UK - Nurse Lucy Letby, Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #23

[Tortoise]

Re obssessive texting

Interesting that Mr NJ KC alluded to her texting during resus and also while performing a certain procedure (when 2 hands were needed).

I wonder what it was all about?
Time will tell.
Didn't he say "We will return to it"?

He's already covered one of the instances, (just before baby C's collapse), where she has testified she remembers now she was looking after her babies in nursery 3, but the baby in nursery 3 was receiving a feed which would have required two hands and LL was sending texts to JJ-K at that exact time.

So she's basically agreed she couldn't have been doing the feed, and couldn't have been in her nursery, and when the prosecutor put that to her she said "I can't answer that" followed by she "would have been in the doorway".

This piece of cross-examination blows her evidence in chief out of the water since it's obvious she doesn't remember being in nursery 3 at that time, and her answer "would have been in the doorway" is also nonsensical because she doesn't have a memory of it.

This has nothing to do with an expectation of her being able to remember things that happened years ago, or of how stress or depression can affect memory. It's how she has taken the stand to say she now remembers what she wasn't able to remember when police interviewed her, and the prosecutor demonstrating through her own evidence about using two hands and through the texting evidence that her recovered 'memory' or alibi doesn't withstand scrutiny.

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

She's also agreed under cross-examination that she didn't think Sophie Ellis was qualified or experienced enough to be looking after baby C, which was not in her texts to JJ-K about wanting to be in room 1 to get the image of baby A out of her head. With LL being upset that Mel was allocated to room 1, this adds a second dimension to her feelings that night, six minutes before baby C collapsed when Sophie left the nursery.

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

I really hope we get back to 5-day weeks. I've been wondering if last week and this week's schedule could be to do with school half-terms sometimes being different and juror/s having childcare commitments or holidays booked since the trial has overrun it's original predicted length. Hoping!

 

[Kemug]

Does LL have any friends left? Genuine question.

 

[Sundial]

Does LL have any friends left? Genuine question.

Potentially. It was reported quite recently (last week I believe), her parents were in attendance at the trial alongside with her friend.

 

[Sausage777]

Was this in all instances or some? Which particular occasions/cases was the unit so busy that she could not take notes properly? If you are not specific it seems like a generalisation.
Is this evidence of a staffing problem? Were lots of nurses coming in on their days off to write up nursing notes or just LL? This would be important information to have.
If everyone is coming in on their days off to do this then yes, we have a seriously out of control unit that is dysfunctional at every level.

Hi, I can't believe there isn't more being made of this. So, is this now normal practice?

 

[marynnu]

Hi, I can't believe there isn't more being made of this. So, is this now normal practice?

Obviously I don't know for sure, but I'd be very surprised if anybody else did this regularly, if at all. Some staff might have stayed late (more fool them) but they'd have better things to do IMO! Though LL did live on site for a long time and had no commitments, so in fairness it was easier for her.
I would just add that on our unit staff did pop in now & then to access things, maybe to do with courses or training for example, though never at night. It could be a bit tricky avoiding getting roped in to babysit briefly or check a drug if things were desperately busy. Food for thought?
All JMO.

 

[Tortoise]

Hi, I can't believe there isn't more being made of this. So, is this now normal practice?

I'm not sure we've heard any evidence of what is being claimed.

A message is shown from 10.56pm on September 7 - Letby: "She looks awful doesn't she. Hope you get some sleep."
Letby said if there was a sick baby on the unit, "you would go and check on them, that's not unreasonable."
She had looked at Child G's charts, and accepts she was not on duty at that time. Letby said she had been in to finish some documentation.
Mr Johnson tells the court this was a "big day for" Child G, as it was her 100th day. Letby said: "Yeah she's declining bit by bit".
Mr Johnson says there is no record of Letby entering the unit.
He suggests Letby does not need a pass to gain entry to the unit.
Letby says she would need a pass to swipe in, and accepts: "Unless another colleague opened the door for me."
Letby adds if she had a legitimate reason to enter the unit, she would have entry accepted.
Letby is asked why she entered the unit at around 11pm, not earlier that day.
Letby: "It's quieter at night - I don't know, I can't say why I've gone in at night."

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, May 18 - prosecution cross-examines Letby



After Letby finished her shift, she returned to the neonatal unit later that day - she claims to sign some paperwork.
"You went to visit Child G didn't you?" Nick Johnson, the prosecution barrister, asks.
"I didn't visit Child G, no. I went to do what I needed to do," she says, adding that she was sorting some documentation.
"Were you looking for an opportunity to finish her off?" Mr Johnson asks.
"No," Letby says.

Lucy Letby trial as it happened: Letby's Facebook messages shown in court - as lawyer says she 'cooked the records'

 

[Tortoise]

Overview – baby G’s projectile vomit and collapse in nursery 2, after her 2am feed on 7th Sep.


2am – Baby G was noted to be asleep, and her designated nurse fed her by NGT before going on her 1-hour break at 2am.

2.15am – LL’s nursing notes say that baby G projectile vomited at 2.15am. In police interview LL could not remember where she was when baby G vomited and didn’t mention being with Ailsa Simpson at the nursing station. There is no record of what LL was doing prior to baby G vomiting. LL did not tell police the vomit left the cot. Ailsa recalls being with LL at the nursing station when baby G vomited. Ailsa was defrosting and warming milk and then feeding another baby at this time which would have made it impossible to be at the nursing station at 2.15am.

around 2.30am – the time the prosecution says baby G vomited, considering the urgent bleep put out to Dr Ventress at 2.35am. The prosecution says LL put a time of 2.15am on it to make it closer in time to when her designated nurse fed her.

2.35am – Two members of staff were called to child G. Dr Ventress’s notes say she was called urgently to baby G at 2.35am.

LL has not been able to point to any unusual problems baby G had in the two days leading up to her collapse, on her 100th day of life. She was taken through baby G’s charts and notes and agreed all her vital signs were good. Baby G suffered brain damage as a result of this collapse and had to go back on oxygen, which she had stopped needing 2 days before the collapse.


links

electronic evidence - Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Thursday, December 1
designated nurse's testimony - Letby colleague: baby was stable when I had break, urgent on my return
LL's evidence in chief and cross-examination - Sky - Lucy Letby trial as it happened: Letby's Facebook messages shown in court - as lawyer says she 'cooked the records'
LL's cross-examination Chester Standard - Recap: Lucy Letby trial, May 24 - cross-examination continues

 

[marynnu]

Overview – baby G’s projectile vomit and collapse in nursery 2, after her 2am feed on 7th Sep.


2am – Baby G was noted to be asleep, and her designated nurse fed her by NGT before going on her 1-hour break at 2am.

2.15am – LL’s nursing notes say that baby G projectile vomited at 2.15am. In police interview LL could not remember where she was when baby G vomited and didn’t mention being with Ailsa Simpson at the nursing station. There is no record of what LL was doing prior to baby G vomiting. LL did not tell police the vomit left the cot. Ailsa recalls being with LL at the nursing station when baby G vomited. Ailsa was defrosting and warming milk and then feeding another baby at this time which would have made it impossible to be at the nursing station at 2.15am.

around 2.30am – the time the prosecution says baby G vomited, considering the urgent bleep put out to Dr Ventress at 2.35am. The prosecution says LL put a time of 2.15am on it to make it closer in time to when her designated nurse fed her.

2.35am – Two members of staff were called to child G. Dr Ventress’s notes say she was called urgently to baby G at 2.35am.

LL has not been able to point to any unusual problems baby G had in the two days leading up to her collapse, on her 100th day of life. She was taken through baby G’s charts and notes and agreed all her vital signs were good. Baby G suffered brain damage as a result of this collapse and had to go back on oxygen, which she had stopped needing 2 days before the collapse.


links

electronic evidence - Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Thursday, December 1
designated nurse's testimony - Letby colleague: baby was stable when I had break, urgent on my return
LL's evidence in chief and cross-examination - Sky - Lucy Letby trial as it happened: Letby's Facebook messages shown in court - as lawyer says she 'cooked the records'
LL's cross-examination Chester Standard - Recap: Lucy Letby trial, May 24 - cross-examination continues

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but does this offer a window of opportunity which was difficult to see previously? Presumably the idea is that Ailsa Simpson finished her patient's feed then joined LL at the nurses' station, so was there sometime around 02.30?

 

[Dotta]

"False Trails"

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1663216193656741890

 

[Tortoise]

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but does this offer a window of opportunity which was difficult to see previously? Presumably the idea is that Ailsa Simpson finished her patient's feed then joined LL at the nurses' station, so was there sometime around 02.30?

I think (possibly) that Ailsa saying to police she was with LL at the time LL noted for the vomit at 2.15 would have been the time LL was allegedly administering the excess milk and air to baby G while Ailsa wasn't there to notice. That's what I'm piecing together from the reports.

 

[Charlot123]

Hi, I can't believe there isn't more being made of this. So, is this now normal practice?

Never worked in GB, so this is general observation. Usually cheaper organizations are bureaucratized to the extreme and constantly come up with new regulations. Instead of writing what has changed, the person ending up mentioning what has not. It is incredibly time-requiring. Either the system has to change so that notes can be dictated, or, templates made, but writing notes should be water under the bridge. It says nothing about LL's personal quality of care to me, maybe that COCH didn't want to invest into computers.

 

[marynnu]

I think (possibly) that Ailsa saying to police she was with LL at the time LL noted for the vomit at 2.15 would have been the time LL was allegedly administering the excess milk and air to baby G while Ailsa wasn't there to notice. That's what I'm piecing together from the reports.

Well done Tortoise, not easy is it! Whatever else, assuming Dr. Ventress is correct, there is no way there would have been a gap of 15-20 minutes between the baby getting into difficulties and her being bleeped.

 

[Charlot123]

All JMO:

I can only tell you that where I worked nurses never got overtime. You had to register on the nurse bank, so extra shifts were paid at the same rate as normal. Everyone gets paid more for nights, bank holidays and weekends.
I don't think the despicable attempts to insinuate private medicine into our health system have anything to do with it.

The private medicine exists in the UK. Do you know who I heard about private medicine from for the first time? I watched videos made by Dr. Jay... i wanted to know more about the main witness. It exists and is growing, as I found out. But, my point is different. I honestly believe that if there is no one to cover the shift and it is LL's overtime, she has the right to either refuse working, or request higher pay. Or, she should have picked extra shifts in hospitals around. I do see being overwhelmed and underslept as the factor here, although it is not by far the main one. I try to look at the organization issues, because identifying one rotten apple doesn't change the environment where things could happen unnoticed for a while. And to me, the biggest problem appears to be, changing from level 3 to level 2+3 without being fully prepared. JMO.

 

[Anxala]

Tuesday and Wednesday of next week from reports, not sure if we are ever going to put in a Monday to Friday shift going forward though !

If the judge only told the jury on 18th May (as per below link) that the trial was likely to carry on until the end of July (as opposed to end of May which was already over and past the original estimated 6 mth end date), then it's very likely that the jury may in turn have told the judge 'your problem, we have lives and holidays booked'.

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

12:36pm Dr Ravi Jayaram said Child A was "pale, very pale", and referred to "unusual patches of discolouration." Letby: "I don't agree with the description of discolouration, I agree he was pale." Letby disagrees with the description of Child A being blue, with pink patches 'flitting around'...

www.websleuths.com

If the case that this came out of the blue (ie. that the jury were not already aware of this long before May 18th), I'm not sure how this can be managed? Jurors asked to cancel holidays? Compensated where necessary (deposits etc) by the court? Compensated again for having to take holidays at more expensive times/rates?

 

[Marantz4250b]

If the judge only told the jury on 18th May (as per below link) that the trial was likely to carry on until the end of July (as opposed to end of May which was already over and past the original estimated 6 mth end date), then it's very likely that the jury may in turn have told the judge 'your problem, we have lives and holidays booked'.

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

12:36pm Dr Ravi Jayaram said Child A was "pale, very pale", and referred to "unusual patches of discolouration." Letby: "I don't agree with the description of discolouration, I agree he was pale." Letby disagrees with the description of Child A being blue, with pink patches 'flitting around'...

www.websleuths.com

If the case that this came out of the blue (ie. that the jury were not already aware of this long before May 18th), I'm not sure how this can be managed? Jurors asked to cancel holidays? Compensated where necessary (deposits etc) by the court? Compensated again for having to take holidays at more expensive times/rates?

I'm not sure that there is any facility, legally speaking, for a court to do that. The expenses you can claim are set in law and I doubt there's much leeway to alter them.

It might be the case that standard travel insurance covers this sort of thing but I have no idea, tbh

 

[Anxala]

I'm not sure that there is any facility, legally speaking, for a court to do that. The expenses you can claim are set in law and I doubt there's much leeway to alter them.

It might be the case that standard travel insurance covers this sort of thing but I have no idea, tbh

That's not my point! My point is that a jury, originally asked to commit to a six-month trial, were being told, 7 months in and rising, on the 18th May, that they effectively would need to continue to cancel their lives and commit to another two months. That's 9 whole months!

Come on, it's an outrageous ask of them. And as much as it's deeply frustrating from our perspective, I'm 100% on their side.

 

[katydid23]

Hi, I can't believe there isn't more being made of this. So, is this now normal practice?

I don't think it was a normal practice for the other nurses. It was 'normal' for LL apparently.

But I don't put it down to being understaffed and overly busy because she had plenty of time to send multiple texts about other topics to friends and coworkers.

I think it is partly because she was uber focused upon her job, to the detriment of other facets of life. She lived alone in a big house, a mile from her job and she worked extra shifts because she didn't have other responsibilities at the time.

And the handovers in her home lead me to believe she had an unhealthy over-connection to her job, which may by the reason she came in early, stayed late and came in on days off to visit and catch up on notes.

 

[nyvictoria]

That's not my point! My point is that a jury, originally asked to commit to a six-month trial, were being told, 7 months in and rising, on the 18th May, that they effectively would need to continue to cancel their lives and commit to another two months. That's 9 whole months!

Come on, it's an outrageous ask of them. And as much as it's deeply frustrating from our perspective, I'm 100% on their side.

It is outrageous!! Aside from messed up vacation plans, how are jurors expected to remember what was said in court and by whom, 7 months ago?