UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #10

[JosieJo]

Effectively, when you weigh this up thus far: It implies that not only the machines used to detect AE aren’t doing their job, but also the monitors aren’t either by the sound of it IMO. They just allegedly malfunction (if guilty) only on LL shifts.

Moo

Well apparently nothing works , no one can see and no one's testimony can be relied upon ...not sure why they are even bothering presenting the case

 

[Sundial]

Well apparently nothing works , no one can see and no one's testimony can be relied upon ...not sure why they are even bothering presenting the case

I know it’s really bizarre. Possibly why some of this has gone on (allegedly) for as long as it did. Because when people DID raise questions and concerns, that was dismissed too by the sound of it. Whatever happened to safeguarding here just astounds me.
JMO

 

[Sweeper2000]

The testimony is to have an opinion on and facts to be ascertained. It seems there is disagreement with LL, why not others? I totally understand though.

 

[Sundial]

The testimony is to have an opinion on and facts to be ascertained. It seems there is disagreement with LL, why not others? I totally understand though.

Because some of them quite frankly are so far fetched (such as your previous point regarding the moon), that even with a cot canopy which obstructs the view of the infants face, during a night shift and limited lighting; there are still those that choose to look the other way imo.

 

[MachinaCollecta]

The testimony is to have an opinion on and facts to be ascertained. It seems there is disagreement with LL, why not others? I totally understand though.

Because some of your thoughts on this particular issue would require the Moon to come in and give its testimony in the courtroom.

 

[Sundial]

Because some of your thoughts on this particular issue would require the Moon to come in and give its testimony in the courtroom.

I was just thinking the same thing; if a remotely even slightly valid point, I’m sure the defence would be asking for the moons guest appearance, stars and maybe why not the sunrise too. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

[ColourPurple]

There are no facts as far as we know been presented by the defence to throw any doubt on her recollection

And not for the first time from what we've heard the collapse happened to a nurse's designated baby while they were temporarily away from their baby, and not during the rest of their shift.

 

[Becci]

Cctv in each room i think.
They can't talk like most people on other wards.

 

[Sweeper2000]

If your a bit more serious and actually read what I wrote rather than trying to pick it apart you might be able to understand that I was saying the room was more lit than the degree to which moonlight lights an otherwise dark place. You can more or less see by moonlight depending on coverage. Or in much much much simpler words, so everyone can understand, that room had more light than the moon gives and by which one can still see by. Lit corridor = lit room Quite obviously. i very much doubt the nurse was strolling around in pitch black. Here is the actual quote so anyone can actually read it rather than distort according to what seems personal preference.

“I might argue that there is more light Than moonlight bouncing around in that room especially with white walls and you can determine light colours in moonlight”

nothing about a personified moon, purely about the amount of light bouncing around in that room in the pic. Yes light does bounce, it’s reflected off of things.

<modsnip>

 

[Sundial]

If your a bit more serious and actually read what I wrote rather than trying to pick it apart you might be able to understand that I was saying the room was more lit than the degree to which moonlight lights an otherwise dark place. You can more or less see by moonlight depending on coverage. Or in much much much simpler words, so everyone can understand, that room had more light than the moon gives and by which one can still see by. Lit corridor = lit room Quite obviously. i very much doubt the nurse was strolling around in pitch black. Here is the actual quote so anyone can actually read it rather than distort according to what seems personal preference.

“I might argue that there is more light Than moonlight bouncing around in that room especially with white walls and you can determine light colours in moonlight”

nothing about a personified moon, purely about the amount of light bouncing around in that room in the pic. Yes light does bounce, it’s reflected off of things.

<modsnip>

But is this not what you are doing? You strive for a balanced discussion but pick apart everything presented by medical professionals, witness testimonies and now the nurse testimony over the cot canopy and make reference to the moon in your point. Really? How is that a balanced discussion, <modnsip>

 

[WaxLyrical]

I find this nurse’s testimony compelling. It’s not just about the photo of the cot and how much light was in the room, that’s just to give the jury an idea. It’s about these nurses’ experience of working in these dim rooms night after night and simply knowing that it wasn’t realistic to see a change in complexion from LL’s viewpoint. And so her gut told her something wasn’t right. And, either way, if a nurse DID suspect a baby was pale, they’d surely be straight over to the cot, alarm or no alarm, to check on things. Not pondering from a doorway.

What’s strange about it, is that if LL’s intention was to kill, then it wasn’t in her own interests to flag the baby’s pallor to the designated nurse, especially when that nurse was distracted by another task. Surely you’d stay quiet and minimise the risk of a successful resuscitation.

Makes me wonder whether, if guilty, it really was about assisting with resuscitations rather than actually wanting the patient dead.

JMO.

 

[sapphireminds]

Joining the fray over here. I'm working on getting verified so I can talk more specifically on things. <modsnip> and am fascinated and horrified by this case.

<modsnip - sub judice> grave concerns about the care the infants received, and find some of the medical testimony seriously dodgy, which makes it even less credible to me, if this was the best they could do so far.

I will point out that the TPN insulin case is incredibly weak because they changed the bag while she was not working and the baby continued to have issues. That casts doubt as to whether the TPN was the contaminated bag at all, because in order for that to be true, LL would have had to predict that they would use starter TPN in the fridge, instead of a higher level of glucose, as would be normal, all so the insulin infusion would continue while she was gone. It's a pretty large deviation from the supposed pattern.

 

[mart321]

I think concentrating on photos and lighting is barking up the wrong tree.

The nurse who was actually there at the time thought it strange that LL could see the baby was pale.

She has stood on oath and said the colour of the baby could not be seen.

Why would anyone disbelieve this nurses testimony?

It's obviously damaging to LL and the defence could not defend it

This is exactly what I think. Its not worth arguing over the difference in light of a picture, which will look different on any display that it's shown. The nurses testimony tells us everything we need to know. She made a point of saying the image was ingrained in her memory.

I'm much more inclined to believe the testimony of people that were there at the time as opposed to people trying to guess if they could see if a babies skin was pale. I find that quite ridiculous.

 

[JosieJo]

Joining the fray over here. I'm working on getting verified so I can talk more specifically on things. <modsnip> and am fascinated and horrified by this case.

<modsnip - sub judice> grave concerns about the care the infants received, and find some of the medical testimony seriously dodgy, which makes it even less credible to me, if this was the best they could do so far.

I will point out that the TPN insulin case is incredibly weak because they changed the bag while she was not working and the baby continued to have issues. That casts doubt as to whether the TPN was the contaminated bag at all, because in order for that to be true, LL would have had to predict that they would use starter TPN in the fridge, instead of a higher level of glucose, as would be normal, all so the insulin infusion would continue while she was gone. It's a pretty large deviation from the supposed pattern.

Welcome..there's no doubt that the insulin continuing to enter the babies body after LLS shift is problematic for the prosecution case. But the baby was receiving small amounts of insulin via infusion from somewhere...and it started directly after LL had contact which is quite damning when looked at alongside the other collapses where LL is the link.

The problem being we do not know enough..the Jury may or may not know more.

How many TPN bags were in the fridge ..did <mod note - someone> put insulin in both if just 2?

 

[mart321]

Joining the fray over here. I'm working on getting verified so I can talk more specifically on things. <modsnip> and am fascinated and horrified by this case.

<modsnip - sub judice> grave concerns about the care the infants received, and find some of the medical testimony seriously dodgy, which makes it even less credible to me, if this was the best they could do so far.

I will point out that the TPN insulin case is incredibly weak because they changed the bag while she was not working and the baby continued to have issues. That casts doubt as to whether the TPN was the contaminated bag at all, because in order for that to be true, LL would have had to predict that they would use starter TPN in the fridge, instead of a higher level of glucose, as would be normal, all so the insulin infusion would continue while she was gone. It's a pretty large deviation from the supposed pattern.

Disagreed, we don't know for a fact if the insulin was actually changed. Secondly, if for example LL had poisoned the TPN bag, what makes you think she would not potentially poison more than 1 bag.

We don't know the layout of the fridge. It could be quite obvious what was going to be selected next by the layout of the fridge. This was at a point in the case where questions were being asked about LL's "bad run". There is every possibility a second bag could have been contaminated, to cause confusion, or to take the blame away from her.


I feel none of this detracts from the fact that the baby was poisoned with insulin by someone and it couldn't have been done through negligence.

 

[Sweeper2000]

Joining the fray over here. I'm working on getting verified so I can talk more specifically on things. <modsnip> and am fascinated and horrified by this case.

<modsnip - sub judice> grave concerns about the care the infants received, and find some of the medical testimony seriously dodgy, which makes it even less credible to me, if this was the best they could do so far.

I will point out that the TPN insulin case is incredibly weak because they changed the bag while she was not working and the baby continued to have issues. That casts doubt as to whether the TPN was the contaminated bag at all, because in order for that to be true, LL would have had to predict that they would use starter TPN in the fridge, instead of a higher level of glucose, as would be normal, all so the insulin infusion would continue while she was gone. It's a pretty large deviation from the supposed pattern.

hello and welcome, glad to have you join the fray. I will, so long as you agree with me have your back

if I can I would like to ask you a question regarding the tpn bag on which there has been little agreement as there is much disputed. Especially regarding the change of the tpn bag. The evidence I think indicates it was changed. The nurse seemed quite emphatic that it was. I was wondering how long tpn bags are stored in the fridge for? There doesn’t seem to be any other insulin cases close to that time so that might give us an indication that the other bags were not contaminated. If one out of however many there were was, it’s another strong indication that it wasn’t planned. If they change the bags every week they could have disposed of the other contaminated bags though.

 

[sapphireminds]

hello and welcome, glad to have you join the fray. I will, so long as you agree with me have your back

if I can I would like to ask you a question regarding the tpn bag on which there has been little agreement as there is much disputed. Especially regarding the change of the tpn bag. The evidence I think indicates it was changed. The nurse seemed quite emphatic that it was. I was wondering how long tpn bags are stored in the fridge for? There doesn’t seem to be any other insulin cases close to that time so that might give us an indication that the other bags were not contaminated. If one out of however many there were was, it’s another strong indication that it wasn’t planned. If they change the bags every week they could have disposed of the other contaminated bags though.

Some of that would be unit protocol, which I don't know. <modsnip - "I heard" is not an approved source>

<modsnip - insider info without being verified>

There weren't any other insulin cases around the same time. But this baby had been on insulin prior, and his twin brother was too, I'm a little fuzzy at the moment on the timeline between when his brother died and when he had his glucose issues.

I'm not sold it was in the TPN ever.

 

[Charlot123]

- I wonder if anyone checked if searching parents' Facebooks was typical for LL before 2015? It is an odd thing, but odd behavior happens, could be a habit and is not in itself a proof of guilt

- Any other factors that might have changed since 2014, unrelated to Lucy? I was surprised to find out that on some nights, there was only a registrar (a resident) working in the unit. I am positive that he is now an amazing specialist . But to me it cries, essentially, no doctor in the NICU on some shifts.

Downgrading to level 3 is a serious admission of being incapable to bear the burden of work. One wonders how it affected everyone.

Why is no one asking about the budget of the NICU in 2010 as opposed to 2014 or 2015?

 

[Tortoise]

I find this nurse’s testimony compelling. It’s not just about the photo of the cot and how much light was in the room, that’s just to give the jury an idea. It’s about these nurses’ experience of working in these dim rooms night after night and simply knowing that it wasn’t realistic to see a change in complexion from LL’s viewpoint. And so her gut told her something wasn’t right. And, either way, if a nurse DID suspect a baby was pale, they’d surely be straight over to the cot, alarm or no alarm, to check on things. Not pondering from a doorway.

What’s strange about it, is that if LL’s intention was to kill, then it wasn’t in her own interests to flag the baby’s pallor to the designated nurse, especially when that nurse was distracted by another task. Surely you’d stay quiet and minimise the risk of a successful resuscitation.

Makes me wonder whether, if guilty, it really was about assisting with resuscitations rather than actually wanting the patient dead.

JMO.

It's just my opinion but I suspect her motivations for alerting the nurse are a little more nuanced, if she's guilty.

I think LL's actions, if she's guilty, showed consciousness of situations that could escalate and backfire on her, by for instance not reporting two monitors that hadn't alarmed, texting about babies looking sick when she took over, asking who was talking about her babies, establishing a narrative amongst her friends of being bullied which might in reality have been staff questioning highly unusual collapses on her shifts, changing methods and establishing consistency of 'problems' with certain babies, putting false information in the notes etc. If LL walked away as soon as the nurse returned, baby I might have died before nurse discovered there was a problem - leaving open the hole that baby had collapsed while LL was watching her. I think LL, if guilty, had to tightly control the emergence of the problem as happening now, in front of nurse, not before.

JMO

 

[sapphireminds]

It's just my opinion but I suspect her motivations for alerting the nurse are a little more nuanced, if she's guilty.

I think LL's actions, if she's guilty, showed consciousness of situations that could escalate and backfire on her, by for instance not reporting two monitors that hadn't alarmed, texting about babies looking sick when she took over, asking who was talking about her babies, establishing a narrative amongst her friends of being bullied which might in reality have been staff questioning highly unusual collapses on her shifts, changing methods and establishing consistency of 'problems' with certain babies, putting false information in the notes etc. If LL walked away as soon as the nurse returned, baby I might have died before nurse discovered there was a problem - leaving open the hole that baby had collapsed while LL was watching her. I think LL, if guilty, had to tightly control the emergence of the problem as happening now, in front of nurse, not before.

JMO

In that case, it would have been better to leave without saying anything, because she wouldn't be connected in any way. I don't think that holds up.