100%. That's the feeling I am getting from all of the middle management that we've seen so far, Eirian, Alison, Karen, Anne etc...
UK - Lucy Letby - Post-Conviction Statutory Inquiry
- Thread starter Tortoise
- Start date
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,248
- Reaction score
- 13,075
I’m playing catch up so apologies if this has already been posted but it’s totally floored me . I’d assumed that if LL had been targeting babies for years that she’d gradually built up the seriousness of the attacks but having read Nurse ZC’s comments to the inquiry this incident sounds so similar to some of the cases from 2015/16 BUT it’s from 2012!
Q. You then tell us about a baby, and I won't ask you much of the details, in early 2012.
A. Yes
Q. A baby that was ready for a step down care in preparation for discharge had been admitted to the Countess from somewhere else and she was in a process of, you describe it as feeding and growing. What was that, what was expected when she was at the Countess of Chester?
A. So with that, it's -- this specific baby had been to a higher-level unit and they had sort of come back and it's kind of a way of the parents adapting really of having a lower-level unit because the runnings are different and it kind of the baby wasn't quite ready for discharge because they need, I think, if I remember rightly they needed to be a certain weight before they could be discharged. So it was sort of a step down from this higher level to monitor the feed and growing and to give the family support and during that time as well the parents would sort of stay on the unit and they would be provided with sort of basic life-support before they were discharged home with the child.
Q. And you explain that you had been on the long day shift and the baby had collapsed unexpectedly during the night shift.
A. Yes.
Q. And then when you came in the next day, you are looking for the patient on the patient allocation board, is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And what do you find out?
A. So as I said in my statement, it wasn't unusual that there wouldn't be anyone around at that point because, you know, they would be feeding babies and doing cares and preparing for handover. So I was kind of looking at the allocation board and the baby's name wasn't there. So obviously I was wondering where she had gone, had they forgot to put the name on, and not long after I had been there Lucy had then sort of presented quite animated and told me everything that had happened with the baby, that she had been involved with resuscitation attempts and, again, it was something that took me - it took me by surprise because obviously the baby had been so well when she came, came back and equally, I guess I didn't feel that I would be as confident in that situation as Lucy was sort of portraying during that conversation telling me about what had happened.
Q. You say you “specifically remember Letby informing me about the blood during intubation and how the doctor had struggled to get the tube down. She expressed the parents' anguish..." . How was this information communicated to you? What was the tone of it?
A. Throughout the whole conversation, I would say in my statement, she was animated with it. It was kind of like it was an excited -- she was excited to tell me about it but reflecting on it, when I - at the time, for me it was kind of, was that still the adrenaline, everything that she's experienced that she just needed to offload it to somebody? But it definitely was -- she was animated in telling me about it. It wasn't as if she, she didn't seem upset or that she, it had traumatised her in any way.
Q. You then tell us about a baby, and I won't ask you much of the details, in early 2012.
A. Yes
Q. A baby that was ready for a step down care in preparation for discharge had been admitted to the Countess from somewhere else and she was in a process of, you describe it as feeding and growing. What was that, what was expected when she was at the Countess of Chester?
A. So with that, it's -- this specific baby had been to a higher-level unit and they had sort of come back and it's kind of a way of the parents adapting really of having a lower-level unit because the runnings are different and it kind of the baby wasn't quite ready for discharge because they need, I think, if I remember rightly they needed to be a certain weight before they could be discharged. So it was sort of a step down from this higher level to monitor the feed and growing and to give the family support and during that time as well the parents would sort of stay on the unit and they would be provided with sort of basic life-support before they were discharged home with the child.
Q. And you explain that you had been on the long day shift and the baby had collapsed unexpectedly during the night shift.
A. Yes.
Q. And then when you came in the next day, you are looking for the patient on the patient allocation board, is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And what do you find out?
A. So as I said in my statement, it wasn't unusual that there wouldn't be anyone around at that point because, you know, they would be feeding babies and doing cares and preparing for handover. So I was kind of looking at the allocation board and the baby's name wasn't there. So obviously I was wondering where she had gone, had they forgot to put the name on, and not long after I had been there Lucy had then sort of presented quite animated and told me everything that had happened with the baby, that she had been involved with resuscitation attempts and, again, it was something that took me - it took me by surprise because obviously the baby had been so well when she came, came back and equally, I guess I didn't feel that I would be as confident in that situation as Lucy was sort of portraying during that conversation telling me about what had happened.
Q. You say you “specifically remember Letby informing me about the blood during intubation and how the doctor had struggled to get the tube down. She expressed the parents' anguish..." . How was this information communicated to you? What was the tone of it?
A. Throughout the whole conversation, I would say in my statement, she was animated with it. It was kind of like it was an excited -- she was excited to tell me about it but reflecting on it, when I - at the time, for me it was kind of, was that still the adrenaline, everything that she's experienced that she just needed to offload it to somebody? But it definitely was -- she was animated in telling me about it. It wasn't as if she, she didn't seem upset or that she, it had traumatised her in any way.
Last edited:
Marantz4250b
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,822
- Reaction score
- 14,218
Haha - thank you. It's actually a great song!
And, yes, you're right. There needs to be less pandering to people's "feelings" and less tolerance of people bringing stupid claims because they feel offended by something said. It creates a culture in which people are terrified of the repercussions of causing offence. No one has a right not be offended.
Marantz4250b
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,822
- Reaction score
- 14,218
The bolded parts are bad enough but I have to say that it never really occurred to me how utterly moronic it was moving someone you suspect may be harming babies into an office where they have access to every patient's file. Perhaps not every patient but maybe just everyone's file who has a potential safety issue raised. How do we know she wasn't altering stuff while she was there?Can Thirlwall revelations get worse?
You bet
New report from today's hearing:
So, as we know, LL gets removed from the NNU and is seconded to Patient Safety. In the office there she can gain access to patient records and notes. Mrs Lawrence worked in the same department, she was 'Risk & Safety Lead'
Letby ‘could have accessed baby death reports after removal from neonatal unit’ | BreakingNews.ie
The Thirlwall Inquiry heard from a former colleague who felt it was ‘not appropriate’ Letby was moved to the hospital’s patient safety office.www.breakingnews.ie
Mrs Lawrence recalled she made a complaint to a nursing boss in autumn 2016 over an incident in which Letby knew about a baby collapse before she did.
She said: “I was coming into work one morning and as I came up the stairs Lucy came out of her office on the corridor to greet me and she was very distressed.
“She almost jumped down my throat really and said ‘there’s been a collapse and a baby has been transferred out, does that mean somebody else is going to be under investigation and I can go back to work?’
“She bombarded me with a lot of questions and I didn’t know what she was talking about because I wasn’t aware of a collapse .. but she knew this information and it had not reached me.
“Lucy had access to information which she shouldn’t have and I wondered whether there was someone on the neonatal unit who is feeding her information but it concerns me that she knows something clinically that I don’t know as the risk lead.”
Asked if she knew if Letby had access to patient notes or baby death reports, she replied: “I think if she wanted to look at them she absolutely could have.”
also, same link, same Thirwall witness:
Mrs Lawrence added that “regular conversations” would take place along the corridor between Letby and some of her nursing managers about her “being made a scapegoat for poor medical care and a lack of teamworking”
Marantz4250b
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,822
- Reaction score
- 14,218
I'm genuinely torn on that point. On the one hand she comes over as very sociable, nice and easy to get on with (and from the various pictures we've seen she was clearly popular), yet on the other she presents as a complete psycho-!
I still think that, on balance, that most people around her had good things to say about her than bad. Just the impression I get.
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,248
- Reaction score
- 13,075
Pictures on Facebook mean literally nothing . When I was on there the most unpleasant person I know had over 1000 Facebook friends , lots of inspirational quotes and hundreds of pictures of her in smiling group shots. In real life nobody could stand her!
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,248
- Reaction score
- 13,075
I remember saying mid trial whether she was guilty or innocent she came across as unbearable. The info from her colleagues at the inquiry is reinforcing that +++
That occasion where she texted her “friend” who was about to go to bed after a night shift to worry her by informing her how low her designated baby’s blood sugar had tested after she hadn’t tested for a few hours … and then signed off with “Sleep well” urgh!
Parker Knoll
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2020
- Messages
- 1,324
- Reaction score
- 10,497
I’m sure everyone has had “that” person at work that just grinds their gears, it’s inevitable but she does sound highly annoying.
We are all looking back at this knowing what she’s done and been convicted of but I have been staggered by what’s been revealed at this enquiry I really have.
Yet ANOTHER appeal tomorrow folks !
We are all looking back at this knowing what she’s done and been convicted of but I have been staggered by what’s been revealed at this enquiry I really have.
Yet ANOTHER appeal tomorrow folks !
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,248
- Reaction score
- 13,075
I remember at one point Johnson asked if she accessed babies’ medical files after they’d died and she said something like she couldn’t remember but she may have done. She’d also made notes on the back of a handover sheet on 28th June about Baby O, even though he'd died on the 23rd!
ColourPurple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 4,248
- Reaction score
- 13,075
Yup there’s so much new info in the inquiry it’s overwhelming, and not easy to just copy paste stuff from it because of the formatting. How many colleagues is it now who’ve commented on her being excited and gossipy and eager to be the first one to tell them about baby deaths and collapses!
Tortoise
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 27,172
- Reaction score
- 140,111
I'm not sure there is another proper legal forum for making such a finding, where evidence can be tested by Letby if these are going to be assigned to her. I mean she still has rights to defend herself, and say there was some perverse finding 20 years down the line that there was a fault with her trial (new so-called scientific evidence from doctors bent on finding fault with the experts used) and she were to be released, with no further trials having been held to keep her locked up. It has happened in another case elsewhere, which I won't get into to avoid controversy and derailing the thread, but it is my opinion.
I think a case of this seriousness needs to be tested in court, where many families are affected and hospitals have to acknowledge liability and learn from their lapses in detection of harm, and also to clear up any misconception that she was ever a harmless dedicated nurse caring for her patients, just keeping confidential hospital paperwork because she collects paper and looks up parents just because it's her habit.
I think it's important to study the behaviours of serial killers in healthcare settings, and to identify that she did not turn overnight into a murderer when she killed three babies in short succession, and how this was escalation and gaslighting of epic proportions which fooled her friends and convinced doctors in their early years of training that it was normal for babies to unexpectedly arrest. Delving into the full extent of her offending, how she went under the radar, and her psychology is important for prison services too.
It will also dispel the myth that she had a crap defence and was scapegoated by these doctors, for a year in which mortality spiked.
MOOing
Last edited:
cottonweaver
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2014
- Messages
- 9,138
- Reaction score
- 31,579
Re this point and the previous post about union rep's involvement in this case.
IMO - from what I've read - a management cover-up and the weaponising of HR processes are bigger features and I believe that will become a key part of Thirlwall's final report. (The rep and the RCN rep seem to be little fishes in this scandal, not the drivers.Their names just don't crop up that much in the items I've read so far)
Letby's rights, bullying policies, the grievance process, support for her, prioritising her mental health, her safeguarding all aligned with management's goals. (Do you believe that those at Harvey or Chambers level genuinely cared about Letby? Powell, Rees etc sure they did, but not Exec level imo)
Was there really a culture of pandering to feelings at Coch? Or was it selective and purposeful?
We've already seen that there was zero concern re offending any of the consultants' feelings, whistleblowers' who raised red flags or protecting the parents' rights or feelings. (The consultants were literally threatened with dire professional repercussions if they kept on airing their ' feelings' )
Times Health Editor: cover-ups are a feature in past scandals ( as found in previous inquiries)
cottonweaver
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2014
- Messages
- 9,138
- Reaction score
- 31,579
speculation
Anyway.... based on all the new material, I do wonder now:
- did Karen Rees, off the record, advise LL on how LL could use the grievance system to her advantage? ( See KR's grievance upload and the minutes, plus fact that KR & LL were meeting weekly)
Re the RCPCH review, you can also see - from the uploads - more about the gameplan there. Certain managers advising Letby that she should participate even though she's no longer on the NNU. LL is one of the first to give a sit-down interview with the RCPCH team when they arrive at CoCH !
The fightback. LL has her warriors and they are ' old hands' ( They've worked within the system a long time and they seem to be holding regular briefings with her) Feels like ' Team Letby' are running a multi-pronged defense.
Also - re the Letby parents meetings & calls
- what was L's mum saying that so concerned the Head of HR? So much that she wanted to set up sep support for the mother?
- why was LL almost hysterical every week that KR saw her? ( she wasn't like that when she was going to Alder Hey, same time frame) Why does protecting LL's mental health crop up so often in so many documents? ( then ofc we have that infamous KR line to Brearey re LL's parents. Where SB replies ' I don't care")
Were people threatening or hinting at suicide risks? Genuinely or as a manipulative tool?
- Because Thirwall has demonstrated that minutes were often not taken or minutes mis-repped contents, I don't expect we'll see what leverage Father Letby was using either ( also see email deletions, use of whatsapp and Harvey's ' all emails cease forthwith'. Did anybody threaten calling the local media, for instance? )
Re questions of Letby's character as a topic
Ms Langdale KC said: "History tells us that serial killers are deceptive, manipulative and skilled at hiding in plain sight."
Anyway.... based on all the new material, I do wonder now:
- did Karen Rees, off the record, advise LL on how LL could use the grievance system to her advantage? ( See KR's grievance upload and the minutes, plus fact that KR & LL were meeting weekly)
Re the RCPCH review, you can also see - from the uploads - more about the gameplan there. Certain managers advising Letby that she should participate even though she's no longer on the NNU. LL is one of the first to give a sit-down interview with the RCPCH team when they arrive at CoCH !
The fightback. LL has her warriors and they are ' old hands' ( They've worked within the system a long time and they seem to be holding regular briefings with her) Feels like ' Team Letby' are running a multi-pronged defense.
Also - re the Letby parents meetings & calls
- what was L's mum saying that so concerned the Head of HR? So much that she wanted to set up sep support for the mother?
- why was LL almost hysterical every week that KR saw her? ( she wasn't like that when she was going to Alder Hey, same time frame) Why does protecting LL's mental health crop up so often in so many documents? ( then ofc we have that infamous KR line to Brearey re LL's parents. Where SB replies ' I don't care")
Were people threatening or hinting at suicide risks? Genuinely or as a manipulative tool?
- Because Thirwall has demonstrated that minutes were often not taken or minutes mis-repped contents, I don't expect we'll see what leverage Father Letby was using either ( also see email deletions, use of whatsapp and Harvey's ' all emails cease forthwith'. Did anybody threaten calling the local media, for instance? )
Re questions of Letby's character as a topic
Ms Langdale KC said: "History tells us that serial killers are deceptive, manipulative and skilled at hiding in plain sight."
Last edited:
Marantz4250b
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,822
- Reaction score
- 14,218
You're right - there seems to be inordinate measures taken to "protect" her. Perhaps it's just the huge over caution that seems to go on these days but I do wonder whether we're reaching the point where something hidden in her medical history, possibly from her earliest days, is going to come out?
Is there something about her psychology which made her parents into the extremely over protective parents they clearly are, I wonder?
Are we going to find out some really troubling things that, perhaps, should have barred her from the profession or at the very least should have resulted in much higher vetting?
cottonweaver
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2014
- Messages
- 9,138
- Reaction score
- 31,579
AnneMarie Lawrence transcript
Updating what yesterday's news report did not cover on AnneMarie Lawrence's testimony at Thirlwall.
Context: Lawrence is pretty new to her role. She was appointed around May 2016
The disappearing Letby folder! ( July 2016 )
After Lawrence hears - on June 27- about the deaths of babies O & P , as the ‘ Risk Lead’ she tries to go onto NNU and is told she can’t enter because the staff are having a meeting ( O & P were murdered on 23 & 24th) It’s unclear who was in the meeting and who exactly was blocking her entry but they knew that she was the Risk Lead and it was within her remit. No Entry! ( Page 67 of pdf)
After this , the ' Extraordinary General Meeting' is held July 2016
At the EGM, LL's role is discussed and the attendees are trying to track Letby's role in any extra cases of collapse.
(A couple of exes attended amongst all the rest of the staff. At the end any personal notes are taken off the attendees.)
Shortly after that, Lawrence & a couple of other staff start looking for Datixes themselves - anything that relates to Letby. They collect all and store them into a folder on their Risk S Drive.
Soon after, the folder just disappears. Millward's name comes up again too.
RH column:
Ruth Millward's response?
Don't concern yourself with it !
( Ruth Millward gives evidence herself after the holiday break)
Lawrence goes onto say that compared to every other Maternity Risk Dept she'd ever worked in NW and Midlands, it was the worst resourced one she'd ever known.
Moving onto 2017 - we're in 'Game is Up' territory by now
Inquiry barrister is also very interested in fact that exec Alison Kelly & Millward later asked Lawrence to produce a misleading report on the cause of deaths of O & P babies. This belated report was done NINE months after the childrens' deaths. Report completed April 2017
Barrister's belief is that getting Lawrence to compile this report was to mislead anyone who read it. ( Unbeknown to Lawrence) part of the cover-up)
one word
Devious
May 2016 , before the triplets deaths, before Letby was belatedly taken off NNU
Mrs Lawrence's testimony, Risk & Safety Lead.
Ruth Millward is still the Head of Risk & Patient Safety at Coch today ! Clueless on her safeguarding duties despite her seniority and her role
View attachment 539762
Letby ‘could have accessed baby death reports after removal from neonatal unit’ | BreakingNews.ie
The Thirlwall Inquiry heard from a former colleague who felt it was ‘not appropriate’ Letby was moved to the hospital’s patient safety office.
Ruth Millward's statement to the Inquiry
Updating what yesterday's news report did not cover on AnneMarie Lawrence's testimony at Thirlwall.
Context: Lawrence is pretty new to her role. She was appointed around May 2016
The disappearing Letby folder! ( July 2016 )
After Lawrence hears - on June 27- about the deaths of babies O & P , as the ‘ Risk Lead’ she tries to go onto NNU and is told she can’t enter because the staff are having a meeting ( O & P were murdered on 23 & 24th) It’s unclear who was in the meeting and who exactly was blocking her entry but they knew that she was the Risk Lead and it was within her remit. No Entry! ( Page 67 of pdf)
After this , the ' Extraordinary General Meeting' is held July 2016
At the EGM, LL's role is discussed and the attendees are trying to track Letby's role in any extra cases of collapse.
(A couple of exes attended amongst all the rest of the staff. At the end any personal notes are taken off the attendees.)
Shortly after that, Lawrence & a couple of other staff start looking for Datixes themselves - anything that relates to Letby. They collect all and store them into a folder on their Risk S Drive.
Soon after, the folder just disappears. Millward's name comes up again too.
RH column:
Ruth Millward's response?
Don't concern yourself with it !
( Ruth Millward gives evidence herself after the holiday break)
https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Thirlwall-Inquiry-22-October-2024.pdf
Lawrence goes onto say that compared to every other Maternity Risk Dept she'd ever worked in NW and Midlands, it was the worst resourced one she'd ever known.
Moving onto 2017 - we're in 'Game is Up' territory by now
Inquiry barrister is also very interested in fact that exec Alison Kelly & Millward later asked Lawrence to produce a misleading report on the cause of deaths of O & P babies. This belated report was done NINE months after the childrens' deaths. Report completed April 2017
Barrister's belief is that getting Lawrence to compile this report was to mislead anyone who read it. ( Unbeknown to Lawrence) part of the cover-up)
one word
Devious
Last edited:
Tortoise
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 27,172
- Reaction score
- 140,111
I haven't looked at the transcript yet, but I can tell you that the two triplets died on 23rd and 24th June 2016, not May.
It's ALL about minimizing the risk to media JMO.
I'm sure there is a very fitting GIF somewhere of people standing up and applauding when Breary delivered that killer line 'I DON'T CARE!' I truly hope it was a fist slamming moment.
Also, I think his comment would be quite out of character him, who appears to be otherwise quite a gentle soul. Would suggest he was pushed to his limits, totally exasperated with all the red tape and policies that senior management were hiding behind, biding their time until the new baby unit was fully financed. Breary was sick of senior management misusing their power and delegating their dirty work to Senior nursing staff.
cottonweaver
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2014
- Messages
- 9,138
- Reaction score
- 31,579
Thank you. I' ve swapped June ( for May) O & P- month was wrong. Just an error but within editing time. It's in the transcript
I may as well add the page itself, in case anybody's interested in the substance
Last edited:
Baby baby Jane
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2019
- Messages
- 711
- Reaction score
- 8,258
Sounds like LL and her parents, were the bullies.
DNASolves
Staff online
-
TriciaManager Websleuths.com
Online statistics
- Members online
- 223
- Guests online
- 745
- Total visitors
- 968