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

[Sweeper2000]

They asked about insulin. They asked about the bags. The inference is surely obvious? She joined the dots! It’s hardly a crime to read between the lines.

Lots of speculation there and why fix on evans when his opinion was backed by many others of top level.

 

[WaneLyrical]

Where did you get the info that there was another nurse in the room? Is that preceding the mothers delivery of the milk? At 9pm

Blood doesnt take long to dry, as a matter of fact one of its purposes is to dry or congeal isnt it? That doesnt take long

I can’t be bothered to go looking for it sweeper. The other nurse was away preparing medicine at the time, she was back in the room administering it at (I think) 9:13pm which is when the mother is suggested to have just left the room.

 

[Sweeper2000]

I can’t be bothered to go looking for it sweeper. The other nurse was away preparing medicine at the time, she was back in the room administering it at (I think) 9:13pm which is when the mother is suggested to have just left the room.

To me that reads that your saying "there was a member of staff in the room, at some point" which is simply a matter of course. not within the relevant timeframe. Another fair point to make is how a second witness account of the babies screaming or not so much screaming as testified by the mother would have been held in regard.

 

[WaneLyrical]

Another example of this would be when the post mortems of triplets O and P were pending, she started panicking that doctors were no longer thinking natural causes, and as it would transpire on her last day ever to work in the NNU, she put in a Datix about an open port of a non-indictment baby, and texted this to her friend -



Bullseye! Super nurse Lucy Letby was one step ahead of the experts.

If she was one step ahead, why didn’t she file the datix when it happened? Why wait until her boss nudges her?

 

[Parker Knoll]

Parents never at cot side when their babies deteriorate or die.
Funny that.

 

[marynnu]

Why did Ben Myers not call a statistician for the defence? That is an interesting question. Why didn't he look into all the unexpected unexplained collapses which happened when Letby was on holiday or had left the unit.

Because there weren't any.

 

[WaneLyrical]

To me that reads that your saying "there was a member of staff in the room, at some point" which is simply a matter of course. not within the relevant timeframe. Another fair point to make is how a second witness account of the babies screaming or not so much screaming as testified by the mother would have been held in regard.

We’re talking about 2 minutes between the mum being there and the other nurse being there. How’s that not within the relevant timeframe? Why didn’t that nurse hear the screaming.

I’ll get the info later.

 

[Tortoise]

They asked about insulin. They asked about the bags. The inference is surely obvious? She joined the dots! It’s hardly a crime to read between the lines.

Who said it was a crime?

Yes, she joined the dots, because it sure is as plain as day how he got the insulin.

As soon as the police asked her why she was asking about the bags being kept she realised she had leaked guilty knowledge and tried to steer them away from it when she wouldn't even say 'because I'm wondering if there was an issue with the production of the bags', she said 'an issue with something else'. That's how deception comes to light, how deceivers give themselves away with their words, and why Johnson made an issue of it in his opening statement and during her cross-examination.

LL: “When something's happened in that time – you are asking me if I have given him insulin and I’m wondering if there’s an issue with something else.”

 

[Sweeper2000]

We’re talking about 2 minutes between the mum being there and the other nurse being there. How’s that not within the relevant timeframe? Why didn’t that nurse hear the screaming.

I’ll get the info later.

The nurse would have to be in the room within the whole potential window of attack, not a minute outside of it. It was one of the features of the case, things going bad whilst it was just her being present and others having juat left or been away etc.

I said the same originally about noone else hearing the baby but there was little other testimony on the matter.

 

[Marah]

Why did Ben Myers not call a statistician for the defence? That is an interesting question. Why didn't he look into all the unexpected unexplained collapses which happened when Letby was on holiday or had left the unit.

How many were there?

 

[Baileyboo]

How many were there?

As far as I know, Letby was on duty or a shift had by just ended, for all of the deaths except one, which was an expected death. After she was removed, the unit was down graded coch only had one death on the unit in the intervening years. There is no information given out to suggest there were unexpected collapses when she wasn't there. This is probably why the Cheshire police, prosecution and defence didn't need a statistician as it was not in doubt that Letby was the only one there and these incidents were following her. The question for the jurors were was there evidence of deliberate harm ?

 

[May72031]

So, I asked (several times) about what exactly this "complaint" was against Peter Hindmarsh, and the responses simply parrot the Guardian article, which does not elaborate whatsoever what the complaint was. It is vague as hell. You'd think from reading the article and the Letbyists it must have been a super-duper serious complaint, and that patients were in some sort of danger?

So what was it? Must be really, really serious....right?

 

[Ruthbullock]

Where did you get the info that there was another nurse in the room? Is that preceding the mothers delivery of the milk? At 9pm

Blood doesnt take long to dry, as a matter of fact one of its purposes is to dry or congeal isnt it? That doesnt take long

Belinda Simcock- was a nurse who would have been around nursery 1

This is her witness statement:

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0107824.pdf

And Caroline Oakley:

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0101334.pdf

So, I asked (several times) about what exactly this "complaint" was against Peter Hindmarsh, and the responses simply parrot the Guardian article, which does not elaborate whatsoever what the complaint was. It is vague as hell. You'd think from reading the article and the Letbyists it must have been a super-duper serious complaint, and that patients were in some sort of danger?

So what was it? Must be really, really serious....right?

it was serious enough that he handed in his registration, rather than a report coming into the public domain. That may seem insignificant- but it is not unusual for people to voluntarily take that step to prevent it becoming a public record. It is also surprising as he was obviously looking at his next career move as a potential expert witness in his retirement years and he is no longer allowed to do that either. Accepting a vague description of harming patients was preferable to all the details being published.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Belinda Simcock- was a nurse who would have been around nursery 1

This is her witness statement:

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0107824.pdf

And Caroline Oakley:

https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0101334.pdf

it was serious enough that he handed in his registration, rather than a report coming into the public domain. That may seem insignificant- but it is not unusual for people to voluntarily take that step to prevent it becoming a public record. It is also surprising as he was obviously looking at his next career move as a potential expert witness in his retirement years and he is no longer allowed to do that either. Accepting a vague description of harming patients was preferable to all the details being published.

It fits with what i said as far as i can see. Little other testimony. Simcock says she remembers virtually nothing and oakley simply says letby was baby e designated nurse. Not sure what im supposed to get from this.

 

[Charlot123]

As far as I know, Letby was on duty or a shift had by just ended, for all of the deaths except one, which was an expected death. After she was removed, the unit was down graded coch only had one death on the unit in the intervening years. There is no information given out to suggest there were unexpected collapses when she wasn't there. This is probably why the Cheshire police, prosecution and defence didn't need a statistician as it was not in doubt that Letby was the only one there and these incidents were following her. The question for the jurors were was there evidence of deliberate harm ?

You have to either tell everything that happened or not mention it to fit “Letby was removed and the deaths went down” issue.

The NICU was downgraded way, way more significantly. They raised the gestational age of the babies to 32 weeks. They stopped taking in young, sick preemies, with poor chance of survival. This will lower the mortality rate, everyone understands it.

And this is why we need a retrial with the full story. The original trial excluded the whole report of the Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health. They excluded huge parts of the Thirwall report that are very telling of what really happened.

It was an unfair trial and unsafe conviction.

 

[rvlvr]

How many were there?

Dr Evans was first asked to review 60 cases. We don’t know who selected these cases, or why.

Dr Evans detailed his initial thoughts to police over two days in 2017. He told them he’d identified 28 suspicious incidents.

Now, we know that Dr Evans is a brilliantly perceptive man, because he’s told us so - after all, he spotted that a baby had been murdered within just ten minutes of reviewing that child’s notes. So evidently these weren’t some off the cuff findings.

The problem was, ten of these suspicious incidents occurred when Letby wasn’t on shift. So clearly more work needed to be done!

Eventually, of course, the prosecution contrived (and I use that word very deliberately) a final chart showing suspicious incidents which coincided perfectly with Letby’s presence, but how exactly this came about, we don’t know.

It may well be that the incidents that were flagged then dropped, were dropped because following further investigation they turned out to be not suspicious (and not dropped simply because, you know, Letby wasn’t there). But we don’t know what investigations were done, or by whom - though we can have a bloody good guess!

The thing is, even if these incidents genuinely weren’t suspicious, it would obviously be useful, arguably necessary, to know more about them - for instance, they might have had features in common with the suspicious incidents which actually did make it on to the final chart.

In January 2023 Mr Myers expressed concern that the prosecution was only interested in cases where Letby was on duty. The defence was asking, essentially, how far had they considered collapses that didn’t incriminate Letby?

The prosecution could’ve settled the matter there and then - had this final list of suspicious incidents been compiled without any regard to who was on duty when these incidents had taken place?

Instead, Mr Johnson claimed the prosecution wasn’t obliged to say - and sadly the judge agreed.

This is an entirely circumstantial case, but the exact circumstances surrounding which cases were chosen and which ones weren’t, has never been disclosed. It’s absolutely extraordinary!

 

[WaneLyrical]

It fits with what i said as far as i can see. Little other testimony. Simcock says she remembers virtually nothing and oakley simply says letby was baby e designated nurse. Not sure what im supposed to get from this.

Letby was assisting Simcock with delivering medication in the same room at 9:13pm. How would she be able to hide the fact that Baby E had been attacked and was bleeding internally? Is this not the period of time where the baby is said to have been screaming?

Most things point towards 10pm being the bleed time, and 11:55pm being the time the father was called, contrary to the phone record which could not be corroborated.

Edit: Also. Simcock doesn’t remember nothing. Simcock was quite clear that there was nothing unexpected about Baby E’s death.

 

[WaneLyrical]

You have to either tell everything that happened or not mention it to fit “Letby was removed and the deaths went down” issue.

The NICU was downgraded way, way more significantly. They raised the gestational age of the babies to 32 weeks. They stopped taking in young, sick preemies, with poor chance of survival. This will lower the mortality rate, everyone understands it.

And this is why we need a retrial with the full story. The original trial excluded the whole report of the Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health. They excluded huge parts of the Thirwall report that are very telling of what really happened.

It was an unfair trial and unsafe conviction.

And they employed more staff

 

[rvlvr]

Who said it was a crime?

Yes, she joined the dots, because it sure is as plain as day how he got the insulin.

As soon as the police asked her why she was asking about the bags being kept she realised she had leaked guilty knowledge and tried to steer them away from it when she wouldn't even say 'because I'm wondering if there was an issue with the production of the bags', she said 'an issue with something else'. That's how deception comes to light, how deceivers give themselves away with their words, and why Johnson made an issue of it in his opening statement and during her cross-examination.

Oh I see, so you can make inferences, but she can’t. Got it!

 

[Sweeper2000]

Letby was assisting Simcock with delivering medication in the same room at 9:13pm. How would she be able to hide the fact that Baby E had been attacked and was bleeding internally? IS THIS NOT the period of time where the baby is said to have been screaming?

Most things point towards 10pm being the bleed time, and 11:55pm being the time the father was called, contrary to the phone record which could not be corroborated.

Edit: Also. Simcock doesn’t remember nothing. Simcock was quite clear that there was nothing unexpected about Baby E’s death.

Iirc no. From what i understood the mom came down at almost exactly 9. At 9.13 i would have guessed it was after she had gone on the summary dismissal from letby. That 9.13 thing with simcock is that what the clinical documentation supports? Was it signed off at 9.13 meaning it was finished or otherwise?
Eta. I never got the impression that there was much to hide. Internal injuries are not visible, i also got the impression that after the initial shock the baby may ahve quieted. Something to do with the baby not feeling the injury due to location.

I did read that from simcock and with all due respect she is a nurse. Indeed she may have seen babies that were doing well decline and eventually pass but presumably with explicable causes. We cant take one persons experience and apply it more broadly.