UK - Lucy Letby - Post-Conviction Statutory Inquiry

[Charlot123]

Eta. I got that post all wrong. Says it all actually.

"The note, covered in dense handwriting, shows sentences including: "Overwhelming fear I panic I'll never have children or marry, I'll never have a family' and 'I don't deserve to live' and 'Why me?'"

Lucy Letby's 'written note' in full including 'I am evil' remark

The Post-it note was found in the former nurse's home after she became a suspect in multiple baby murders

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

However this does still pose the question of how she wrote that post it note either very close to or before the time that the other note ie possible referal to child services as "single parent" was made and that it isn't some clerical error?

The post it note was written in 2016 whilst in the patient safety office? Wait no way. The meeting discussing the single parent status was in May 2017 and was with the police. I find that almost impossible to think then that either it isn't true or that she lied but then this wasn't communicated. It would seem at the point that Ian harvey had that meeting with the police that her background living situation was known as fact. No mh issues, no signals from occupational health and Ian harvey is talking to the police. Surely they would at that point be able to say "we know without doubt she has a child"? Isn't it also true that the lie of never having a child wouldn't be prompted by NJ? There's a big bit of contradictory info there isn't there? I can't believe that her having a kid wouldn't be known by the court? Was it ever addressed?

@Tortoise how confident are you that her having a kid wouldn't have been allowed in court?

It's about ten months between the suspension from clinical to when IH had that meeting with the police so there is the potential but I just can't see how that wouldn't have been known. I was going to say I can't see her doing it but she's a baby killer.

You really think she thought it was a good idea to pop one out whilst she could? Last orders so to speak. The last post on the bugle. "Time gentlemen please".

So two options:
Perhaps a single mom before 2016, maybe a kid, not a toddler. Could be mostly raised by the parents but "single mom". Stranger things happened.
Or, indeed, pregnancy and the delivery between 2016-2017.

I assume that with the case hovering over her, adoption would be out of question? Or could she be allowed to adopt?

 

[ColourPurple]

This is quite extraordinary, in that it's clearly and surely not an error. This is a police report. You don't get to claim to be a single parent without proof that you are one. And surely also, it would have been corrected by now if wrong? And/or used in her trial if correct and the case?

I really don't know what to think.

ETA. If a single parent, who was looking after this child while LL worked pretty much every hour she was asked to work? The cats?

I think unless she was claiming to be expecting Doc Choc’s child (which seems unlikely as she wasn’t admitting to a relationship with him at all) then maybe it’s going to just be some crossed wires about LL’s own mother needing support? There were a few mentions in the inquiry of COCH managers having concerns about her and her “distressed state”. Most strange though.

 

[Parker Knoll]

The only time “ statistics “ were introduced in this case was the nurses rota which showed letby on shift for all of the babies on the indictment.
IIRC it was mentioned by the prosecution in court for under 10 minutes during the 10 month trial.

 

[Sweeper2000]

So two options:
Perhaps a single mom before 2016, maybe a kid, not a toddler. Could be mostly raised by the parents but "single mom". Stranger things happened.
Or, indeed, pregnancy and the delivery between 2016-2017.

I assume that with the case hovering over her, adoption would be out of question? Or could she be allowed to adopt?

No adoption in that scenario. If she tried she would have a legal obligation to inform and I think the agency would check anyways.

I am not convinced there is a period in her life after university and lwh that she would have been able. We know where she lived since her uni days. She also would have been housed before her due date by the council in the event she couldn't afford a place. Hold on a second. Anyone remember the picture of Lucy and one of her chums December 2016. Lucy had a Christmas jumper on and no sign of a bump at all within the timeframe of her going on admin and IH having the meeting.

Right also if it wasn't true IH would have known for definite. He has spoken to people who know her quite well. If she had of claimed she was a parent that also would have been known to be false and presumably flagged by occupational health? It's a big big lie and you could easily class such a blatant and absurd fabrication as worthy of being flagged. I am also near certain that social services would have had to be informed who was looking after the baby. She obviously wasn't but she could easily have given her to parents.

This is absurd. There is absolutely nothing at all in her history to suggest she had a child including her own note. I can see no reason to see she had a child after going on admin either. Ian harvey said referal for a "single parent" which presumably means present tense rather than "expecting"? In May 2017 which is 5 months after that Xmas pic when IH had that meeting with the police, she would have had to be four months or thereabouts pregnant but no bump. Nope I cannot understand this I really can't.

That sounds like an error to me. It's too unbelievable.

 

[marynnu]

The sngle parent thing is just an error, surely? There is zero chance of looking after a child on your own doing those shifts.

 

[Parker Knoll]

She hasn’t got a child, it would have come out by now plus there are no 9 month gaps in the timeline from leaving school going forward.
As crazy theories go that one is up there !

 

[Kemug]

Maybe she did have a child, and it is in foster care. Her parents would know, and maybe visit sometimes. But kept it a secret. Re 9 months - it wouldn't need to be that long a gap. Plenty of (particularly first-time ) mothers don't show till fairly late. I speak from experience. And some get quite a shock. LL might not have needed much more than a month's holiday.

 

[Kemug]

Oh my God, this could explain everything! If LL does indeed have a child, and was pressured to give it up, that could explain her envy, even hatred, of new mothers!

 

[iamshadow21]

Oh my God, this could explain everything! If LL does indeed have a child, and was pressured to give it up, that could explain her envy, even hatred, of new mothers!

I think it's too simplistic, and I think it's wrong. You don't refer to someone who's given up a child to fostering or adoption as a 'single parent', that tends to be reserved for people actually raising that child.

I think the mail and the mirror and all the other rags would have been all over it if she had a child at home with her.

I don't think she's ever had a child. I think primarily, she's a narcissistic sadist, has been for a very long time, and she doesn't need a reason like giving up an infant to torture and kill babies.

MOO

 

[Kemug]

I think it's too simplistic, and I think it's wrong. You don't refer to someone who's given up a child to fostering or adoption as a 'single parent', that tends to be reserved for people actually raising that child.

I think the mail and the mirror and all the other rags would have been all over it if she had a child at home with her.

I don't think she's ever had a child. I think primarily, she's a narcissistic sadist, has been for a very long time, and she doesn't need a reason like giving up an infant to torture and kill babies.

MOO

That is a very reasonable point of view. But, respectfully, it fails to take into account the possibility of LL herself having said that she is a single mother.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Its an error definitely. Any adoption agency would entrust Lucy's parents with her child should she not be deemed fit but again that info would have been presented already. We would know. I can see no reason to think her being a parent would be disqualified from evidence. I think that info if it was true then by publishing it officially would mean that it would be OK for it to be published more widely and known publicly or no gag. That presumably also means that that evidence would have been presented at court which means it wasn't which means that's an error of some sort I think. Jmo

 

[katydid23]

I think that in that "pouring out note" she wrote "I'll never get married, never will have kids." So it looks like she may be lying. On the other hand, if she was not and was a single mother, this makes the note less meaningful.

In general, this is why one needs to know if it is true or not, because of what she writes on that note.

By itself, whether she is a single mom or not has as much relevance to the case as how many candies Dr. A left for her.

She was not a single mother.IMO. ... We saw all of her relevant texts and DMs. She never ever, even once, mentioned a child. A single mom, talking to her co-workers , is going to mention her child. Whether to brag or to complain, or comment about
something about their child.

She went out of country 2 or 3 x a year with just her parents. No children were ever mentioned or seen in the vacation photos. No babysitters were ever mentioned. IMO, if she had a child, her parents woulds have lived close to her to micro-manage that situation.

We also heard her superiors say that the reason she worked so much overtime was because she was able to because no family responsibilities.

Lucy had fur babies---could she have lied to the police by saying she had a dependent at home?

 

[Parker Knoll]

PLOT TWIST !
She’s got a secret child stashed away that’s why she had one room decorated as a nursery/shredder room … it’s doc chocs and the crazy parents are bringing it up as their own in Torquay.
Somebody make it stop please !

 

[iamshadow21]

That is a very reasonable point of view. But, respectfully, it fails to take into account the possibility of LL herself having said that she is a single mother.

It doesn't if she lied about it to police. Or if the police wrote it in error.

 

[iamshadow21]

What do you all think of this then

Page 2 of 2 - minutes of meeting with Cheshire Police 5th May 2017

"The nurse has been working at COCH for approximately 8 years full time, she is a Cheshire resident, and a single parent. The staff member has since placed a grievance against COCH. There has been no formal investigation of misconduct and no motive identified. There are no mental health issues known and nothing has been highlighted by occupational health. There are no management issues.

AP — IH to provide personal details of the nurse, and to look at safeguarding referral as single parent."

INQ0102298 Pages 3 – 4 of Meeting between Cheshire Constabulary, Tony Chambers, Stephen Cross and Ian Harvey, on 05/05/2017 | The Thirlwall Inquiry

Examining the events at the Countess of Chester Hospital and their implications following the trial, and subsequent convictions, of former neonatal nurse Lucy Letby of murder and attempted murder of babies at the hospital.

thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk

Surely this CAN'T be Letby, if she began working there in 2012 and was arrested 2018.

 

[Tortoise]

Surely this CAN'T be Letby, if she began working there in 2012 and was arrested 2018.

It must be about her with all the other info in there. They've probably added in her time there as a student nurse from 2009 if I had to guess.

 

[Tortoise]

It doesn't if she lied about it to police. Or if the police wrote it in error.

The meeting was a year before police interviewed her for the first time. This was meeting between hospital execs and Cheshire police. It's in there twice so can't be an error, with a follow up action of safeguarding referral marked for Harvey to look into IMO. That must be info police got from execs because police hadn't spoken to the consultants at that date.

I think it was either execs mistake, a very strange mistake to just make up out of thin air, or that's what was in hospital notes/records at the time.

The outcome could have been followed up in their next meeting a week later, because we haven't been given every page of the minutes of the next meeting.

So I think it's either execs mistaken belief, or she lied to the hospital.

 

[Parker Knoll]

I really wish you could add memes on this thread !

 

[MrsAddick]

I really wish you could add memes on this thread !

It’s diabolical. But I suspect that the people in this forum have spent many more hours agonising and empathising than those executives in roles paid top dollar.

 

[Parker Knoll]

I have my English degree so I’m going to take media and communications then have a crack at running a hospital … can’t be that hard surely ?? :- )