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

[WaneLyrical]

No, Letby didn't know that Jayaram would discover the paper on air embolism but the fact is, she was causing air embolisms.

So she knew that, they might realise what
was happening. The bung, gives the suggestion that an accidental air embolism could happen on the unit.
She did not want a purposely done, injected air embolism to look like a possiblity on a baby in her care.

Datix 1. Shows how an accidental air embolism could occur on the unit.

Datix 2. Loss of peripheral access,
All of which comes from the mouth of Letby and is called untrue by Breary. Shown in court to be a load of BS with zero evidence.
Letby is the cause of this false datix being filed.
No peripheral access, means no injected air.

Those 2 Datix served a purpose, to a very clearly panicked Letby.

A bit like lying about CPAP on the notes and claiming not to remember why she did it. It would potentially explain why baby O was full of air.

I thought air going in an NG tube is what causes tummies and bowels to be full of air, not a long line. Isn’t that what we’ve all learned?

The point of the datix was that they had to go up to the children’s ward to get the equipment needed for the IO access. The reason for the IO access was because they couldn’t get blood from the existing access.

It’s quite remarkable seeing how this is being twisted into somehow showing that deliberate harm was caused.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Joltz is correct, Letby was the first one to mention anything about AE.

Why did she bring it up before anyone else?

She brought it up in an attempt at creating an alibi because she'd been causing them!

 

[Sweeper2000]

"I wouldn't do a thing like that, see MY datix i warn against them". Basic just of it.

 

[WaneLyrical]

And you’re all sure there were no other instances of open bungs in 2015/16?

 

[marynnu]

What you are saying is simply flat out untrue, and you have failed to provide one single link for any of the wild claims that you're stating as fact.

It is absolutely not normal in any way. You've also posted "so what" about things that would get you disciplinary action in any UK hospital.


She removed his oxygen without permission, without the medical staff knowing she'd done it, and without telling anyone. She very obviously did not remove him from oxygen for cleaning since she only invented the "cleaning" excuse after the fact, when she was confronted. She removed him from oxygen for the sole purpose of taking illicit photos, which is extremely weird and against the law.

The fact the parents found it weird and disturbing is the only thing that matters.

No wonder so many people who knew LL reported that they found her to be deeply strange or excessively angry and hostile. She fits the profile of a female serial killer exactly.

You are completely wrong about this. O², CPAP & ET tubings are all changed regularly. You don't need permission from anybody! And nurses often take a photo for parents as it's nice to see the baby's face without tubes. It takes just a few seconds.
Apart from anything else, she was hardly going to take a photo if it was at all dodgy, was she?

 

[marynnu]

These guidelines only refer to CPAP. I believe your earlier argument was in relation to oxygen being administered through nasal prongs. How frequently does that equipment need to be cleaned? When my daughter was in NICU and later SCBU, she often pulled her nasal cannula out with her fidgety arms, but even then it wasn't cleaned before being put back in. And in those moments that she was being deprived of the oxygen she needed, I wasn't taking photos, I was calling a nurse to help her.

The hospital took a photo of my daughter in NICU because I couldn't be by her side. Funnily enough they didn't remove her ventilator to get a "better" photo of her.

We replaced nasal prongs & tubing weekly.

 

[marynnu]

So, Letby knew Jayaram was about to discover the Lee paper before he did, and in order to create an alibi(?) she told someone else there was an open bung on a baby who didn’t have an air embolism. Letby then waited until the moment Jayaram’s spine shivered, had no involvement in Powell becoming aware of it, and then recorded the datix so she could say she knew about air embolism risk before the doctors?

Compelling stuff.

Well I guess Ben Myers was right then when he described Letby as having Nostradamus-like foresight.

Dr. J found the paper because one of the consultants had already proposed air embolism as a possibility and he was searching online for anything about it. She had to know they might come up with this idea.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Al at The Art of Law channel with an excellent video on the recent statement by the CCRC.

 

[marynnu]

I thought air going in an NG tube is what causes tummies and bowels to be full of air, not a long line. Isn’t that what we’ve all learned?

The point of the datix was that they had to go up to the children’s ward to get the equipment needed for the IO access. The reason for the IO access was because they couldn’t get blood from the existing access.

It’s quite remarkable seeing how this is being twisted into somehow showing that deliberate harm was caused.

Why are you mentioning air in the bowel?

 

[Marantz4250b]

Dr. J found the paper because one of the consultants had already proposed air embolism as a possibility and he was searching online for anything about it. She had to know they might come up with this idea.

Indeed.

And, if LL knew of the existence of this article then the fact would surely have been known via examination of her devices?

Was it even publicly available at the time, or only via paid resources such as the ones doctors have access to? If so then it's extremely that a nurse would also have the ability to find it.

She likely knew that there were faint rumblings of AE, she's caused those AE's so needed an explanation.

 

[joltz]

And you’re all sure there were no other instances of open bungs in 2015/16?

There is no evidence that I know of, of

"I wouldn't do a thing like that, see MY datix i warn against them". Basic just of it.

Letby is proven to be lying already on multiple occasions over this instance. She falsified the medical record with CPAP entry and claimed peripheral access was lost. We know for a FACT that is not true. There is evidence to show such and witness testimony.

But Wax seems to think proven pathological liar Letby is innocent so sure, the bung datix is a genuine one, lol

 

[joltz]

Indeed.

And, if LL knew of the existence of this article then the fact would surely have been known via examination of her devices?

Was it even publicly available at the time, or only via paid resources such as the ones doctors have access to? If so then it's extremely that a nurse would also have the ability to find it.

She likely knew that there were faint rumblings of AE, she's caused those AE's so needed an explanation.

Exactly. The bung datix, with danger of causing air embolism how convenient.

If you can't see what is happening here, it's because you are purposely choosing to completely ignore and discount it because it makes Letby look bad. The alternative explanations about it and Letby being innocent just don't even make sense.
It doesn't add up whatsoever.

 

[WaneLyrical]

Dr. J found the paper because one of the consultants had already proposed air embolism as a possibility and he was searching online for anything about it. She had to know they might come up with this idea.

Ok, yes, so is the suggestion that when Gibbs (?) first mentioned air embolism, that got back to Letby at the same time it got to jayaram, and then the open bung happened, with the datix to follow later once Powell finds out?

 

[WaneLyrical]

Why are you mentioning air in the bowel?

The baby had a distended abdomen and xrays showed air in the stomach and intestines. I just checked back, cause of collapse/death was liver trauma, air in the NG tube, and air embolism

 

[marynnu]

Ok, yes, so is the suggestion that when Gibbs (?) first mentioned air embolism, that got back to Letby at the same time it got to jayaram, and then the open bung happened, with the datix to follow later once Powell finds out?

We have no idea who first mentioned air embolism. It was brought up in a consultant meeting where Dr. J was present. It wouldn't have needed to 'get back' to Letby given that she caused the problem so knew about it well before anybody else.

 

[Ruthbullock]

Rewatching that Netflix doc. Aren't her police interviews interesting? I struggle to see that all the "no comment" responses were nothing of significance. Its definitely like she's hiding something isn't it.

I haven’t watched a single documentary yet- but I may well get round to watching the Netflix on. The no comment thing is what every one is told to respond with in a police interview by their solicitor- there is a solid reason for this and it’s shared by the police when they are read their rights. To paraphrase if you are charged and plead not guilty it will go to trial (at which point your solicitor will have more idea on how to advise you as they will have some idea of the evidence) anything you say in a spur of the moment interview can potentially be used against you in court. The only people who say nothing are those who are confident they won’t be charged (this was an unlikely outcome in this case) or those who intend to plead guilty as it won’t go to trial anyway.

 

[Ruthbullock]

I agree.

When she has an answer, such as to the questions about her job, the procedures the unit employs when a particular incident happens, etc, she answers without hesitation and in detail. She clearly knows her job and is good at it.

However, when the difficult questions come up, it's either "no comment" or, "I don't remember". The latter never spoken as confidently as when she does know the answer.

That’s fairly standard though to confirm your factual information, but respond no comment to questions about the cases. At that point solicitors can’t give you solid advice as they don’t have the information, or haven’t had time to review it properly- she was probably told to answer no comment to everything but found that unnatural for certain questions.

What were the smoking gun contradictions where she did answer and was proved incorrect in court? They are the things that would be interesting to discuss.

 

[Parker Knoll]

I don’t read anything from a NC interview to a certain degree as if I were arrested it would be no comment interview and a prepared statement but I would be co operating all throughout.
She doesn’t do that.

 

[Ruthbullock]

P

Let's not pretend Letby was in some habit of bringing them home because it was somehow ok.

COC had had 2 recent data breaches involving patient data with paperwork leaving the hospital, which had made the local news, so this was an issue that Letby would have been very much aware of.

Tony Chambers actually commented on the last one in a local news article and stated that they have been through the implications with staff but it would be reiterated.

There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Letby knew exactly what she was doing and how wrong it was, yet continued to do it: purposely and with absolute awareness. FACTS

There is no way to possibly minimise the handovers, despite your best attempts.

You have just minimised them yourself- she wasn’t the only one and it was in the press that other staff acted that way as well. I’m not attempting to minimise it, I think it’s irrelevant as evidence- it would have been relevant if she had the handover sheets for the children she was convicted of murdering, but she didn’t. Yes she had some, but not others. Perhaps there is a pattern to why she kept them that we don’t know about- every record is of a baby collapsing or something else- but from the evidence we have they aren’t trophies, they aren’t anything. We will never know, but what if 95% of the handover sheets were from babies with no medical incidents and no desaturations and have since lived healthy lives. I’m sure you could attempt to believe that the other sheets were all failed attempts or attempts to work out a better plan- but I’m dubious, I genuinely think she was a typical young 20 year old who wasn’t as organised and tidy with her paperwork as she should have been. Does that make her innocent, not at all- but I’m not convinced it makes her guilty either. Would I like to see an investigative deep dive into the handover sheets- yes because I don’t want a guilty person released, but to me this isn’t evidence of guilt.

 

[Ruthbullock]

A lot of people just can't get their head around circumstantial evidence it seems. Which begs the question why they bother arguing about a case that is only going to frustrate them because the person in question didn't get caught doing it on CCTV or have multiple witnesses to their crimes. It doesn't matter how many times Lucy ended up in a room with a collapsing baby the minute a parent or staff member left, or how many times a baby deteriorated the minute she got on shift. Or even the insulin results. It's all irrelevant to them because no one actually saw her. I can't understand that thought process tbh.

JMO

Have you ever stayed in an NHS hospital- they are busy and bustling and full of patients and medical staff, there are no separate spaces, no individual rooms and a lot of windows- even if she is completely guilty- others on the shop floor are culpable and there were issues on the unit. No one should be having a medical crisis within a hospital and there is only one nurse available. Realistically there shouldn’t be one nurse available for 4 or more patients who are all classed as ICU patients-so where were the staff? It’s very easy for people on here to fail to understand why people really want to get further into understanding what happened and how and for the evidence to be further looked into- but there is much more to understand both from our NHS perspective and the way we run trials and court cases. To this day i still can’t sit in either camp (but I do have a tendency to be on the fence, so tend to accept the outcome) there was things raised in the inquiry that don’t sit comfortably with things in the trial. I’m not in the free Letby camp at all, but do want the case to be r looked at- I think a lot can be learned for both the NHS and improving care as well as the judicial system.