hospital and the Liverpool women’s hospital between the period of 2012 to 2016 is also ongoing.”
McDonald, barrister at Furnival Chambers, said: “Yet another press release from the police at a very sensitive time when the CCRC are looking at the case of Lucy Letby. Despite this the concerns many have raised will not go away, and we will continue to publicly discuss them.
“The reality is that 26 internationally renowned experts have looked at this case and the lead expert has concluded that no crime was committed, no babies were murdered. What is needed is a proper and full public inquiry into the failings of the neonatal and paediatric medical care unit at the Countess of Chester hospital.”
But on Tuesday Cheshire constabulary said its criminal investigation into the former nurse, hospital bosses and the hospital itself would continue.
Hughes said: “Both the corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter elements of the investigation are continuing and there are no set timescales for these.
“Our investigation into the deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the neo-natal units of both the Countess of Chester hospital and the Liverpool women’s hospital between the period of 2012 to 2016 is also ongoing.”
McDonald, barrister at Furnival Chambers, said: “Yet another press release from the police at a very sensitive time when the CCRC are looking at the case of Lucy Letby. Despite this the concerns many have raised will not go away, and we will continue to publicly discuss them.
“The reality is that 26 internationally renowned experts have looked at this case and the lead expert has concluded that no crime was committed, no babies were murdered. What is needed is a proper and full public inquiry into the failings of the neonatal and paediatric medical care unit at the Countess of Chester hospital.”
There was this guy who got on my nerves,
you know...,
taking LL to a restaurant,
forcing Consultants to apologize to her, etc,etc
I'm not going to write his name here, cough, cough
but I wonder if he is 1 of the 3???
JMO
you know...,
taking LL to a restaurant,
forcing Consultants to apologize to her, etc,etc
I'm not going to write his name here, cough, cough
but I wonder if he is 1 of the 3???
JMO
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2016
- Messages
- 2,243
- Reaction score
- 9,663
There has to be more substance to it than just that, as the doctors and consultants also had a process to go directly to the police themselves at any point and also chose not to. Just apologising for not following the policy, shouldn’t make them less culpable than another set of staff members being accused of not contacting the police. Being paid more or less than another member of staff, also shouldn’t make a difference as to whether you are responsible for safeguarding at work.
As an aside, I have also taken a moment to reflect on the parents, who still 10 years later are waiting, which seems unimaginable. 10 years for an inquiry to fully investigate what happened must seem a lifetime for the parents. Then we have charges of gross negligence manslaughter, with still outstanding possible corporate manslaughter and the threat of more warning letters from the Thirlwall Inquiry in September (that may or may not have been addressed through these arrests).
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Messages
- 3,552
- Reaction score
- 20,087
What a complete fool this man is. How on earth is he a barrister?
How can he say that anything about this press release is in any way improper? He seems to be implying that the police are doing this to make things "go away"!
He could be sailing very close to the wind her with statements such as ...we will continue to publicly discuss them. along with the one about his people concluding that...no crime was committed, and that...no babies were murdered. These may be foolhardy words given the close association between those recently arrested and LL's convictions. As a barrister, he should know that better than 99% of people.
No credibility whatsoever. When actual forensic pathologists with actual access to cadavers (and forensic detail post mortem techniques) , notes, history, etc often say that cannot be absolutely certain about causes of death/abuse in highly suspicious cases (please read Richard Shepherd’s Unnatural causes or Seven Ages) it should be deemed highly concerning that pairs of clinicians should be so certain from notes review.
Eradicates trust for me - medicine is an art not an exact science unfortunately.
(8) The route by which the paediatricians raised their concerns
255 CoCH submits that in the extraordinary circumstances of 2015/16, it was appropriate for the paediatricians to escalate their concerns direct to those at the highest levels of the Trust outside of the established governance systems.
256 The concerns they were raising from February 2016 onwards were of the upmost seriousness. Far from being inappropriate, it was if anything entirely appropriate that they were escalated directly to those at the top of the organisation. Doing so was the clearest and quickest way to highlight the concern.
Page 66
Just to highlight the idiocy of some of the commentary surrounding the Letby trial, I have just seen a clip of Julia Hartley-Brewer interviewing Mike Neville, a "Former Met Police DCI". About 2 minutes in he says, quote, "...one of the key prosecution witnesses, Dr. Evans, has gone back on his story and basically said 'I now believe that she's not responsible for the deaths'". That's news to me. He then goes on a ramble about the "eminent" peeps on Dr. Shoo Lee's panel.
Where do media organisations keep finding these know-nothings from? (around 2m, 48s).
Where do media organisations keep finding these know-nothings from? (around 2m, 48s).
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2016
- Messages
- 2,243
- Reaction score
- 9,663
It may have been the “quickest and clearest way”, but it wasn’t the only way
LANGDALE: Moving now to my first topic, Dr Jayaram, you have clearly covered a lot in your statement and been referred to a lot of documents. I am going to take the questions today, if I may, thematically and the first one that I would like to ask you some questions about is guidance around Working Together to Safeguard Children and processes that should be used. You refer in your statement to a number of these pieces of guidance and I know that you have seen them. So the first one, please, if we go to Working Together to Safeguard Children, this is the general 2015 guidance and this is government guidance. If we go to INQ0014575, page 91, you make the point, Dr Jayaram, and we see it with this chart, that in fact this guidance referring to: "Processes for rapid response to unexpected death of a child very much relates to deaths in the community and/or deaths where family members might be suspected of causing harm to the child, support for carers, other family members, discussion between paediatrician and attending police officers and the like." So at the time, would you have found 'Working Together' particularly useful in telling you what to do where you suspected a colleague may be causing harm to a child?
JAYARAM: I think in answer to that question, for me may I refer to it as the SUDiC guidance, meaning Sudden Unexpected Death in Childhood --
LANGDALE: Yes, yes.
JAYARAM: Just for brevity's sake. I was fully aware of the SUDiC processes.
LANGDALE: We are in agreement that this does flag up at least if it's unexpected and sudden so that is not the same as a sudden natural death but sudden and unexpected?
JAYARAM: Yes.
LANGDALE: Because you are not alone in failing to realise that this process should have been triggered, clearly?
JAYARAM: Yes.
LANGDALE: But Dr Mittal, he is the designated doctor for safeguarding. Did you have any conversations with him or did he approach you to discuss this SUDiC process and whether and if so it should apply to any of the babies --
JAYARAM: No, there were no conversations either way.
LANGDALE: Throughout the whole period we are investigating?
JAYARAM: Not that I can recall with me specifically.
LANGDALE: And not with any of the nurses as well who may have had responsibilities in some cases for safeguarding, you know there is designated officers for safeguarding et cetera?
JAYARAM: Yes. No, because I think -- and again this is something that I have had a long time to reflect on, thinking about the concept of safeguarding, you know, as paediatricians we are fully aware of safeguarding in terms of parents potentially causing harm, other people causing harm and even in terms of staff members, if we saw somebody verbally abuse a child, physically abuse a child, or considered it. I think one of the issues here is that initially, again we weren't thinking beyond natural causes and -- and I will come back to this I am sure in due course. It was once you start thinking the unthinkable, how do you -- how do you bring it forwards? And I fully accept that had the SUDiC process been initiated, the difference between what happened in terms of investigations that were done for each of the events compared to what would happen with SUDiC is that there would have been other professional agencies, particularly the police, involved as well.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2016
- Messages
- 2,243
- Reaction score
- 9,663
I just still to this day struggle to comprehend that you suspect someone maybe murdering babies in your unit and you feel no one is listening to you in management and you still sit back and do nothing. I realise most don’t agree, but that is a harsh reality to comprehend, that most people value other things above doing the right thing.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2016
- Messages
- 2,243
- Reaction score
- 9,663
“An investigation into gross negligence manslaughter began in March of this year - in addition to one probing potential corporate manslaughter, which started in October 2023.”
This might narrow down the triggers
news.sky.com
This might narrow down the triggers
Three members of Lucy Letby hospital's senior leadership team arrested
An investigation into gross negligence manslaughter began in March of this year - in addition to one probing potential corporate manslaughter, which started in October 2023.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2016
- Messages
- 2,243
- Reaction score
- 9,663
“Three managers at the hospital where Lucy Letby worked have been arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter.
They were in senior roles at the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2015 and 2016 and have been bailed pending further enquiries,”
“There is also an investigation into corporate manslaughter at the hospital, which began in October 2023.
That focuses on "senior leadership and their decision-making", Mr Hughes said.”
There is a definite difference in the reporting text here from senior leadership and senior roles, which suggests potentially different people
news.sky.com
They were in senior roles at the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2015 and 2016 and have been bailed pending further enquiries,”
“There is also an investigation into corporate manslaughter at the hospital, which began in October 2023.
That focuses on "senior leadership and their decision-making", Mr Hughes said.”
There is a definite difference in the reporting text here from senior leadership and senior roles, which suggests potentially different people
Three members of Lucy Letby hospital's senior leadership team arrested
An investigation into gross negligence manslaughter began in March of this year - in addition to one probing potential corporate manslaughter, which started in October 2023.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
