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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I appreciate you sharing your thoughts on this. Do you think it may be possible that if LL is at fault in these awful situations, perhaps she may have been a bit 'away with the fairies', not present, clumsy, and doing a really awful job? Some of what is being said about her lack of sensitivity makes me think of someone I once knew who had quite a serious but hidden mental health problem and her work was really really shoddy because she was utterly disengaged from reality. Superficially she could 'pass', it was only when you examined what she'd been doing it became clear something pretty deranged was going on. Just my speculation. MOO
Honestly?, Im still not quite sure but I just cannot get my head around “why” someone would just stand there and not help a tiny baby (screaming no less) with blood round it’s face, not to mention the other witnesses where she has been allegedly just stood, watching. That is particularly harrowing to even contemplate, even more so in her profession.

In regards to not being present/clumsy, I don’t actually see that from the evidence in her text messages. She seems IMO to be quite articulate, she appears to give reasons and diagnosis, medical terminology, insulin rates, giving background information very diligently to babies she is not even assigned to.. it doesn’t strike me as clumsy or awkward or anything else but an educated, articulate “specialist” nurse. Hence why I said previously; how are we to believe (as she stated) she doesn’t know quite what an air embolism is.

That is absolutely absurd.
 
Honestly?, Im still not quite sure but I just cannot get my head around “why” someone would just stand there and not help a tiny baby (screaming no less) with blood round it’s face, not to mention the other witnesses where she has been allegedly just stood, watching. That is particularly harrowing to even contemplate, even more so in her profession.

In regards to not being present/clumsy, I don’t actually see that from the evidence in her text messages. She seems IMO to be quite articulate, she appears to give reasons and diagnosis, medical terminology, insulin rates, giving background information very diligently to babies she is not even assigned to.. it doesn’t strike me as clumsy or awkward or anything else but an educated, articulate “specialist” nurse. Hence why I said previously; how are we to believe (as she stated) she doesn’t know quite what an air embolism is.

That is absolutely absurd.
Right.
Very focused.
Moo
 
Honestly?, Im still not quite sure but I just cannot get my head around “why” someone would just stand there and not help a tiny baby (screaming no less) with blood round it’s face, not to mention the other witnesses where she has been allegedly just stood, watching. That is particularly harrowing to even contemplate, even more so in her profession.

In regards to not being present/clumsy, I don’t actually see that from the evidence in her text messages. She seems IMO to be quite articulate, she appears to give reasons and diagnosis, medical terminology, insulin rates, giving background information very diligently to babies she is not even assigned to.. it doesn’t strike me as clumsy or awkward or anything else but an educated, articulate “specialist” nurse. Hence why I said previously; how are we to believe (as she stated) she doesn’t know quite what an air embolism is.

That is absolutely absurd.
Another thing to consider along with this; she very clearly articulates all the medical terminology etc in her messages as mentioned above; and yet not only does she allegedly not know what an air embolism is (despite watching a programme on it and nurses are trained not to have air in the lines) she also asked one of the nurses about the drugs calculations when the chart was missing off the side of the cot during resus.

It defies any kind of logic IMO
 
Another thing to consider along with this; she very clearly articulates all the medical terminology etc in her messages as mentioned above; and yet not only does she allegedly not know what an air embolism is (despite watching a programme on it and nurses are trained not to have air in the lines) she also asked one of the nurses about the drugs calculations when the chart was missing off the side of the cot during resus.

It defies any kind of logic IMO
And the fact that nobody expressed any concerns about this.
 
It was just a suggestion.

Then there's this: "The father said that a nurse he thought may have been Letby came in..." So, not definitely LL.
Yes there's that. Not definitely LL. I do wonder how likely it is though, that of two nurses going into the family room, one of them not with their son when he collapsed, the other charged with murdering him and having been asked repeatedly to leave them alone, yet still ignoring the supervisor and taking over the memory box preparation unasked, it was the other senior nurse who was so shockingly inappropriate.

IMO
 
Yes there's that. Not definitely LL. I do wonder how likely it is though, that of two nurses going into the family room, one of them not with their son when he collapsed, the other charged with murdering him and having been asked repeatedly to leave them alone, yet still ignoring the supervisor and taking over the memory box preparation unasked, it was the other senior nurse who was so shockingly inappropriate.

IMO
Of course, but if there's reasonable doubt... we can't be sure IMO
 
Of course, but if there's reasonable doubt... we can't be sure IMO
Beyond reasonable doubt isn't used anymore, because it would confuse jurors. (In the UK)

"satisfied that they are sure" Is the new term.

Some jurors were confused by the other term thinking that you needed the standard of proof to be 100% certain. But thats not the case.
 
Last edited:
Beyond reasonable doubt isnt used anymore, because it would confuse jurors.

"satisfied that they are sure" Is the new term.

Some jurors were confused by the other term thinking that you needed the standard of proof to be 100% certain. But thats not the case.
That's interesting, but I'm not sure it's any less confusing, tbh.
 
I thought he said it may have been her.
We don't have verbatim reporting.

there's a few versions - possibly others I haven't seen

The family were taken into a room, where there were two nurses there, one of whom the father has since been able to identify as Lucy Letby.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 26

Baby C's father has previously told the jury that Letby interrupted them as his life ebbed away in the family room following the attempts at resuscitation.

The father said that a nurse he thought may have been Letby came in with a ventilated basket, allegedly telling the couple: 'You've said your goodbyes. Do you want me to put him in here?'

Lucy Letby: 'Baby killed by nurse showed signs of life for FIVE HOURS'

It's still between two, and he knows what LL looks like when he made his statement.
 
I can’t help wondering if colleagues had noticed suspicious events surrounding LL previously to babies A-Q. If there were any strange collapses or deaths previous to baby A that aren’t listed in the charges, I imagine colleagues would be unable to mention those instances when giving evidence IMO, because she’s only charged with babies starting with A to Q.

I just think some of the text messages have an underlying suspicious feel to them, like the colleague saying she also doesn’t think it’s a good idea for LL to go back in room 1, and the reply to the message where LL says ‘just forget I said anything’ the colleague says ‘I won’t forget’. To me that sounds like something you may say if you were starting to add up doubts about a person. I suppose we won’t know because the case and evidence we will hear essentially starts in the June of 2015, so anything prior to that could well have been suspicious but lacked evidence to charge.

Something to think about anyway… MOO of course.
Right, we only have a partial picture but some of the text messages are actually quite confrontational. I also get the impression LL was generally sounding out various colleagues to see if they had suspicions. And her attempts to then combat them with excuses and unfounded diagnoses seems very transparent.
 
I also think.. in terms of motives, it’s important to remember someone who is deliberately killing babies, is illogical. There’s not likely to be an explainable method to the madness. We may never know the reason.
If LL is found guilty, I very much doubt that she will admit it, let alone give her motivation. I just can't see it. That could be (if this happens) at least partly because I do believe she cares for her parents, and wouldn't want to admit it to them, and cause them further grief.
 
I can’t help but question; if she is “more experienced” as she stated in her police report and appears to be quite irritated; then why are there numerous reports where she was stood not assisting very unwell babies including poor baby E with blood round his mouth. That is very hard to rationalise. MOO
Nursing is meant to be a "caring profession", yes? Plenty of times LL was not very caring - well, except for herself. MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
2,547
Total visitors
2,732

Forum statistics

Threads
589,984
Messages
17,928,670
Members
228,033
Latest member
okaydandy
Back
Top