UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #11

[JosieJo]

Not sure about that. I’m not seeing how ll could have done as alleged with the other nurse being in the room at the same time. She seemed to say LL wasn’t close to child M at or preceding the time of the collapse.

It would take seconds with a pre prepared syringe..plus it may take minutes before a collapse occurs plenty of time

 

[WaxLyrical]

Also, on Dr J, the reporting today makes it sound like the air embolus penny dropped in April 2016, but wasn’t he talking about researching air embolism papers way back at the start of the trial for the earlier babies and how he was taken aback by the mottling back then?

I’m sorry, I know this might be a minor point and others might not agree, but I really am blown away that Dr J had previously raised concerns that LL was harming babies, had previously researched air embolism and mottling, had literally walked in on LL allegedly attacking child K, and still felt it not relevant to log Child M’s mottling on the notes. JMO.

 

[Tortoise]

Also, on Dr J, the reporting today makes it sound like the air embolus penny dropped in April 2016, but wasn’t he talking about researching air embolism papers way back at the start of the trial for the earlier babies and how he was taken aback by the mottling back then?

I’m sorry, I know this might be a minor point and others might not agree, but I really am blown away that Dr J had previously raised concerns that LL was harming babies, had previously researched air embolism and mottling, had literally walked in on LL allegedly attacking child K, and still felt it not relevant to log Child M’s mottling on the notes. JMO.

They mentioned at the start of the trial that he did research but they only said it was sometime after the death of child D. It's only today that we found out this was in June 2016.

 

[Sweeper2000]

It would take seconds with a pre prepared syringe..plus it may take minutes before a collapse occurs plenty of time

Can you think of any reason that a non dn would have to be fiddling with lines when the dn is there? Especially when the dn is presumably senior to LL with that much experience and being older.

these are assumptions but mg seems to have a good recall of events that day. I struggle to think she wouldn’t remember LL being in proximity to child M in the necessary time frame or that she wasn’t present in the room for say 5 mins prior to the right time ie on the computer. Giving LL scope to do it while no one else is present.

it’s a shame we don’t have her testimony or notes of observations taken immediately prior to the collapse. From 3.55 to 4 pm. we don’t even know what LL was doing ie tending to her designated child.

im also wondering if an ai would cause physical pain to a baby in the time the bubble is travelling in the body? Presumably if that was at most 3 mins? Of travel during which the baby is in pain there would have been signs from the baby M like crying?

it seems like baby m just crashed like a light switch going off.

 

[LadyEdgeworth]

I have the opposite feeling of Mr. Myers. Dr. Jayram is a doctor, not a police officer. He's looking to record medical information that is relevant to the treatment of the baby, not for criminal court proceedings. JMO

exactly, at that moment in time the focus is on treating the babies most urgent needs, and the rash is certainly lower priority. You especially wouldn’t be joining the dots in your head at that time either but in hindsight you see the links.

 

[Tortoise]

Can you think of any reason that a non dn would have to be fiddling with lines when the dn is there? Especially when the dn is presumably senior to LL with that much experience and being older.

these are assumptions but mg seems to have a good recall of events that day. I struggle to think she wouldn’t remember LL being in proximity to child M in the necessary time frame or that she wasn’t present in the room for say 5 mins prior to the right time ie on the computer. Giving LL scope to do it while no one else is present.

it’s a shame we don’t have her testimony or notes of observations taken immediately prior to the collapse. From 3.55 to 4 pm. we don’t even know what LL was doing ie tending to her designated child.

im also wondering if an ai would cause physical pain to a baby in the time the bubble is travelling in the body? Presumably if that was at most 3 mins? Of travel during which the baby is in pain there would have been signs from the baby M like crying?

it seems like baby m just crashed like a light switch going off.

If you look at the floorplan the computer is inside nursery 1.

Several nurses have already testified to being on the computer in nursery 1 when babies collapsed.

 

[WaxLyrical]

They mentioned at the start of the trial that he did research but they only said it was sometime after the death of child D. It's only today that we found out this was in June 2016.

Ok, so it does seem that the air embolism research wasn’t done until June 2016 as a result of this meeting of consultants. Previous reports made it seem like that research happened a while ago.

However, Dr J did previously say everyone was talking about these fleeting rashes around the time of Baby D’s death, and that’s when he raised concerns about LL’s presence with management. By the time of Baby K his instincts were screaming loud enough that he burst through a door when he realised LL was alone with a baby.

I feel like I could categorically say that if I had been in his position I would have recorded the fleeting rash of Baby M. There’s no doubt about that. I know doctors are busy and they’re saving lives, but he had a legitimate suspicion that this person was harming babies, and was also suspicious of these rashes. And then he witnessed it again. I’m not saying the rash didn’t happen, far far from it, but I’m nowhere close to accepting that Dr J simply didn’t think it was relevant to record it. He noted it mentally and chose to leave it out of the notes in my opinion. I won’t speculate as to why. JMO.

 

[Sweeper2000]

If you look at the floorplan the computer is inside nursery 1.

Several nurses have already testified to being on the computer in nursery 1 when babies collapsed.

My bad I thought the computer was outside all the rooms and more central in the unit. Shame we aren’t told how the beds were numbered. say for instance if mg has her back to bed 1 directly behind her then 2 3 and 4 clockwise with 1 being at 9 Aclock. If baby m was in bed four she presumably wouldn’t be able to see ifLL did something.

 

[Marantz4250b]

I have the opposite feeling of Mr. Myers. Dr. Jayram is a doctor, not a police officer. He's looking to record medical information that is relevant to the treatment of the baby, not for criminal court proceedings. JMO

But, surely, something so unusual and striking which you've never seen before is exactly the sort of thing you'd record as it's obviously highly relevant to the care of the patient?

 

[Tortoise]

More detail added in today's write-up - more to read at link but restricted by copyright

"Dr Jayaram replied: “At the time it was not the priority. I wish I had and we would not be sitting here years later having this rather academic discussion.”

In a sharp retort, and pointing to the defendant in the dock, Mr Myers said: “It's not academic. She is on trial here for multiple murders and attempted murders.”

[...]

Mr Myers went on: “He [Dr Brearey] raised with you the fact that Lucy Letby was present on these occasions?”

“Yes,” said Dr Jayaram.

Mr Myers said: “With that in mind, she became the focus of interest as events unfolded. She had been flagged up as somehow linked in some way.”

Dr Jayaram said: “There was an association with her being present. Nothing more.”

Mr Myers said: “You and Stephen Brearey were already talking about Lucy Letby in June 2015, weren't you?”

The consultant replied: “In terms of association but as clinicians we have to think about all possibilities … we don't generally consider unnatural causes or deliberate things.

“Nothing like that was being contemplated at that stage.

“It was simply an association.”

Mr Myers said: “Miss Letby had been a person identified as a potential link by June 2015.”

Mr Jayaram said: “Yes and other colleagues had noticed the association as well.”

Mr Myers said: “So all eyes on Ms Letby then?”

The consultant replied: “Well clearly yes because there is an association.”



‘A chill went down my spine' over possible baby deaths cause, doctor tells court

 

[magikarpmagikarp]

But, surely, something so unusual and striking which you've never seen before is exactly the sort of thing you'd record as it's obviously highly relevant to the care of the patient?

You'd think so, but not necessarily. In hospitals, you can see lots of thing that you've never seen before which are clinically irrelevant. Many years ago I had a baby girl who was very ill at birth. We never knew completely "why" but regardless they knew how to treat her. It was personally very important to us, as her parents, to find out why things happened as they did, but it did not matter medically. (edit - And we heard things like "this is very unusual." Etc.) The treatment was the same no matter the ultimate cause. Likewise, in the course of a resuscitation, a "rash" or other skin changes are not relevant to the treatment plan which is the same regardless: positive pressure ventilation, chest compressions, epinephrine and so on. So I can understand why it might not have been recorded. JMO.

 

[magikarpmagikarp]

More detail added in today's write-up - more to read at link but restricted by copyright

"Dr Jayaram replied: “At the time it was not the priority. I wish I had and we would not be sitting here years later having this rather academic discussion.”

In a sharp retort, and pointing to the defendant in the dock, Mr Myers said: “It's not academic. She is on trial here for multiple murders and attempted murders.”

[...]

Mr Myers went on: “He [Dr Brearey] raised with you the fact that Lucy Letby was present on these occasions?”

“Yes,” said Dr Jayaram.

Mr Myers said: “With that in mind, she became the focus of interest as events unfolded. She had been flagged up as somehow linked in some way.”

Dr Jayaram said: “There was an association with her being present. Nothing more.”

Mr Myers said: “You and Stephen Brearey were already talking about Lucy Letby in June 2015, weren't you?”

The consultant replied: “In terms of association but as clinicians we have to think about all possibilities … we don't generally consider unnatural causes or deliberate things.

“Nothing like that was being contemplated at that stage.

“It was simply an association.”

Mr Myers said: “Miss Letby had been a person identified as a potential link by June 2015.”

Mr Jayaram said: “Yes and other colleagues had noticed the association as well.”

Mr Myers said: “So all eyes on Ms Letby then?”

The consultant replied: “Well clearly yes because there is an association.”



‘A chill went down my spine' over possible baby deaths cause, doctor tells court

It sounds like they just thought she was incompetent. Those were the concerns. She was present, stuff went sideways. They weren't thinking "unnatural causes or deliberate things."

 

[WaxLyrical]

More detail added in today's write-up - more to read at link but restricted by copyright

"Dr Jayaram replied: “At the time it was not the priority. I wish I had and we would not be sitting here years later having this rather academic discussion.”

In a sharp retort, and pointing to the defendant in the dock, Mr Myers said: “It's not academic. She is on trial here for multiple murders and attempted murders.”

[...]

Mr Myers went on: “He [Dr Brearey] raised with you the fact that Lucy Letby was present on these occasions?”

“Yes,” said Dr Jayaram.

Mr Myers said: “With that in mind, she became the focus of interest as events unfolded. She had been flagged up as somehow linked in some way.”

Dr Jayaram said: “There was an association with her being present. Nothing more.”

Mr Myers said: “You and Stephen Brearey were already talking about Lucy Letby in June 2015, weren't you?”

The consultant replied: “In terms of association but as clinicians we have to think about all possibilities … we don't generally consider unnatural causes or deliberate things.

“Nothing like that was being contemplated at that stage.

“It was simply an association.”

Mr Myers said: “Miss Letby had been a person identified as a potential link by June 2015.”

Mr Jayaram said: “Yes and other colleagues had noticed the association as well.”

Mr Myers said: “So all eyes on Ms Letby then?”

The consultant replied: “Well clearly yes because there is an association.”



‘A chill went down my spine' over possible baby deaths cause, doctor tells court

So this would have been around the same time as the nurses’ group WhatsApp where they said “there’s something odd about those 3 deaths” and then saying something to the effect of “never mind, ignore me” when LL tried to explain them away. So that’s pretty much confirmation now that the ward was becoming suspicious of LL’s presence. JMO.

 

[ColourPurple]

More detail added in today's write-up - more to read at link but restricted by copyright

"Dr Jayaram replied: “At the time it was not the priority. I wish I had and we would not be sitting here years later having this rather academic discussion.”

In a sharp retort, and pointing to the defendant in the dock, Mr Myers said: “It's not academic. She is on trial here for multiple murders and attempted murders.”

[...]

Mr Myers went on: “He [Dr Brearey] raised with you the fact that Lucy Letby was present on these occasions?”

“Yes,” said Dr Jayaram.

Mr Myers said: “With that in mind, she became the focus of interest as events unfolded. She had been flagged up as somehow linked in some way.”

Dr Jayaram said: “There was an association with her being present. Nothing more.”

Mr Myers said: “You and Stephen Brearey were already talking about Lucy Letby in June 2015, weren't you?”

The consultant replied: “In terms of association but as clinicians we have to think about all possibilities … we don't generally consider unnatural causes or deliberate things.

“Nothing like that was being contemplated at that stage.

“It was simply an association.”

Mr Myers said: “Miss Letby had been a person identified as a potential link by June 2015.”

Mr Jayaram said: “Yes and other colleagues had noticed the association as well.”

Mr Myers said: “So all eyes on Ms Letby then?”

The consultant replied: “Well clearly yes because there is an association.”



‘A chill went down my spine' over possible baby deaths cause, doctor tells court

I wonder if it's relevant that after the four charges relating to June 2015 there is a six week period where there are no charges.

If guilty was LL aware of people seeing a link with her and so stopped for a while?

If innocent did there just happen to be no deaths or near fatal collapses in that period?

Either way that six week period may have been enough for those who had noticed a link to assume that it had just been a coincidence after all.

Then once the deaths and near fatal collapses continued in August 2015 the alleged methods had changed too. This may have resulted in the symptoms being different enough to the symptoms of the first four cases for people not to have linked them. eg bleeding, low blood sugar, projectile vomiting...

 

[Tortoise]

So this would have been around the same time as the nurses’ group WhatsApp where they said “there’s something odd about those 3 deaths” and then saying something to the effect of “never mind, ignore me” when LL tried to explain them away. So that’s pretty much confirmation now that the ward was becoming suspicious of LL’s presence. JMO.

I still don't think anyone suspected her of doing anything deliberate.

end of September -

cross-examination of shift-leader : “Was there an issue with Lucy Letby being relatively junior compared to others and some debate about her going into Nursery One to look after more poorly babies?” “Sometimes, yes,” she replied. Mr Myers said: “And sometimes a bit of an under-the-surface dispute about that, is that correct?” The witness said: “Yes.”

LL to deputy manager : “Thank you. That’s really nice to hear as I gather you are aware of some of the not so positive comments that have been made recently regarding my role which I have found quite upsetting. Our job is a pleasure to do and just hope I do the best for the babies and their family. Thank you to you & [another colleague] for your support x.”

 

[Dotta]

"Do you call me a liar?"

https://twitter.com/x/status/1628428651774767105

 

[Tortoise]

"Do you call me a liar?"

https://twitter.com/x/status/1628428651774767105

I expect Mr Myers replied "I'm asking the questions!"

 

[Sweeper2000]

You see I’m still not sure that that leaves scope for LL to have done what is alleged. The testimony suggests that mg was on the computer I think but that means she is in the room and presumably in a position to tend to her dp. If not she can ask LL to attend but doesn’t as we would have heard it. This suggests that LL would have to have snuck over and fiddled with the lines whilst the dn is there not more than a few metres away. I’m almost confident the dn would ask LL why she was tending to a non dp whilst she is there.

 

[marynnu]

You see I’m still not sure that that leaves scope for LL to have done what is alleged. The testimony suggests that mg was on the computer I think but that means she is in the room and presumably in a position to tend to her dp. If not she can ask LL to attend but doesn’t as we would have heard it. This suggests that LL would have to have snuck over and fiddled with the lines whilst the dn is there not more than a few metres away. I’m almost confident the dn would ask LL why she was tending to a non dp whilst she is there.

JMO:
Well, it's all speculation of course, but I know what I would do. (Don't worry, I'm retired!!). Neonatal nurses quite often attend to another nurse's patient for minor things if they happen by & the DN is occupied - CPAP prongs have dislodged, baby is restless & in danger of pulling out a cannulla, any number of things. These would provide a valid reason to have your hands in the incubator if you were spotted.

 

[marynnu]

You'd think so, but not necessarily. In hospitals, you can see lots of thing that you've never seen before which are clinically irrelevant. Many years ago I had a baby girl who was very ill at birth. We never knew completely "why" but regardless they knew how to treat her. It was personally very important to us, as her parents, to find out why things happened as they did, but it did not matter medically. (edit - And we heard things like "this is very unusual." Etc.) The treatment was the same no matter the ultimate cause. Likewise, in the course of a resuscitation, a "rash" or other skin changes are not relevant to the treatment plan which is the same regardless: positive pressure ventilation, chest compressions, epinephrine and so on. So I can understand why it might not have been recorded. JMO.

I agree 100%. Unless you know something is relevant it probably won't get mentioned. Nobody right then was thinking "has somebody injected air into this baby?", they were too busy saving his life.
I hope all went well for you by the way?