UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #8

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have five children. IME it is rare. Only twice did it happen. Once in a newborn, who had caught gastroenteritis in hospital and once with a toddler that drank orange juice that someone gave him, I think he drank it too fast.
Replying to own comment.
I just realised what I had said when I read it through.
My toddler projectile vomited after drinking a carton of juice really quick, like pushing milk down a tube very quickly?
 
It strikes me as a question of someone who thinks they can outsmart medical experts - it's not a clean denial - "how do you know" can be seen as an admission "you do know" - dangerous territory imo. I wonder if she was choosing to ignore advice to offer no comment. That would be a personality indicator, imo. It's like the written note "they have no evidence" which entertains the notion that there is evidence, but thinking they don't have it.
A personality indicator, yes. The personality which I see emerging is of someone who doesn't like to take advice or instructions. Who thinks she is, if not better than, at least as good as anyone else in her profession, even if that person is senior to her. Which is arrogant really. And I think that her dominant emotion right now could well be anger - anger at her situation, anger at the "little people" speaking against her. Just my opinion, of course.
 
The thought of having 'professional jurors' really scares me though. It is hard to imagine they would be able to stay unbiased and objective once they listen to many trials and all that.

A 'jury of one's peers' is different than a paid employee of the court system. JMO

I probably worded that badly, as I think the suggestion by reform advocates is that the jurors are average people from wide walks of life -but- the difference is, they are willing and free to be available for chunks of time, have volunteered to be in a bank of jurors who can be repeatedly called upon over the years, they are given support in various areas, ie how to comprehend evidence, their own internal bias, and how to cope with emotive stuff. As opposed to people called out of their daily life to attend something incredibly traumatic which might be devastating for their own personal life, many people don't have English as a first or even second or third language, jury service causes untold stress and inconvenience, plus not everyone is the sharpest tool in the box and many people are downright hateful - for example it's well known that juries take a dim view to both female victims of crime and perpetrators of crime. But I totally take your point, the definition of a jury is that its comprised from peers of every day life.
 
looks like we may be off today as well, no updates as of yet
Yesterday one of the reporters said today was going to be a half day. I wonder if that means the morning or afternoon?






Liz Hull

The trial of alleged killer nurse Lucy Letby is not sitting today because one of the jurors is poorly, back for a half day tomorrow before the evidence resumes in earnest on Wednesday


6:09 AM · Dec 5, 2022
 

The Trial of Lucy Letby
https://twitter.com/LucyLetbyTrial

Part 2 of Episode 8 is now available for streaming. This week,
@lizhull
and
@RadioCaroline_
continue their examination of what the prosecution say happened to Baby F, a premature twin boy who Lucy Letby allegedly tried to poison with insulin.

open.spotify.com
The Trial of Lucy Letby, Episode 8: Baby F, Part 2: ‘His heart rate was high and his sugar was low,...
Listen to this episode from The Trial of Lucy Letby on Spotify. In this episode Caroline and Liz explain what the pro
What I found interesting from this podcast is that they suggest LL went into the fridge and injected the 2nd bag just before she went off shift. Potentially to evade suspicion..? I guess without seeing the layout of the fridge it is hard to say if it is obvious which bag would be taken next. If it is obvious, then that scenario makes logical sense (if she is guilty imo). All MOO
 
What I found interesting from this podcast is that they suggest LL went into the fridge and injected the 2nd bag just before she went off shift. Potentially to evade suspicion..? I guess without seeing the layout of the fridge it is hard to say if it is obvious which bag would be taken next. If it is obvious, then that scenario makes logical sense (if she is guilty imo). All MOO
Yes I would like to see the layout of the fridge or know a bit more about it to see if this is a reasonable assumption. For example if they have a FIFO set up so it's obvious which bag will be out next or they're stacked in a certain way so she could reasonably know which bag would be connected next.
 
Yes I would like to see the layout of the fridge or know a bit more about it to see if this is a reasonable assumption. For example if they have a FIFO set up so it's obvious which bag will be out next or they're stacked in a certain way so she could reasonably know which bag would be connected next.
Yes I agree ...I imagine they do stack them in a certain way to ensure they are used in use by date order
 
I probably worded that badly, as I think the suggestion by reform advocates is that the jurors are average people from wide walks of life -but- the difference is, they are willing and free to be available for chunks of time, have volunteered to be in a bank of jurors who can be repeatedly called upon over the years, they are given support in various areas, ie how to comprehend evidence, their own internal bias, and how to cope with emotive stuff. As opposed to people called out of their daily life to attend something incredibly traumatic which might be devastating for their own personal life, many people don't have English as a first or even second or third language, jury service causes untold stress and inconvenience, plus not everyone is the sharpest tool in the box and many people are downright hateful - for example it's well known that juries take a dim view to both female victims of crime and perpetrators of crime. But I totally take your point, the definition of a jury is that its comprised from peers of every day life.
Of course, not all countries have a jury system, including several in Europe.
 
I have five children. IME it is rare. Only twice did it happen. Once in a newborn, who had caught gastroenteritis in hospital and once with a toddler that drank orange juice that someone gave him, I think he drank it too fast.
This brought back a memory for me of my brother doing something very similar on a long car ride as a toddler, we'd gotten a maccies breakfast and he insisted he could hold his own bottle of juice, downed it in about 2 gulps and it was like a small orange juice bomb went off in the backseat.

I thought projectile vomiting is the body trying hard to get rid of something it perceives as dangerous/harmful and it's definitely different to just normal throwing up/sicking up that all babies do
 
A summary I've prepared today of the babies with throat trauma and babies who screamed. (All quotes from the media thread.)


Throat bleeding / swelling



Baby C - room 1 – designated nurse on computer out of view of baby

Ms Taylor said Lucy Letby suggested using a type of ventilation support - a Guedel device - to aid Child C.

(registrar) Davis's note is presented to the court, written at 1.30am on June 14 and timed retrospectively. The note said she arrived at the unit in "less than one minute" after the crash bleep went off.
A 'Guedel airway in situ' was noted, with chest compressions in progress. […]

Dr Davis attempted to intubate Child C, but was unable to do so as Child C's vocal cords were swollen. Dr Davis tried again with a smaller tube, twice, but was again unable to intubate.


Baby E - room 1 – LL alone in room with baby

A '13ml blood-stained fluid from NGT on free drainage' is noted. Dr Harkness says the origin of the blood must have come from somewhere in the oesophageal tract, down to the stomach. It rules out blood coming from the lungs.

Dr Evans said a second major issue was significant haemorrhaging from the upper gastrointestinal tract, somewhere between the mouth and the stomach. In a further report – after he reviewed a statement from Child E’s mother who described “horrendous crying” from her son and blood around his mouth – he suggested something “had been done or used” to cause trauma. The expert witness suggests that a piece of equipment made of rigid plastic may have been used to cause the injury to baby E.


Baby G - room 2 – designated nurse gone to lunch

Dr Ventress - Child G was then intubated, and 'IV vitamin K given due to blood from trachea'. Mr Johnson says this is another case where a baby is bleeding at the mouth.

Dr Ventress notes 'ETT removed at 6.10am. […] Blood clot at end of ETT.
'Reintubated 0615 ETT with intubation drugs. Blood-stained fluid in oropharynx.

Dr Alison Ventress is now recalled to give evidence. Dr Ventress noted 'blood-stained fluid noted coming up from trachea/between cords' during intubation.

Child G was reintubated with a mild anaesthetic at 6.15am, with 'blood-stained fluid in oropharynx' noted.

Dr Ventress says the first observation of blood was in the windpipe, whereas this was more in the throat. Mr Myers refers to the note about 'blood-stained fluid noted coming up from trachea/between cords'. He asks if that was noted after intubation. Dr Ventress said it was during intubation. Mr Myers asks if it would be unusual to see that. Dr Ventress: "It's not uncommon for the baby to [have bleeding during intubation] - it is unusual to have blood coming up from beneath the vocal cords."



Evidence not heard yet – from opening speech


Baby N – room 3 - designated nurse’s back turned for 1st event. (different date from screaming event below)

7.12am – LL arrived early for her day shift. A colleague said LL came into the room to say hello but when her back was turned LL said N had desaturated and assisted with his breathing - the alarm was not sounding.

Around 8am – Doctor tried to intubate N - He couldn’t get the breathing tube down his throat. He was “surprised by his anatomy more than anything else … I could not visualise parts of the back of his throat because of swelling”. The doctor saw "fresh blood" in N's throat, which the prosecution say was the same seen in babies C, E and G. The doctor was unable to get the breathing tube down the throat of N as he was unable to visualise the child's tracheal inlet. He attempted to intubate N on three occasions.

2.50pm – LL noted N stopped breathing, fresh blood in mouth and 3 mls aspirated from NGT. Crash call. A consultant was called at 2.59pm. While awaiting a consultant, a junior doctor looked into the airway of N and saw a “large swelling at the end of his epiglottis” he could only just see the bottom of the vocal cords. He had never seen anything like this before in a newborn baby. The junior doctor's notes made at 4.30pm recorded: "desaturated this afternoon at 2:50pm with blood in the oropharynx + blood in the NG tube. Improved with bagging. Elective intubation planned following ??? unsuccessful attempts with 2 registrars and 2 consultants cords difficult to visualise …”

A more specialist team was called to carry out the intubation.

Dr Kinsey blood expert said such a bleed would not have happened spontaneously and swelling was evidence of trauma. He had a mild version of haemophilia. She also excluded heavy-handed intubation.



Babies screaming

Baby E - room 1 - LL alone

Court hears that on the evening of the babies' 5th day, their mum came down to the neonatal ward to bring breast milk. As she came along the corridor, she could hear screaming. She says "I could hear my son crying, and it was like nothing I’d heard before…"It was a sound that shouldn’t have come from a tiny baby. I can’t explain what it was - it was horrendous. It was more of a scream than a cry". The twins' mum says that Lucy Letby was the only person in the room with the babies but was not by the incubator - she was standing at the workstation.



Evidence not heard yet – from opening speeches


Baby I - room unknown yet - designated nurse left room

1.06am - baby I’s monitor alarm sounded and she screamed. Her nurse, having left the nursery temporarily, responded to I's alarm and saw Lucy Letby at the incubator.

An expert paediatrician who reviewed child I’s case … believed that on the final occasion the child had been injected with air into her bloodstream which led to her "screaming", followed quickly by her collapse.



Baby N - room unknown yet - designated nurse on break

1am – N’s designated nurse went on break, leaving N “stable”. 1.05am – N collapsed and was screaming and cried for 30 mins. He was resuscitated.

Independent medical experts said the baby’s sudden deterioration was consistent with some kind of "inflicted injury". Dr Sandie Bohin said such a profound desaturation followed by a rapid recovery, in the absence of any painful or uncomfortable procedure, suggested an inflicted painful stimulus. She said – “this is life threatening. He was also noted to be … ‘screaming’ and apparently cried for 30 minutes. This is most unusual. I have never observed a premature neonate to scream.”

The defence say there are many reasons a baby will shout or scream - and "it is more far more likely to be hunger".
 
Last edited:
A summary I've prepared today of the babies with throat trauma and babies who screamed. (All quotes from the media thread.)


Throat bleeding / swelling



Baby C - room 1 – designated nurse on computer out of view of baby

Ms Taylor said Lucy Letby suggested using a type of ventilation support - a Guedel device - to aid Child C.

(registrar) Davis's note is presented to the court, written at 1.30am on June 14 and timed retrospectively. The note said she arrived at the unit in "less than one minute" after the crash bleep went off.
A 'Guedel airway in situ' was noted, with chest compressions in progress. […]

Dr Davis attempted to intubate Child C, but was unable to do so as Child C's vocal cords were swollen. Dr Davis tried again with a smaller tube, twice, but was again unable to intubate.


Baby E - room 1 – LL alone in room with baby

A '13ml blood-stained fluid from NGT on free drainage' is noted. Dr Harkness says the origin of the blood must have come from somewhere in the oesophageal tract, down to the stomach. It rules out blood coming from the lungs.

Dr Evans said a second major issue was significant haemorrhaging from the upper gastrointestinal tract, somewhere between the mouth and the stomach. In a further report – after he reviewed a statement from Child E’s mother who described “horrendous crying” from her son and blood around his mouth – he suggested something “had been done or used” to cause trauma. The expert witness suggests that a piece of equipment made of rigid plastic may have been used to cause the injury to baby E.


Baby G - room 2 – designated nurse gone to lunch

Dr Ventress - Child G was then intubated, and 'IV vitamin K given due to blood from trachea'. Mr Johnson says this is another case where a baby is bleeding at the mouth.

Dr Ventress notes 'ETT removed at 6.10am. […] Blood clot at end of ETT.
'Reintubated 0615 ETT with intubation drugs. Blood-stained fluid in oropharynx.

Dr Alison Ventress is now recalled to give evidence. Dr Ventress noted 'blood-stained fluid noted coming up from trachea/between cords' during intubation.

Child G was reintubated with a mild anaesthetic at 6.15am, with 'blood-stained fluid in oropharynx' noted.


Dr Ventress says the first observation of blood was in the windpipe, whereas this was more in the throat. Mr Myers refers to the note about 'blood-stained fluid noted coming up from trachea/between cords'. He asks if that was noted after intubation. Dr Ventress said it was during intubation. Mr Myers asks if it would be unusual to see that. Dr Ventress: "It's not uncommon for the baby to [have bleeding during intubation] - it is unusual to have blood coming up from beneath the vocal cords."



Evidence not heard yet – from opening speech


Baby N – room 3 - designated nurse’s back turned for 1st event. (different date from screaming event below)

7.12am – LL arrived early for her day shift. A colleague said LL came into the room to say hello but when her back was turned LL said N had desaturated and assisted with his breathing - the alarm was not sounding.

Around 8am – Doctor tried to intubate N - He couldn’t get the breathing tube down his throat. He was “surprised by his anatomy more than anything else … I could not visualise parts of the back of his throat because of swelling”. The doctor saw "fresh blood" in N's throat, which the prosecution say was the same seen in babies C, E and G. The doctor was unable to get the breathing tube down the throat of N as he was unable to visualise the child's tracheal inlet. He attempted to intubate N on three occasions.

2.50pm – LL noted N stopped breathing, fresh blood in mouth and 3 mls aspirated from NGT. Crash call. A consultant was called at 2.59pm. While awaiting a consultant, a junior doctor looked into the airway of N and saw a “large swelling at the end of his epiglottis” he could only just see the bottom of the vocal cords. He had never seen anything like this before in a newborn baby. The junior doctor's notes made at 4.30pm recorded: "desaturated this afternoon at 2:50pm with blood in the oropharynx + blood in the NG tube. Improved with bagging. Elective intubation planned following ??? unsuccessful attempts with 2 registrars and 2 consultants cords difficult to visualise …”

A more specialist team was called to carry out the intubation.

Dr Kinsey blood expert said such a bleed would not have happened spontaneously and swelling was evidence of trauma. He had a mild version of haemophilia. She also excluded heavy-handed intubation.



Babies screaming

Baby E - room 1 - LL alone

Court hears that on the evening of the babies' 5th day, their mum came down to the neonatal ward to bring breast milk. As she came along the corridor, she could hear screaming. She says "I could hear my son crying, and it was like nothing I’d heard before…"It was a sound that shouldn’t have come from a tiny baby. I can’t explain what it was - it was horrendous. It was more of a scream than a cry". The twins' mum says that Lucy Letby was the only person in the room with the babies but was not by the incubator - she was standing at the workstation.



Evidence not heard yet – from opening speeches


Baby I - room unknown yet - designated nurse left room

1.06am - baby I’s monitor alarm sounded and she screamed. Her nurse, having left the nursery temporarily, responded to I's alarm and saw Lucy Letby at the incubator.

An expert paediatrician who reviewed child I’s case … believed that on the final occasion the child had been injected with air into her bloodstream which led to her "screaming", followed quickly by her collapse.



Baby N - room unknown yet - designated nurse on break

1am – N’s designated nurse went on break, leaving N “stable”. 1.05am – N collapsed and was screaming and cried for 30 mins. He was resuscitated.

Independent medical experts said the baby’s sudden deterioration was consistent with some kind of "inflicted injury". Dr Sandie Bohin said such a profound desaturation followed by a rapid recovery, in the absence of any painful or uncomfortable procedure, suggested an inflicted painful stimulus. She said – “this is life threatening. He was also noted to be … ‘screaming’ and apparently cried for 30 minutes. This is most unusual. I have never observed a premature neonate to scream.”

The defence say there are many reasons a baby will shout or scream - and "it is more far more likely to be hunger".
Thanks very much for this @Tortoise

It makes horrible reading, but we are seeing things stack up here
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
98
Guests online
3,665
Total visitors
3,763

Forum statistics

Threads
591,856
Messages
17,960,155
Members
228,625
Latest member
julandken
Back
Top