UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #8

[Becky53]

BBC News write up here with some additional info I have not read before.

Lucy Letby: Nurse made celebration banner for baby before alleged attack

Nurse Lucy Letby is accused of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder 10 others.

www.bbc.co.uk

Manchester Crown Court heard how Child G was born almost 16 weeks prematurely at Arrowe Park Hospital in Wirral and weighed just over 1lb.
She was transferred to the neonatal unit in Chester at 13 weeks.
The court heard Ms Letby was on the last of a run of four night shifts when the baby suddenly became ill in the early hours of 7 September 2015.

In a statement read to the court, Child G's mother described an occasion when Ms Letby had told her that she needed to take her daughter's blood readings.
She said: "She said 'wait in the parents' room' which was not unusual, because nurses often say 'go out and come back later'. So I went for a coffee but something pinched me, and so I went back early.
"[Child G] was freaking out and screaming. She looked so puzzled.

many thanks to LadyEdgeworth for todays updates

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

That a lovely comment, bless you. I was actually quite reluctant to take my baby to visit the patient in truth. I spoke to my manager and had confirmation it was fine to do so, but only if I was comfortable about it. It wasn’t an issue, I felt it wasn’t appropriate but was assured it would most definitely mean a lot to the patient.

I did eventually take my baby to visit when she was about 6 weeks old. And sadly when I arrived, patient had passed away about a week prior. Needless to say I was quite upset.

But I have also known of doctors who have needed to come in for training days or admin or meetings etc on their days off.. and have also popped in briefly to see how a long term patient is doing. Regardless, I can’t imagine the deep pain these parents have been left with, just awful to read.

Oh how awful, i’m sorry. I remember during 2020 my nana was hospitalised with covid pneumonia, I will always remember her nurse who stayed behind after her shift, used her own mobile and held up facetime in front of my nanas face (who didn’t even know how to use sky+ lol) just so we could talk to her, completely off her own back. This case has been hard to stomach at times but nurses/doctors like her and you show it’s not all awful.

 

[ColourPurple]

This I find interesting;

“The conversation then turned to Letby asking which of the team had informed Jennifer Jones-Key about the events of the night-shift for September 6-7. After a few guesses, the name 'Ali', in the messages, is said to be correct.
Jones-Key: "Ali. She not having a good time x"
Letby: "No, I know. It's been awful for her but she's coped with it brilliantly and got back-up when needed etc x"
Jones-Key: "Yeah I don't know how she's done it. She was fab on Thursday..."

Also the “venting” of colleagues by another nurse, starting to get a bit of a feel of the unit amongst them here. The part also highlighted in bold actually makes me wonder “what” was going on with this other nurse.. childcare, loss of own child, time off etc, why is she “not having a good time, been awful, coped with “it” brilliantly” JMO

It took it to mean she was having a bad time with her designated babies, and I wondered if, (if guilty) that was LL's intention. To target the other nurse's designated babies so that everybody' would be talking about HER having a bad run instead of talking about LL having a bad run.

 

[Music2022]

"[Child G] was freaking out and screaming. She looked so puzzled.

Like baby E.. Screaming.

 

[Dotta]

Like baby E.. Screaming.

And mother sent out of the room.

So many coincidences!

Oh wait,
"Everything happens for a reason".

And who said that in a text???

Moo

 

[Sundial]

Oh how awful, i’m sorry. I remember during 2020 my nana was hospitalised with covid pneumonia, I will always remember her nurse who stayed behind after her shift, used her own mobile and held up facetime in front of my nanas face (who didn’t even know how to use sky+ lol) just so we could talk to her, completely off her own back. This case has been hard to stomach at times but nurses/doctors like her and you show it’s not all awful.

That’s so lovely to hear (of the nurse), and I’m sorry to hear your nana hadn’t been well, that must have been such very difficult time for you all.

 

[Imnothere]

Her maternal instinct kicked in again. So sad for this baby and family

 

[crystalline]

So very sad

My daughter asked me once a few years back when she was about 12, how does a mom know what a baby needs when they cry. I remember telling her mothers instinct kicks in and you just know, a baby has different cries and you simply know what’s a hungry cry, what’s a nappy cry, what’s a sad cry, teething cry etc...

Those mothers who heard their babies screaming know…my heart bleeds for them

 

[Dotta]

Today's summary

"Her mother said: 'She was smiling and was really alert with the nurses. I would read to her and sing to her, and you would notice the difference when you did.'

Following the incident on September 7 the baby's expressions had changed 'and she looked different,' her parents said.

In the previous months her father had seen her engage with him more and more. He said: 'I would speak to her and she would smile at the sound of my voice.

'I could tell she was different (afterwards) because she didn't respond as she'd done before.' "

Lucy Letby 'tried to kill baby on milestone birthday', court hears

In a statement to police, Baby G's mother recalled the 100 days banner and cake, adding: 'I remember it was Lucy (Letby) who was looking after her that day'.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[notsure]

If LL did this deliberately (and this is just my opinion and nothing is proven and everything is alleged) then what a cold-hearted evil person to attempt to murder baby G on the 100th day when the parents had said this was a huge milestone after which they felt their daughter would be healthy and well. And there was a cake and a celebratory banner ready to mark the day. If deliberate, words fail me.

It would be beyond evil, and beyond belief to inflict such suffering.

 

[Dotta]

Re "conspiracy theories" of upper management framing "a poor, excellent (cough cough), dedicated nurse".

Where is the evidence??

Don't they say that the more improbable theory, the stronger evidence it needs?

Is there an Investigation Operation working on this?

I have never heard about it.
Only "Hummingbird" one.
But, who knows?

Moo

 

[Sarahlou]

Evil is the word that springs to mind every time I read the horrible details revealed in this trial. All those poor babies, it's heartbreaking.

 

[Music2022]

And mother sent out of the room.

So many coincidences!

Oh wait,
"Everything happens for a reason".

And who said that in a text???

Moo

Also that long SMS about baby G being extremely premature and her theory why she collapsed and how any little thing could trigger it. That seemed very deflecting. Who would just start suggesting diagnosis out of the blue and it also sounded like her trying to make baby g’s situation not out of the ordinary and sort of expected.

 

[Dotta]

Also that long SMS about baby G being extremely premature and her theory why she collapsed and how any little thing could trigger it. That seemed very deflecting. Who would just start suggesting diagnosis out of the blue and it also sounded like her trying to make baby g’s situation not out of the ordinary and sort of expected.

It is soooo transparent!

Moo

 

[ColourPurple]

Evil is the word that springs to mind every time I read the horrible details revealed in this trial. All those poor babies, it's heartbreaking.

I think it was Tortoise who said before that, if guilty LL seems to have targeted those babies whose deaths would have the biggest impact.

IF guilty, it feels almost like she's writing the script for a soap opera, aiming for the biggest drama, the saddest scenario.

So, if guilty....
She hears that a couple have been trying for years for a baby- so she decides to try to kill that baby.
She hears that after losing one twin, the father is terrified that they're going to lose the other twin too- so she decides to try to kill that baby.
She hears that a baby is about to celebrate being 100 days old, sees the banners and the cake - so she tries to kill that baby.... on that day.

Only this isn't a soap opera. This is real life, with real people with real emotions.

IMO

 

[Mimi82]

No. Each side has to disclose their evidence to the other. You can't introduce "surprise" evidence.

They have to disclose it too before the trial begins but they don’t have to mention anything in a particular order do they? For example, the defence, Myers, might be waiting to bring up something relevant to a baby at this stage at a later stage because it’s relevant to a baby not discussed yet & it might be more important/tactical to bring it up later? Just my thoughts. I’m thinking he didn’t challenge those experts at that time for a reason but that he will draw upon it later when it links to something else??

 

[ColourPurple]

Also that long SMS about baby G being extremely premature and her theory why she collapsed and how any little thing could trigger it. That seemed very deflecting. Who would just start suggesting diagnosis out of the blue and it also sounded like her trying to make baby g’s situation not out of the ordinary and sort of expected.

Yes, it really stood out amongst the series of much shorter texts. Like, if guilty, she wanted the theory to be put out there.

 

[Mimi82]

Understood. So if the defence did call a witness, the prosecution would already know exactly what evidence they would be presenting to the court and presumably would know what/how to cross examine them before they even open their mouths.

Wonder why the defence doesn't seem to have done the same and has let some prosecution witnesses go unchallenged, unless there literally is nothing to dispute, which is probably the impression the jury get

Or they are waiting to cross examine the witness at a later stage because the same experts in some cases are called up more than once to discuss another baby? So, maybe the next baby she is accused of poisoning with insulin is when the defence will challenge it?

 

[Dotta]

They have to disclose it too before the trial begins but they don’t have to mention anything in a particular order do they? For example, the defence, Myers, might be waiting to bring up something relevant to a baby at this stage at a later stage because it’s relevant to a baby not discussed yet & it might be more important/tactical to bring it up later? Just my thoughts. I’m thinking he didn’t challenge those experts at that time for a reason but that he will draw upon it later when it links to something else??

But will there be time for that?
We are already in month 3 (plus Xmas break and New Year) - and there are still many victims and alleged attempts to discuss.

Does six month trial take into account Jury's deliberations?

 

[Mimi82]

But will there be time for that?
We are already in month 3 (plus Xmas break and New Year) - and there are still many victims and alleged attempts to discuss.

Does six month trial take into account Jury's deliberations?

The 6 month time frame is approximate. When another baby’s evidence is heard & a witness/expert testifies, Myers is allowed to cross each and every one. I’m suggesting that Myers might wait for whatever the witness/ expert testifies on another baby until he points out something about a past one. For example, he could try to suggest another baby who the prosecution say has been poisoned, hasn’t been. Or that the baby has died in a different manner and then it will not link in the same way to the last one so it wouldn’t show a pattern anymore. Just a possibility. I’m in no way thinking LL is or isn’t guilty but, I imagine from what I’ve read of the reports of Myers’ approach so far, that the defence are going along the route of, ‘the pattern presented by the prosecution’ isn’t there. I imagine that they will go down the route of, if this is a possible alternative in this case/ this isn’t more than coincidence in this part/ this didn’t happen in this way/ this baby isn’t proven to have died in this way/ LL isn’t proven to have done…/ etc… so with each case, they will dismantle/disprove/ suggest an alternative until, in the end there may be none or one or two or.. more cases were the Prosecution’s case/narrative/ suggestion doesn’t fit and the more or less they do this the more or less LL looks guilty as a murderer/ attempted murderer. Just from my perspective, at this point, there are lots of coincidences to convey her as guilty as sin but there are also lots of possibilities suggesting the babies could have died or nearly died for other reasons than intentional murder. As the reporting continues, the more I see that it’s pointing towards her being guilty but I feel that there’s still time to see more to say, “no that’s not right, that puts what was said earlier into question” etc. All just my opinion. I know nothing & I’m just going on what my instincts are as we read the daily reports & looking at the direction the defence is going in. In my opinion again, I firmly believe Myers believes he has a good chance of presenting enough doubt to free LL. Again, that isn’t me saying she should or shouldn’t be found not guilty but in some trials, the impression I get is that the barrister is doing their job to their best ability with fingers crossed they have a chance but I don’t get that vibe from Myers. All of my opinions/vibes/ thoughts mean absolutely nothing to anybody but that’s my response to the trial so far. I doubt there will be some “smoking hot” evidence to show her guilt & I think Myers will wait until the later stages to throw ultimate doubt in her guilt of the whole accusations. JMO.