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

[ColourPurple]

This article seems to be saying that the nurse had asked LL to "observe" the baby while she went to help a colleague for 15 minutes

The court also heard how Ms Letby had been asked to observe Child I before she collapsed in the early hours of 13 October 2015 as her designated nurse Ashleigh Hudson was required to help a colleague carry out a 15-minute procedure in a different nursery.

Ms Hudson said Child I was in a "good clinical condition" when she left the nursery and there had been discussions regarding her discharge from the hospital in the coming weeks.
She said she returned to the baby about 20 minutes later and Ms Letby "was standing in the doorway and we were talking"...

...Ms Hudson was asked about a recreation of the nursery at the time of the collapse, which was staged as part of the criminal investigation. It showed the area as Ms Hudson recalled it at the time.

It was put to her that it would have been impossible to recall the exact lighting on the day in question.

She said she "couldn't claim for it to be precise, but it has been an image that has been imprinted on my brain for quite some time".

Lucy Letby: Murder-accused nurse cried over baby collapses, court told

Lucy Letby said it felt like babies often became seriously ill on her shifts, a doctor tells a jury.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Sweeper2000]

I really admire your dedication and tenacity
It means we have balanced discussion.

Greetings from the other side of the fence

Thank you dotta, that’s nice to hear. Witam, jestes kochany.

 

[JosieJo]

do you think mr Myers should then?

It's not really my call to suggest what Mr Myers should or should not put forward..he will be putting forward what he can ...and not putting forward impossible or ridiculous alternatives as it would be counter productive I would think
Obviously we are not hearing everything ..but with that in mind the jury can only make their decision based on evidence presented by the prosecution or defence team .. they cannot use alternative possibilities from their own imagination

 

[ColourPurple]

Have they mentioned anywhere why Baby I's monitor alarm didn't go off? or was she not deemed ill enough to be on a monitor?

 

[Sweeper2000]

The jury will make their own minds up and reach their own conclusions. IMO.

 

[Dotta]

The jury will make their own minds up and reach their own conclusions. IMO.

We can also vote in the Jury Room on WS.

But I think it can only be done during waiting for Jury's verdict.

JMO

 

[squish]

This article seems to be saying that the nurse had asked LL to "observe" the baby while she went to help a colleague for 15 minutes

The court also heard how Ms Letby had been asked to observe Child I before she collapsed in the early hours of 13 October 2015 as her designated nurse Ashleigh Hudson was required to help a colleague carry out a 15-minute procedure in a different nursery.

Ms Hudson said Child I was in a "good clinical condition" when she left the nursery and there had been discussions regarding her discharge from the hospital in the coming weeks.
She said she returned to the baby about 20 minutes later and Ms Letby "was standing in the doorway and we were talking"...

...Ms Hudson was asked about a recreation of the nursery at the time of the collapse, which was staged as part of the criminal investigation. It showed the area as Ms Hudson recalled it at the time.

It was put to her that it would have been impossible to recall the exact lighting on the day in question.

She said she "couldn't claim for it to be precise, but it has been an image that has been imprinted on my brain for quite some time".

Lucy Letby: Murder-accused nurse cried over baby collapses, court told

Lucy Letby said it felt like babies often became seriously ill on her shifts, a doctor tells a jury.

www.bbc.co.uk

Letby sounds very self-obsessed in the crying conversation about babies dying on her shift. “Why does it always happen to me?” “my babies” etc.

Nothing happened to Letby. It happened to the babies. And they weren’t her babies.

 

[ColourPurple]

Letby sounds very self-obsessed in the crying conversation about babies dying on her shift. “Why does it always happen to me?” “my babies” etc.

Nothing happened to Letby. It happened to the babies. And they weren’t her babies.

I read the article just after reading a post from somebody saying LL was very "Me, myself and I" (which I guess could come from being an only child) But yes I came away with a few thoughts from that article:

If LL herself was talking about always being there at the collapses then it must've become really obvious and therefore not strange that doctors were noticing too, and that she felt the need to address it. I wonder if the bitchy comments had been about this too?

As this was on a day shift, was this at the point where they moved her to days because of the increase in collapses while she was on night shift? In which case she would also be aware that people were noticing the link ... yet, if guilty also couldn't stop herself from doing it

And if guilty, her way of addressing it, was to make out it was something that was happening TO her rather than being caused BY her.

 

[Dotta]

I read the article just after reading a post from somebody saying LL was very "Me, myself and I" (which I guess could come from being an only child) But yes I came away with a few thoughts from that article:

If LL herself was talking about always being there at the collapses then it must've become really obvious and therefore not strange that doctors were noticing too, and that she felt the need to address it. I wonder if the bitchy comments had been about this too?

As this was on a day shift, was this at the point where they moved her to days because of the increase in collapses while she was on night shift? In which case she would also be aware that people were noticing the link ... yet, if guilty also couldn't stop herself from doing it

And if guilty, her way of addressing it, was to make out it was something that was happening TO her rather than being caused BY her.

I agree.
Also, she might have "mourned" her (alleged) compulsions she couldn't control.

As if she knew it was obvious for those around her, but she (allegedly) knew no way how to stop herself.

JMO

 

[ColourPurple]

I agree.
Also, she might have "mourned" her (alleged) compulsions she couldn't control.

As if she knew it was obvious for those around her, but she (allegedly) knew no way how to stop herself.

JMO

If guilty, it really does look like she couldn't stop herself from doing it, and instead of stopping completely she just set up other nurses so it would be their designated babies who collapsed, but she could still be there to witness it and get involved. I'm reminded of the words she said in a text about one of the babies who had been moved to another room and designated nurse... that she was "still involved" but "without the responsibility."

imo

 

[Dotta]

If guilty, it really does look like she couldn't stop herself from doing it, and instead of stopping completely she just set up other nurse's so it would be their designated babies who collapsed, but she could still be there to witness it and get involved. I'm reminded of the words she said in a text about one of the babies who had been moved to another room and designated nurse... that she was "still involved" but "without the responsibility."

Her hysterical outburst that she "HAD TO return to Room 1" seems to me the example of a compulsion.
But it is surely a case for a psychiatrist to ponder upon.

Of course, if she is guilty...

JMO

 

[Sundial]

This article seems to be saying that the nurse had asked LL to "observe" the baby while she went to help a colleague for 15 minutes

The court also heard how Ms Letby had been asked to observe Child I before she collapsed in the early hours of 13 October 2015 as her designated nurse Ashleigh Hudson was required to help a colleague carry out a 15-minute procedure in a different nursery.

Ms Hudson said Child I was in a "good clinical condition" when she left the nursery and there had been discussions regarding her discharge from the hospital in the coming weeks.
She said she returned to the baby about 20 minutes later and Ms Letby "was standing in the doorway and we were talking"...

...Ms Hudson was asked about a recreation of the nursery at the time of the collapse, which was staged as part of the criminal investigation. It showed the area as Ms Hudson recalled it at the time.

It was put to her that it would have been impossible to recall the exact lighting on the day in question.

She said she "couldn't claim for it to be precise, but it has been an image that has been imprinted on my brain for quite some time".

Lucy Letby: Murder-accused nurse cried over baby collapses, court told

Lucy Letby said it felt like babies often became seriously ill on her shifts, a doctor tells a jury.

www.bbc.co.uk

I wonder (if guilty) LL was expecting her colleague to be longer away from child I than what she actually was.

 

[ColourPurple]

Her hysterical outburst that she "HAD TO return to Room 1" seems to me the example of a compulsion.
But it is surely a case for a psychiatrist to ponder upon.

Of course, if she is guilty...

JMO

Funnily enough , I was just reading this old article about that need to be in room 1 where Baby C then died !

"Lucy Letby texted a colleague saying she wanted to be in the room with Baby C - for her own wellbeing - before she murdered the newborn, the court heard today.

She was the only person in the room when Child C suddenly and unexpectedly collapsed, but was meant to be caring for a different child elsewhere.

An alarm went off an she was found next to the premature child's cot. Letby told the nurse who ran in: 'He's going', the court heard.

Prosecutor Nick Johnson KC told the court: 'She texted an off duty colleague saying that she, Lucy Letby, wanted to be in room number one, saying it would be cathartic for her, it would help her wellbeing, to see a living baby in the space previously occupied by a dead baby - Child A - a baby who had died a few days earlier.

'But the shift leader had put her in room three. So she didn't like it.'

Senior medics failed to resuscitate Baby C and he was pronounced dead at 5.58am on June 14."

Lucy Letby 'killed premature baby by injecting air into his stomach'

Chester nurse Lucy Letby was found next to the cot of Baby C, who was just five days old and weighed 2lbs, when his monitor alarm went off and she told the colleague who rushed in: 'He's going, he's going'.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Tortoise]

Have they mentioned anywhere why Baby I's monitor alarm didn't go off? or was she not deemed ill enough to be on a monitor?

Lucy Letby made a note at the end of her shift at 8.10am: '[Child I] noted to be pale in cot by myself at 03:20hrs … apnoea alarm in situ and had not sounded. On examination [Child I] centrally white, minimal shallow breaths followed by gasping observed.'

Medical expert Dr Dewi Evans said he believed the apnoea monitor might have been switched off on October 13 for child I

Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders

 

[Dotta]

If guilty, that she was "still involved" but "without the responsibility."

imo

Oh, there was certainly (alleged) method in all this madness

JMO

 

[ColourPurple]

OOh this is interesting from the link Tortoise posted. Explaining how the shifts and handovers worked:

• Nurses worked on the children's ward as well as the neonatal unit, but "it was the general rule" they did not mix on a shift.
• A day shift would begin at 7.30am and the night shift would end at 8am, leaving a 30-minute handover period.
• A general briefing would occur during that time, before patient-specific handovers.
• There were two types of day shift - a short day and a long day. A short day would end in the afternoon, the long day shift would end at 8pm.
• When babies are handed over from one shift to the next, the system was that a sheet was produced, listing all the babies in the unit at the time and their corresponding designated nurses.

• The hospital has - and had - band 6 nurses, band 5 nurses - ones who had done special training and ones who had not - and band 4 nurses (nursery nurses).
• Letby had done her special training, caring for intensive care unit babies, which permitted her to work in the neonatal unit.

• On a specific shift, a senior nurse would be designated as a shift leader, responsible for assigning specific nurses to specific babies.
• They would be responsible for the administration of medicine.
• The neonatal unit had four rooms, split into the ICU (intensive care unit), the HDU (high dependency unit) and special care babies rooms.
• "With one or two exceptions", the cases in this trial, Mr Johnson explains, were dealt with in the ICU or HDU

• Doctors at the hospital would work different shifts from the nurses, and a shift would cover the children's ward and the neonatal unit.
• Paediatric consultants would be on duty from 9am-5pm, while at night there would be a paediatric consultant on call within 10 minutes of the department.
• Registrars would provide senior medical cover overnight.

Recap: Prosecution opens trial of Lucy Letby accused of Countess of Chester Hospital baby murders

THE trial of former Countess of Chester Hospital nurse Lucy Letby, who is accused of multiple baby murders, is due to finalise its jury and hear…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[Anxala]

I mean more in court. But it's unlikely we are going to get any of this information, until after the case has finished or the defence feel they can benefit from any character witness

I really hope the defence has and does bring in character witnesses that will paint a 3d pic of LL as opposed to the very 1d one we've, imo, been presented with so far. If ever a defendant needing padding out, this one does. We still know nothing real about her, it's all second/third hand information that's coming from places that really can't be relied upon to be either accurate or objective.

Without wanting to sound like a broken record, LL is still as remote to me as a person as she was at the beginning of this trial. I really want to know her.

 

[katydid23]

Do we know which room this is?

if the nurse reentered the room and was doing the task on the table to the right of the picture with her back turned on the cot and didn’t check the baby she would not have necessarily seen the pallor. If the door is to the left of where that picture was taken it would seem anyone standing there would have a clearer line of sight compared to anyone standing and looking at the table.

if you think about it, apparent inaction to a baby needing care is the opposite to pointing out a baby that could need care especially when the act is potentially self incriminating and against a supposed desire to kill or harm.

jmo though.

"if you think about it, apparent inaction to a baby needing care is the opposite to pointing out a baby that could need care especially when the act is potentially self incriminating and against a supposed desire to kill or harm."

But then if you think further, it could mean that someone wanted another nurse to be the one that called in the crash cart, instead of calling it in herself. Just for deflection.

It would not be 'against' a supposed desire to kill or harm, if she had already, allegedly, taken that harmful action against the child. Now she can savour that time and watch all the chaos ensue. JMO

 

[Blondiexoxo]

I think it’s quite far fetched that the defence are going with child I’s ‘extreme immaturity’ as the reason for her death imo. Child I was born in August and passed away late October, so by this point her corrected age would have been around full term. Sounds like the defence want jurors to picture child I as a tiny, vulnerable, premature baby, whereas at the time of her death she would have likely been roughly the size of an average new born.

If guilty, I think this charge in particular would show that the victims were certainly targeted for a reason. If a person were just targeting nicu babies at random, surely they’d go for the smaller, more premature and poorly ones. If Child I was indeed targeted repeatedly with attempts on her life for around a month, until eventually being murdered, this would show an obsession with harming this particular baby IMO. Like some sort of mission that one feels just ‘has’ to be completed.

I wonder if baby I or her parents had something in common with other parents in this case… was she an IVF baby? Were her parents considered older or younger? I just have this niggling feeling that, if guilty, these babies were ‘chosen’ for some reason, maybe dislike towards the parents, jealousy, belief that child I was just ‘not meant to be’. I understand identities in this case are protected so we are not likely to learn much about the families of the victims, however, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a common denominator when they are all compared. All MOO of course.

 

[Dotta]

I think it’s quite far fetched that the defence are going with child I’s ‘extreme immaturity’ as the reason for her death imo. Child I was born in August and passed away late October, so by this point her corrected age would have been around full term. Sounds like the defence want jurors to picture child I as a tiny, vulnerable, premature baby, whereas at the time of her death she would have likely been roughly the size of an average new born.

If guilty, I think this charge in particular would show that the victims were certainly targeted for a reason. If a person were just targeting nicu babies at random, surely they’d go for the smaller, more premature and poorly ones. If Child I was indeed targeted repeatedly with attempts on her life for around a month, until eventually being murdered, this would show an obsession with harming this particular baby IMO. Like some sort of mission that one feels just ‘has’ to be completed.

I wonder if baby I or her parents had something in common with other parents in this case… was she an IVF baby? Were her parents considered older or younger? I just have this niggling feeling that, if guilty, these babies were ‘chosen’ for some reason, maybe dislike towards the parents, jealousy, belief that child I was just ‘not meant to be’. I understand identities in this case are protected so we are not likely to learn much about the families of the victims, however, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a common denominator when they are all compared. All MOO of course.

It is like a bully who chooses particular victims to intimidate and harm.
JMO