UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #14

[Dotta]

That line was printed on thecard. Though why you'd pick that for a baby that had died tragically young I don't know.

But your post does IMO apply to some of the words she actually did write:

There are no words to make this time any easier. It was a real priviledge (sic) to care for (Child I) and get to know you as a family - a family who always put (Child I) first and did everything possible for her. She will always be a part of your lives and we will never forget her. Thinking of you today and always - sorry I cannot be there to say goodbye. Lots of love Lucy x'

Pictured: The sympathy card nurse Lucy Letby wrote to grieving parents

She is accused of killing the premature-born infant, known as Child I, in the early hours of October 23, 2015, which the Crown say was the fourth attempt to take her life.

www.dailymail.co.uk

ALL IMO

It all sounds sooo artificial

JMO

 

[esther43]

One article quoted her as saying beautiful , the others have said peaceful. Maybe she said both. It reminds me of the sympathy card she sent that said "your loved one will be remembered with many smiles".

Ah okay. I'd see peaceful as a bit different as it's comforting to another person I guess.
That sympathy card is interesting to revisit. Especially given that the bond between her and the parents seemed more on LL's side than theirs. Though the consultant team were allegedly not definitely thinking LL for sure until after child Q. There was something more going on with the dynamics closer to the ground around the time of child I. The baptism, LL not going to funeral but sending her own card, the rota change and the team letter to management about child I.

 

[ColourPurple]

It all sounds sooo artificial

JMO

Especially when Baby I's mother's comments about LL were that she always seemed reserved and didn't really interact with the parents.

 

[Lincoln34]

I assumed she was actually talking about the babies. But this makes perfect sense: she never talks about the babies’ suffering or their experiences as little people in their own right.

She doesn’t seem to see them as sentient.

I think that’s a key point . Dehumanisation is the basis for a lot of abuse and atrocities .

If there have been baby killings I do wonder if seeing them as a problem rather than humans is at the heart of it. There is a very influential piece by Ethicists Kulse and Singer - they are preference utilitarians- so they come at this from a perspective that maximising the preferences of rational sentient humans is the correct moral choice - and argue that disabled babies have a lesser status. Link below.

More recently similar arguments have been made by Gubliani and Minerva in a very controversial article in the Journal of Medical Ethics. Gubliani and Minerva article


Singer article - Should the baby live? The problem of handicapped infants

 

[squish]

I think that’s a key point . Dehumanisation is the basis for a lot of abuse and atrocities .

If there have been baby killings I do wonder if seeing them as a problem rather than humans is at the heart of it. There is a very influential piece by Ethicists Kulse and Singer - they are preference utilitarians- so they come at this from a perspective that maximising the preferences of rational sentient humans is the correct moral choice - and argue that disabled babies have a lesser status. Link below.

More recently similar arguments have been made by Gubliani and Minerva in a very controversial article in the Journal of Medical Ethics. Gubliani and Minerva article


Singer article - Should the baby live? The problem of handicapped infants

I think if LL is guilty she saw them as objects and a source for her own sick fun. It's notable that she often talks about the parents, their reactions, them thanking her etc, but never mentions anything that gives clues to what the babies might have been feeling or experiencing. If guilty, it was all about the drama of the grieving parents IMHO.

With regards to those articles, I think it's sophistry to justify their appalling desire to kill burdensome disabled people and tiny defenseless babies.

I won't go into details but the first article is are not logically consistent and are flimsily based on how they personally define "personhood" and what they personally believe other people's "aims" to be, and what should even count as "aims". They are unaware of the psychological development of newborns.

Personhood is a social construct and varies massively by culture, and by individual opinion. In no way should it be used to justify if someone or something deserves death. Their arguments in general are so subjective, they could ultimately be a slippery slope to justify killing almost anyone.

The second article is shamelessly talking about disabled people based on the burden they cause to society and their carers.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

I have been away from following the case since they took a break before Christmas; after Christmas, I was back at school, and I haven't had the time in the day to read and keep up. I pop on the thread periodically, but it's hard to find out what the latest is.
Is there anywhere I might be able to find a summary of what has been happening, I'm sorry, I know you are all putting in the time to follow and it seems like a cop-out from me, but this case was what brought me to websleuths.

 

[squish]

I have been away from following the case since they took a break before Christmas; after Christmas, I was back at school, and I haven't had the time in the day to read and keep up. I pop on the thread periodically, but it's hard to find out what the latest is.
Is there anywhere I might be able to find a summary of what has been happening, I'm sorry, I know you are all putting in the time to follow and it seems like a cop-out from me, but this case was what brought me to websleuths.

The prosecution has continued as before. We are now up to Baby P. The quality of reporting has got much, much worse from December onwards and we're not clear if the prosecution has got worse or the reporting has.

The main new things are that 1) Dr Dewi Evans has previously been chastised by a judge in a separate case for apparently not being impartial; 2) After the death of babies O and P (2/3 triplets), a consultant insisted on having LL removed while they investigate; the head nurse refused and said she would take responsibility if anything happened. The collapse of baby Q (who was not related to the triplets) happened the next day, and LL was removed to admin duties a few days later. 3) An unnamed doctor is a witness, and many text messages have been shown which seem to show he was romantically interested in her, but was not reciprocated by LL though she was seemingly happy to be friendly.

Also 4) Lots more text messages showing the familiar patterns of behaviour from LL: talking about baby deaths; pretending to be sad about the deaths for sympathy; no concern or self-doubt over her clinical performance despite all the deaths; boasting about the grieving parents' appreciation of her; no mentions of the suffering of the babies.

 

[katydid23]

I have been away from following the case since they took a break before Christmas; after Christmas, I was back at school, and I haven't had the time in the day to read and keep up. I pop on the thread periodically, but it's hard to find out what the latest is.
Is there anywhere I might be able to find a summary of what has been happening, I'm sorry, I know you are all putting in the time to follow and it seems like a cop-out from me, but this case was what brought me to websleuths.

Welcome back. This is a very hard, overwhelming case to try and follow.

I think the best way to try and catch up quickly is to go to page one of this thread, and click on MEDIA NO DISCUSSION thread at top of the page.

All of the media articles and links are posted in that thread, chronologically. You could go to December and pick up where you left off.

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

The prosecution has continued as before. We are now up to Baby P. The quality of reporting has got much, much worse from December onwards and we're not clear if the prosecution has got worse or the reporting has.

The main new things are that 1) Dr Dewi Evans has previously been chastised by a judge in a separate case for apparently not being impartial; 2) After the death of babies O and P (2/3 triplets), a consultant insisted on having LL removed while they investigate; the head nurse refused and said she would take responsibility if anything happened. The collapse of baby Q (who was not related to the triplets) happened the next day, and LL was removed to admin duties a few days later. 3) An unnamed doctor is a witness, and many text messages have been shown which seem to show he was romantically interested in her, but was not reciprocated by LL though she was seemingly happy to be friendly.

Also 4) Lots more text messages showing the familiar patterns of behaviour from LL: talking about baby deaths; pretending to be sad about the deaths for sympathy; no concern or self-doubt over her clinical performance despite all the deaths; boasting about the grieving parents' appreciation of her; no mentions of the suffering of the babies.

Thank you so much. Fantastic summary.

1) Dr Dewi Evans has previously been chastised by a judge in a separate case for apparently not being impartial

Separate case? As in, not LL case? What happened?

2) After the death of babies O and P (2/3 triplets), a consultant insisted on having LL removed while they investigate; the head nurse refused and said she would take responsibility if anything happened. The collapse of baby Q (who was not related to the triplets) happened the next day, and LL was removed to admin duties a few days later.
This sounds manic, JMO. If guilty, what was happening around this time that could of had her frenzy killing? Do we know the consultant's name, or is it withheld? Same with nurse.

3) An unnamed doctor is a witness, and many text messages have been shown which seem to show he was romantically interested in her, but was not reciprocated by LL though she was seemingly happy to be friendly.

I was looking at one of the links up thread while hoping for a summary.
Chester Standard-LL faints after a blood test
Just from this one article, I could tell he was a love interest. JMO. He is flirting with her, and she is TRYING to flirt back.
JMO. IMO. She sounds like she is frustrated with her mothers 'bubble wrapping' for lack of a better word to come to me.
Could she mothers be the target?

4) Lots more text messages showing the familiar patterns of behaviour from LL: talking about baby deaths; pretending to be sad about the deaths for sympathy; no concern or self-doubt over her clinical performance despite all the deaths; boasting about the grieving parents' appreciation of her; no mentions of the suffering of the babies.

I did not expect any less

Once again, thank you

 

[Observant-ADHD-ENFP-BSc]

Welcome back. This is a very hard, overwhelming case to try and follow.

I think the best way to try and catch up quickly is to go to page one of this thread, and click on MEDIA NO DISCUSSION thread at top of the page.

All of the media articles and links are posted in that thread, chronologically. You could go to December and pick up where you left off.

Thank you

 

[sceawian]

It's referenced on the prosecution's opening speech that colleagues names were found on post it notes. Not sure if these or other notes or refer to Tom and matt

Were the two males next to "mum + dad" specifically referred to as family? Any possibility one of those names is Doc Choc...?

Snipped:

It was a real priviledge (sic) to care for (Child I) and get to know you as a family - a family who always put (Child I) first and did everything possible for her.

Hmm... I've always wondered, if she's guilty, if she may have chosen victims based on their parents rather than the patients themselves, hence why so many multiples were harmed.

Thinking of you today and always - sorry I cannot be there to say goodbye. Lots of love Lucy x'

This seems more ominous in hindsight; we know now this sentiment was true in multiple cases, due to her facebook searches, even remembering the anniversaries of their deaths etc.

 

[Ruby12345]

Were the two males next to "mum + dad" specifically referred to as family? Any possibility one of those names is Doc Choc...?

The two males posted a message in the local paper for her 21st birthday so years before she met doc choc.

Thinking maybe Uncles or godfathers since she says in the latest text messages she's an only child.

 

[squish]

So a few weeks ago Lucy dramatically wept and flounced in the courtroom at the sight of a certain unnamed male witness; do we know for certain this was Dr. Choc? This was after she'd been described as acting emotionless throughout her trial, with the only previous notable reaction when she turned to look at the crying parent of an (alleged) victim.

We know that LL has the ability to turn on the waterworks and cry realistically when necessary. The parents of babies O and P believed her crying and said she seemed even more upset than they were. Even if innocent, this is odd and unprofessional behaviour as she'd only known the babies a couple of days, and quite frankly would have been used to baby deaths by then anyway.

So I suspect, that if memory serves and she dramatically sobbed in court at seeing Dr. Choc, that she was in fact trying to manipulate him, and get sympathy from him, knowing that he had really fancied her at one point?

 

[JosieJo]

Thank you

The No Discussion thread by @Tortoise is a wealth of info ..or the daily mail weekly podcasts are a good way to catch up also

 

[JosieJo]

So a few weeks ago Lucy dramatically wept and flounced in the courtroom at the sight of a certain unnamed male witness; do we know for certain this was Dr. Choc? This was after she'd been described as acting emotionless throughout her trial, with the only previous notable reaction when she turned to look at the crying parent of an (alleged) victim.

We know that LL has the ability to turn on the waterworks and cry realistically when necessary. The parents of babies O and P believed her crying and said she seemed even more upset than they were. Even if innocent, this is odd and unprofessional behaviour as she'd only known the babies a couple of days, and quite frankly would have been used to baby deaths by then anyway.

So I suspect, that if memory serves and she dramatically sobbed in court at seeing Dr. Choc, that she was in fact trying to manipulate him, and get sympathy from him, knowing that he had really fancied her at one point?

I did have to wonder if this was more about causing a disturbance to ensure he was aware.
If she had sat quietly and cried he would have been non the wiser ...jmo

 

[LorriB]

What do those of you claiming her texts show no emotion towards the babies expect to see?

 

[LorriB]

So a few weeks ago Lucy dramatically wept and flounced in the courtroom at the sight of a certain unnamed male witness; do we know for certain this was Dr. Choc? This was after she'd been described as acting emotionless throughout her trial, with the only previous notable reaction when she turned to look at the crying parent of an (alleged) victim.

Where was she described as acting emotionless throughout the trial so far?

 

[katydid23]

What do those of you claiming her texts show no emotion towards the babies expect to see?

I guess maybe she might have talked more about the pain and difficulties the babies themselves were experiencing. Mostly she spoke about how she felt. Kind of made it about her?

I guess I am comparing her to my daughter's best friend----who works with dogs who are getting chemo treatments. She loses some of the sweet dogs and it is emotionally difficult for her, losing them and dealing with the grieving owners.

But when she does talk about it, she talks about how difficult it is for her to see the dogs in pain and stressed out and being sick. It really troubles her at times, even though it is often a successful process.

So it did seem odd to me that LL never seemed as focused on the babies and used words like rubbish, and was not as sympathetic sounding at times.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Where was she described as acting emotionless throughout the trial so far?

I can't recall reading that at all. I'm sure it would never be reported as it could only amount to opinion and the press can only report the actual factual occurrences from a court. Giving an opinion would definitely be sub-judice.

 

[katydid23]

dbm