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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: "It was happening right under his nose"

Well, we don't actually know that he was aware of the far more serious concerns being raised by other doctors/consultants to management - the same management that reportedly spent the next 11 months trying to reinstate her! [bolding mine] It could be that at that moment, Dr. Choc was defending a colleague/possible love interest from what he believed was spurious gossip about being possible negligence. LL was seen (AFAIAA) by much of the few fellow staff and management as hard working and very capable. So why wouldn't he?

So, given that the management knew about the more serious concerns put forward by several doctors and consultants, and reacted in the way they did they didn't - why cast aspersions on Dr. Choc, who for all we know, didn't know about the aforementioned?

IMO.
I'm sure he didn't know anything. People are casting unwarranted aspertions on this guy, I think.

From the evidence, it was only a group of consultants who had concerns about her and he wasn't a consultant. Management wouldn't have been saying anything so there is no evidence that he'd be "in the loop" to hear anything.
 
Something that struck me was their conversations were on Facebook messenger..considering how much they messaged I'm suprised they didn't seem to have each others phone numbers ?
It was WhatsApp, I thought?
 
To add to this, we heard early on in the trial from another consultant who was also junior at the time, who said he didn’t realise how out of the ordinary the collapses were until he experienced working in a different hospital, then he suddenly realised how abnormal it had been at COCH.

Dr Choc could be suffering the same delusion, saying “it’s not you, it’s the babies” because he knew no better at that moment.

JMO. I do believe his judgement was probably clouded by his feelings for LL to an extent, but I don’t think he was a complete fool.

Edit: just read that he’d worked “everywhere in the region”, so most of what I’ve written here is probably nonsense!

2nd Edit: Aaaannd I also missed he has actual older children. I am more confused as ever about this doctor. No wonder he’s staying anonymous..
He's not anonymous - the press just can't publish his name.

I too had missed the part about his kids. Not surprised he's older, though. In fact, I was kind of expecting it.
 
I'm sure he didn't know anything. People are casting unwarranted aspertions on this guy, I think.

From the evidence, it was only a group of consultants who had concerns about her and he wasn't a consultant. Management wouldn't have been saying anything so there is no evidence that he'd be "in the loop" to hear anything.
Consultants are senior doctors, I believe.

These doctors seemed very concerned that this one nurse might have been harming babies. So concerned that they asked management to take her off the unit. They were denied.

If you were a consultant, and management had denied your request, and you believed babies were dying because of a nurse who was still working with the babies, would you ask the other doctors to keep an eye on her when they were on the floor together? These attending doctors are the ones who spend the most time on the unit.

I know I would share that info. How could I keep that kind of dangerous information to myself if I thought babies were truly being attacked?
 
Maybe some of our NNU people might chime in, but would Letby be privy to this information? Eg in child Q’s case the mother had surgery for the ectopic at 9 weeks, which would likely have been done under general anaesthetic. Would this sort of information be contained within Child Q’s notes? Or would it be on the mother’s records only?

i do big time. I’m looking at the non sensical nature of that particular sentence. If it doesn’t make sense it must have a root, the root for it IMO is a thought that relates to a feeling no matter how reoccurring or transient (feelings don’t often relate to fact). The feeling in this context is one of low self esteem and the thought is “not good enough“ explains the heading of the note and that Sentence.

I didn’t actually ever think judging by the rest of the staffs coms that the events under question were ever actually viewed as completely abnormal at the time, was always in retrospect that they were deemed unusual. So if ll didn’t do anything why would she question her practice? I also think that unfortunately on a NNU deaths are expected hence why LL had the coping mechanism of “getting straight back in”, a coping mechanism built on experience.

genuinely i think if she had of had her back up because she had done something I would have expected these scanning questions around the time of the alleged incidents but we didn’t see that. Only now, so why now? She may well have picked up on a change of attitudes towards her but how? There was no questions after the dr j and baby k event, no scanning questions on the move to day shifts, so why now?
The only thing I would say about LL throwing herself back in (and about it being a coping mechanism as an established nurse) is that it shouldn't be normal for LL to have gathered this much experience of neonatal death at the age of 25.
If you did a survey of level 2 units and you asked all nurses of that age how many babies had died in their care, The answer would range between 0-1 with zero being far, far more likely. I think the change attitude may have been prompted between her and Dr Gibbs.
I've been up and down on the note. At times seeing it as completely obvious confession. It's been argued that it was a brain dumping exercise. I looked this up and turns out it is a genuine CBT approach. If this was true then I'm sure we will hear about this when we hear the police interview transcribed.
 
How many Prosecutors are there?
- Nick J.
- Simon D.
- Philip A.

Anybody else?

Quite a numerous Team
Is it normal to have a team of prosecutors? The defence barrister seems to fly solo.
 
Just for emphasis. Think the context gives the idea that the root of that being addressed/consoled is perceived to be purely in the mind of the person being addressed.

im actually really blooming curious about this doc choc. Its only a little while that he has been at coch, yet it seems these two are actually quite deep which to me is standout. I might have expected so at this level to have developed over more time but I will say it seems he is much more involved than her. I can’t say I think her disposition has actually changed much since the start whereas he seems very full on yet I’m also not really seeing her seeing him as a potential partner. She seems formal he seems very informal indeed. However I don’t know if this simply is some quite young and inexperienced individuals being that along with LL not quite being on the atypically social page.

if I were to gauge this relationship without the context I might say this is one person burning the candle at both ends and the other simply not getting his perspective.
Formal is a good way to describe how LL was towards this Dr when he tries to ramp things up between them. Maybe that's what he liked about her, he considered her a bit of a challenge.
Yet she seems to fluctuate between 'all business' and very needy of sympathy and information.
 
Re: "It was happening right under his nose"

Well, we don't actually know that he was aware of the far more serious concerns being raised by other doctors/consultants to management - the same management that reportedly spent the next 11 months trying to reinstate her! [bolding mine] It could be that at that moment, Dr. Choc was defending a colleague/possible love interest from what he believed was spurious gossip about being possible negligence. LL was seen (AFAIAA) by much of the few fellow staff and management as hard working and very capable. So why wouldn't he?

So, given that the management knew about the more serious concerns put forward by several doctors and consultants, and reacted in the way they did they didn't - why cast aspersions on Dr. Choc, who for all we know, didn't know about the aforementioned?

IMO.
When considering how the case evolved and why there were conflicting beliefs between nursing management and doctor management it's important to consider the two different structures and how they interact with the top tier.
It's clear imo that KE was used as a 'buffer' to keep the drs under control. They were on the process of overturning the medical director and CEO.
Usually, the medical director would have direct relationships with department leads. I. E doctor breary.
It does seem to be the case, that these consultants were expected to take responsibility for these deaths and to do so quietly.
If they didn't take responsibility and it came out that there was a serial killer on the loose then this would seriously damage the career of the medical director, in particular given that concerns were first raised around the time of child A.
To reinstate LL would equate to avoiding an abundance of negligence claims, that would bring in to question whether decision making power was in the right hands.
In relation to nursing management supporting the idea of the return of LL there are many things that need to be taken into account. Firstly is very hard for anyone to get their heads around the idea that a nursing colleague would be a serial killer. Secondly, whilst good care is assumed to be the key motivator for the nursing profession, I think it's naive to believe that among nursing management, allegiances with those 'higher up' are characterised purely by this notion.
Promotional opportunity could have been an unconscious motivation for attempting to reinstate LL. IMO
 
I'm sure he didn't know anything. People are casting unwarranted aspertions on this guy, I think.

From the evidence, it was only a group of consultants who had concerns about her and he wasn't a consultant. Management wouldn't have been saying anything so there is no evidence that he'd be "in the loop" to hear anything.
I think they alerted jr docs to the problem but unlikely confirmed the suspect as it would damage the investigation, which seemed to be going on since before child I.
 
It was WhatsApp, I thought?

No it has been reported as Facebook messenger throughout..since he first was mentioned...and even still Facebook yesterday

"On Friday, March 31, the court was read a series of Facebook messages on the evening of June 25 between Letby and a registrar, who cannot be named for legal reasons."

I find this surprising considering how long they had been messaging ..it does speak of a yet budding relationship

 
JMO but .. on average registra's are between 27 and 40s if not promoted to consultant

During his training and part of his specialisation into paediatrics would involve him working in various neonatal units ...the doctors often move around every 6 months in early qualified years

He mentioned his kids were now much too old for LL to look after ..but bearing in mind she cares for neonates they may not necessarily mean teenagers..unless I've missed that ?

I've always envisaged him older than her ..but jmo I wouldn't say much more than 10 years or less
 
Last edited:
lol no, he definitely fancied her. Men don't get that eager just by feeling fatherly to some random young nurse.
I know; I was just thinking that if he was married, it would be inappropriate to flirt with her, but he could be divorced, as others have said.
 
The only thing I would say about LL throwing herself back in (and about it being a coping mechanism as an established nurse) is that it shouldn't be normal for LL to have gathered this much experience of neonatal death at the age of 25.
If you did a survey of level 2 units and you asked all nurses of that age how many babies had died in their care, The answer would range between 0-1 with zero being far, far more likely. I think the change attitude may have been prompted between her and Dr Gibbs.
I've been up and down on the note. At times seeing it as completely obvious confession. It's been argued that it was a brain dumping exercise. I looked this up and turns out it is a genuine CBT approach. If this was true then I'm sure we will hear about this when we hear the police interview transcribed.

I agree about her experience of neonatal deaths. In fact, IMO this would be staggering even for a much more experienced nurse. And the very idea of coming back to work the day after Baby P died, having lost his brother the previous day, would be too much for most people I think.
 
JMO but .. on average registra's are between 27 and 40s if not promoted to consultant...He mentioned his kids were now much too old for LL to look after ..but bearing in mind she cares for neonates they may not necessarily mean teenagers..unless I've missed that ?
Plus he described them as being "too big" rather than "too old" so may just have meant they're not the size of the tiny preemies and newborns that LL is used to looking after. So could be anything from toddler upwards really.
 


He’s not leaving here alive, is he? Baby P —ep 25

In this episode Caroline and Liz examine what the prosecution say happened to Baby P, the second of two identical triplets allegedly murdered by Lucy Letby at the end of June 2016. The nurse is accused of killing him 23 hours after his brother, by injecting air into his feeding tube and tummy.

PART 3:
=======================


Soon afterwards the court heard the triplets parents went off to Liverpool Women’s Hospital with their remaining son

And Lucy Letby stayed late for the 2nd night running to write up her notes and around the same time she resumed her FaceBook convos with Dr A


Yes and before we outline these messages which were shown to the jury, we should explain that Lucy Letby pricked herself with the needle at some point during the failed resuscitation and in line with hospital protocol went to a ER to get checked out and to have some blood tests…


But while she was there, she fainted , the messages between her and Dr A begin at about 9:20 that evening while she’s still at the hospital.

DR: Have you been seen yet?

L: Yes, just got back. I made a fool of myself while there

DR: I asked them to be quick for you how did you make a fool of yourself?

L: Did you really? They said someone had asked for me to be seen ASAP and they knew what happened today
Everyone talking about it Whilst I was there I fainted

Dr: I asked them to see you quickly as a favour. I didn’t give any details about today
Maybe someone from the unit also called
Oh, are you ok now?

L; Bit shaky but okay. Writing my notes, they were reluctant to let me go as on my ow


Dr: You could have bleeped me. I am almost a responsible adult.

L: I did think about it but thought you would be in recess [?] [recess or resus?]
I’m okay anyway

Dr: Do you need a lift home?

L: No, I will be okay, thanks, not finished yet anyway

Dr: I can wait, it’s no problem

L: Can you give me 10 mins?

Dr: OK

L: I’m done

Dr: just outside the front door

L: two secs



So Dr A dropped Lucy home just after 10 pm but around an hour and 20 minutes later they resume their conversation via Facebook which continues until 1 in the morning:


L: thanks for the lift and for talking to A and E

Dr: I couldn’t have you walking back in the dark after a rubbish day, mini needle stick and an Annie faint

L: thank you, appreciated

DR: did you talk to Belinda about allocation for tomorrow ?

L: yes , she’s going to try and give me a lighter workload but said we’ll have to see how it goes overnight with a 30 weaker and twins delivering overnight, only 5 of us on too

Dr: what are you doing? I can’t concentrate on anything [sad face emoji]

L: wanting to [cry emoji]

Dr: did in the car. Must have looked a right mess when I got in

L: I keep thinking of both of them in the cart together, so peaceful yet beyond words how awful it is

Dr: I know, Dad was pushing them back to you he stopped and thanked me [crying emoji]
I gave him a hug. It seemed the only thing to do [crying emoji]

L: so sad ,the family all thanked me when I took baby P in dressed, and I know age doesn’t make it any easier/harder, but such a lot to go through at a young age

Dr: I don’t know how it would be possible to get over losing a child. Let alone two


L: [crying emoji]. Think my head may explode


So Lucy Letby went to bed but the court heard that unbeknown to her, some of the consultants on the unit were so suspicious they decided she must be removed from work until a proper investigation could be carried out

We covered a lot of this in our bonus episode -episode 24 on Friday—but in a nutshell Baby P’s death prompted the head of the neonatal unit, Dr Steven Breary, to phone the hospital executive on duty and demand Lucy Letby be removed from work immediately


But his request was refused and Lucy returned to work the following day which is when she allegedly harmed the final baby in this case—Baby Q, who we’ll hear more about in a couple of weeks time

Lucy Letby denies murdering or harming any babies—so what did her KC , Ben Meyers, say about what happened to Baby P?


So like in the case of his brother, Mr Meyers said Baby P had suboptimal or poor care at the Countess.


He suggested his deterioration the night before he died was due to too much milk being given to him by nurse Alice, and that the air she removed from his tummy was due to some new problem going on in his gut. Nurse Alice admitted this was a possibility but she also said the air could have been there all along and only aspirated in the early hours because the tip of the feeding tube in his stomach had moved.


The court also heard that blood tests later showed no evidence that he had an infection.


Mr Meyers said Baby P’s death could have been complications related to his punctured lung

He suggested the puncture was caused by vigorous resuscitation attempts by the doctors,

Or because they set the air pressures too high when they attached him to the ventilator, helping him to breathe.


Dr Breary admitted that this was possible but said it was highly unlikely that the punctured lung cause by Baby P’s collapse because once it was spotted it was quickly resolved more than three and a half hours before his death.

Mr Meyers also pointed out to Dr Evans ,the prosecution’s expert witness, that his 1st report on Baby P actually blamed the punctured lung for his death. The barrister accused Dr Evans of inventing an extra dollop of air being administered to Baby P on the morning of June 24th, to take his theory over the line and support the allegation of murder against Lucy Letby.

Dr Evans denied this—but he admitted that after listening to the evidence from Doctors who treated Baby P that he’d changed his mind about what caused his collapse.


Mr Meyers also pointed out that there had been a mistake in the amount of adrenaline given to Baby P who was accidentally give double the intended dose in his drip, over the course of the afternoon. He suggested the drug could have made his condition worse.


But Dr Rackham told the jury that Baby P suffered no apparent side affects from the increased dosage, as did Dr Sandi Bowen, the other prosecution’s expert.



She said neither his blood pressure or heart rate went up dramatically, as would be expected if he had too much and both

Dr Bowen and Dr Evans agreed that air had been injected into Baby P’s tummy before his death.

They told jurors it squashed his lungs and splinted his diaphragm which compromised his breathing and caused his collapse.
 
I'm sure he didn't know anything. People are casting unwarranted aspertions on this guy, I think.

From the evidence, it was only a group of consultants who had concerns about her and he wasn't a consultant. Management wouldn't have been saying anything so there is no evidence that he'd be "in the loop" to hear anything.

By the time LL is texting him after Baby Q, it does sound like he was aware that the consultants had linked her to the increase in deaths as he says:

'You'll know that the coch (Countess of Chester Hospital) nicu mortality rate is a bit higher than the network average. It makes people (consultants) look at trends and patterns. That may have been why Dr G came to ask."

Plus the female doctor (that he went to the tea room with) did say that before Baby P, there were rumours amongst junior doctors as well as consultants about LL, but not that she was causing deliberate harm.

But unless the female doctor then told him about her concerns about LL being a danger, then it's possible he had just heard the rumours about LL but hadn't heard anything about her allegedly causing deliberate harm.


Some of the female doctor's exchange with Myers:

The consultant said: “Even though I didn’t beg, in my heart and mind I just wanted him to leave because that’s the only way he was going to live.”

Ben Myers KC, defending, asked her: “Is that because you thought the Countess of Chester’s neonatal unit was unable to cope or are you suggesting that Lucy Letby poses such a danger to small babies?”

The doctor replied: “It definitely was not because the Countess of Chester was not able to cope with a baby like (the surviving triplet). They were completely normal triplets who were expected to run a healthy course.

“I was extremely worried. I couldn’t understand what had gone on in the last two days. In my mind what had gone on was not normal.

“At that point in time I just wanted (the surviving triplet) to be in a safe place.”

Mr Myers asked: “Because of the danger posed by nurse Letby?”

“Yes,” she said...

...Mr Myers asked: “Did you hear gossip, comment, finger-pointing about Lucy Letby?”

She replied: “Yes, but vaguely. Nothing concrete implicating deaths and increasing mortality rates.”

Mr Myers said: “Who were making these comments?”


The doctor said: “Other junior doctors, some consultant colleagues. But again not in a way that would make you think anything untoward in the way of harm being done was going on.”



 
I think they alerted jr docs to the problem but unlikely confirmed the suspect as it would damage the investigation, which seemed to be going on since before child I.


By the day of Baby P's death the female doc who I think was a junior doctor at the time, confirmed there were rumours about LL amongst "other junior doctors" as well as consultants but not of her doing deliberate harm.

Myers asked: “Did you hear gossip, comment, finger-pointing about Lucy Letby?”

She replied: “Yes, but vaguely. Nothing concrete implicating deaths and increasing mortality rates.”

Mr Myers said: “Who were making these comments?”


The doctor said: “Other junior doctors, some consultant colleagues. But again not in a way that would make you think anything untoward in the way of harm being done was going on.”

 
The only thing I would say about LL throwing herself back in (and about it being a coping mechanism as an established nurse) is that it shouldn't be normal for LL to have gathered this much experience of neonatal death at the age of 25.
If you did a survey of level 2 units and you asked all nurses of that age how many babies had died in their care, The answer would range between 0-1 with zero being far, far more likely. I think the change attitude may have been prompted between her and Dr Gibbs.

One of the nurses did say to her (think it must've been during the early deaths) that luckily it didnt happen very often at Chester. And from LL's comments following Baby A it sounds like she had witnsessed a death(or deaths) at Liverpool women's hospital, during her placement(for her ICU training) there, as she mentioned the support afterwards was better there.
 
Last edited:
I hadn't picked up on that. So, he's potentially quite a bit older than her? I belive I said weeks ago that I'd not at all be surprised if she was seeing an older guy. Seems like that may have been the case.

No idea of his age but I'd also posted before whether she enjoyed the almost paternal/parental type of attention she got from him. The asking if she was OK all the time, offering her a lift home, ringing the A&E to get her seen quicker etc. That's not to say his intentions were paternal. Just that she might have enjoyed that kind of attention.

Obviously, if guilty, there are other things she was getting from the relationship too, like having somebody to share in the deaths and to talk about them with, meaning she coudl re-live the deaths afterwards, somebody who (she thought) had her back, and somebody who could give her insghts into what the doctors and consultants may be thinking and whether anybody was suspicious. IMO if guilty
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
217
Guests online
4,808
Total visitors
5,025

Forum statistics

Threads
592,340
Messages
17,967,819
Members
228,753
Latest member
Cindy88
Back
Top