GUILTY 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

[joltz]

Lucy Letby used "air embolism" on an answer in her QIS training, which she completed, 2 weeks before Baby A’s death - the training was May 2015.

The QIS training is intensive care training, meaning she could work with sicker children and handle Long Line / Central IVs (hence the air embolism answer to a question - as central lines go very near to the heart) - it was after this training and her gaining access to IV lines that the mottling rashes / crashes started. Letby did not have this type of access to high dependency babies before this training in 2015.

Over a year later on 23/24 June 2016, 2/3 triplets, in Letby's care, die in very unusual circumstances. These would be the last deaths on the unit. Over the previous year, there had been 13 deaths on the unit. The average over the previous 5 years was 2 or 3 deaths. None of them had been suspicious.

On June 30th 2016, less than a week after the deaths of the two triplets, Dr Ravi Jayaram sent an email to his colleagues sharing the Lee & Tanswell air embolism paper at 8:30am. This was the first mention by any of the staff in relation to air embolism.

At 3pm on the same day, Lucy Letby submitted a Datix about the potential for an air embolism, due to bungs.

Letby filed this datix, after Dr A, tipped her off that there was suspicions about the deaths of the 2 triplets and it would probably go to an inquest.

She also filed another Datix that same day stating that Baby O lost peripheral access during resus and equipment required during resuscitation to establish intraosseus access was not available on the unit.

At trial the staff working on the resuscitation of Baby O testified that he never lost peripheral access, and his records do not show that either.

Why would she be filing two Datix records nearly a week after the incidents, after she got word that the doctor felt the death of the babies concerned was odd.

After she was arrested Letby was asked if she knew about air embolisms.
She denied to police that she knew what an air embolism was. She then, claimed she didn't know it could happen in babies (she said she thought it only could happen in adults).

 

[joltz]

Lucy Letby used "air embolism" on an answer in her QIS training, which she completed, 2 weeks before Baby A’s death - the training was May 2015.

The QIS training is intensive care training, meaning she could work with sicker children and handle Long Line / Central IVs (hence the air embolism answer to a question - as central lines go very near to the heart) - it was after this training and her gaining access to IV lines that the mottling rashes / crashes started. Letby did not have this type of access to high dependency babies before this training in 2015.

Over a year later on 23/24 June 2016, 2/3 triplets, in Letby's care, die in very unusual circumstances. These would be the last deaths on the unit. Over the previous year, there had been 13 deaths on the unit. The average over the previous 5 years was 2 or 3 deaths. None of them had been suspicious.

On June 30th 2016, less than a week after the deaths of the two triplets, Dr Ravi Jayaram sent an email to his colleagues sharing the Lee & Tanswell air embolism paper at 8:30am. This was the first mention by any of the staff in relation to air embolism.

At 3pm on the same day, Lucy Letby submitted a Datix about the potential for an air embolism, due to bungs.

Letby filed this datix, after Dr A, tipped her off that there was suspicions about the deaths of the 2 triplets and it would probably go to an inquest.

She also filed another Datix that same day stating that Baby O lost peripheral access during resus and equipment required during resuscitation to establish intraosseus access was not available on the unit.

At trial the staff working on the resuscitation of Baby O testified that he never lost peripheral access, and his records do not show that either.

Why would she be filing two Datix records nearly a week after the incidents, after she got word that the doctor felt the death of the babies concerned was odd.

After she was arrested Letby was asked if she knew about air embolisms.
She denied to police that she knew what an air embolism was. She then, claimed she didn't know it could happen in babies (she said she thought it only could happen
in adults).

 

[Marantz4250b]

And, no one should ever forget that, Lucy Letby was not simply picked at random to be thrown under the bus as an attempt to hide alleged hospital management or doctors failings in causing these deaths and injuries when they thought they couldn't hide it any longer.

It's on record, and beyond any doubt, that consultants were raising concerns about her well before the police were ever involved. The only reason the police weren't involved sooner was because her friends in management pushed back against it. If management had been compliant then she would have been arrested far sooner - almost certainly saving lives.

No one suddenly realised one day that more babies than normal were dying (see my sig on those points) which caused the hospital to scrabble around for a sacrifice. That's the myth that the media still trots out. Lets face it, if that were the case then she is literally the very last one you'd chose to take the fall, for the precise reasons that people are screaming for her innocence today! Anyone choosing her as the one to throw to the Lions wouldn't be bright enough to come up with such a elaborate plot of lies and evidence planting to be able to get away with it over a nine month trial and nearly another month of jury deliberations!

If this is all a fit-up, then whoever planned it is quite literally the most fiendish criminal genius in all recorded history!