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

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I was just reading back through some of the trial points...I just wanted to ask if was there any point/s theory raised as to why the accused seemed to be very erratic in her texts to her colleague's reference to wanting to get into room 1 I may have missed. Just feeling her texts were very erratic at that time, desperate in fact to want to get in that particular room at that particular time. Maybe she had left something in there she didn't wish to be found?

Thank you.

Ooh good point.

 

[JosieJo]

Thinking more on this charge for baby G.

At 2 am her nurse fed her 45 mls of breast milk.

"nursing note - 45mls of milk via nasogastric tube, with 'ph4' aspirates recorded. G was noted to be 'asleep' at this stage. The milk was expressed breast milk, plus fortifier and Gaviscon."

At 2.15 am baby G projectile vomited out of the cot.

LL then made a nursing note: "[G] had large projectile milky vomit at 2.15am. Continued to vomit++. 45mls of milk obtained from NG tube with air++. Abdomen noted to be distended and discoloured. Colour improved few minutes after aspirating tube, remained distended but soft. Reg. Ventress asked to review. To go nil by mouth with IV fluids. Dr called to theatre."


So clearly the implication is that 45 mls went into her empty stomach and 15 minutes later loads of milk was vomited and then 45 mls was aspirated from the tube.

The further implication is that LL had access to extra breast milk, because the designated nurse would have known how much breast milk the mum had provided, to feed her later (I think she was on three-hourly feeds).

I'm wondering if the prosecution thinks LL's text at 8.30 pm earlier in the shift was how she obtained the milk. Shame we didn't get the wording of it.

"LL texted colleague Kate Bissell enquiring about expressed breast milk for her designated baby for that night. The matter is clarified in the text conversation."

I did wonder why that text message was mentioned...that makes sense.

 

[katydid23]

There's a very extreme fixation on Baby I, if I remember correctly she also sent a card to Child I's parents, and kept a picture of it on her phone too?

"In June 2019, she was asked about a sympathy card she had sent to the child's parents. She said it was not normal to do so - and this was the only time she had done so."

Why specifically Child I

One of the main things that stood out to me about Child I was that she was the most premature child they had cared for in many years, or something along those lines. She was only 23 weeks gestation, IIRC? So very very tiny and fragile.

 

[katydid23]

The texts....she also gets defensive again about how another nurse had heard the news about G. She has done this before. Why does she care how someone found out a baby had nearly died, or who told them? Why the guessing games over who texted the nurse? A baby has died/nearly died. Who gives a **** who told a colleague the bad news, or that they were even told....

Perhaps there is some paranoia, IF allegedly, there was some guilt and fear hanging over the defendant?

 

[Sundial]

Thinking more on this charge for baby G.

At 2 am her nurse fed her 45 mls of breast milk.

"nursing note - 45mls of milk via nasogastric tube, with 'ph4' aspirates recorded. G was noted to be 'asleep' at this stage. The milk was expressed breast milk, plus fortifier and Gaviscon."

At 2.15 am baby G projectile vomited out of the cot.

LL then made a nursing note: "[G] had large projectile milky vomit at 2.15am. Continued to vomit++. 45mls of milk obtained from NG tube with air++. Abdomen noted to be distended and discoloured. Colour improved few minutes after aspirating tube, remained distended but soft. Reg. Ventress asked to review. To go nil by mouth with IV fluids. Dr called to theatre."


So clearly the implication is that 45 mls went into her empty stomach and 15 minutes later loads of milk was vomited and then 45 mls was aspirated from the tube.

The further implication is that LL had access to extra breast milk, because the designated nurse would have known how much breast milk the mum had provided, to feed her later (I think she was on three-hourly feeds).

I'm wondering if the prosecution thinks LL's text at 8.30 pm earlier in the shift was how she obtained the milk. Shame we didn't get the wording of it.

"LL texted colleague Kate Bissell enquiring about expressed breast milk for her designated baby for that night. The matter is clarified in the text conversation."

The part highlighted; this is what I was referring to earlier. From the testimony yesterday she was asking about the milk/the feeds prior to her shift. That actually did catch my eye. Someone appearing very articulate in diagnosis from her messages, but prior to this was discussing feeds with a different colleague.

 

[Tortoise]

Here's something else about room 1.

We've picked up on other strange coincidences regarding the text messages -

30 June 2015

colleague texted "I don't know, were they that different?"

4 Aug 2015 - the next death - baby E - with (alleged) trauma bleeding in the throat and air embolus.

4 Aug 2015

JJ-K: "Hey how's you?"
LL: "Not so good, we lost E overnight."
JJ-K: "That’s sad. ‘We’re on a terrible run at the moment. Were you in 1? x"
LL: "Yes. I had him and F x"
JJ-K "That’s not good, you need a break from it being on your shift. x"

4 Aug 2015 - baby F was moved from room 1 to room 2.

5 Aug 2015 baby F was poisoned with insulin in room 2, and his blood sugars continued to be dangerously low for the 12 hours after LL went off shift.

 

[notsure]

Just caught up on today's updates (thanks again to all who provide them).

So effing rough on the heart, the father of Baby G describing how his tiny but determined little baby would respond and smile at him and then suddenly, not respond and smile at him.

Just... no words.

She recognised and responded to people who loved her. It's awful to think she might have also recognised and felt fear for someone who allegedly harmed her.

 

[ColourPurple]

More texts after Baby A's death (not B as written below as that was an attempted murder charge). LL was asking if there were any extra shifts going!

Text messages exchanged following the deaths of Child A and B show Lucy Letby asking if there were spare shifts going, adding: "Think I need to throw myself back in on Saturday."

The response: "Hopefully it might settle down by then."

Letby: "I think from a confidence point of view I need to take an ITU [intensive treatment unit] baby soon."

The response: "It does knock you a bit when things like that happen, but it's ok to have time out as well. Enjoy the sun


Also there's this about things she'd seen in a women's hospital previously.


Letby later adds: "Forget I said anything, I will be fine, it's part of the job. Just don't feel like there is much team spirit tonight x"

The colleague replies: "I am not going to forget but think you're way too hard on yourself..."

Letby referred to previous events she had seen in a women's hospital, and the support available following such events.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 26

The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more,…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

 

[ColourPurple]

She recognised and responded to people who loved her. It's awful to think she might have also recognised and felt fear for someone who allegedly harmed her.

I understand why they have to refer to them as Baby A, Baby B etc. but this is a reminder to the jury that they weren't just "letters. These were much loved little babies, little people in their own right but also somebody's son, somebody's daughter, somebody's little brother or sister, somebody's grandchild...

 

[MissMarbles]

More texts after Baby A's death (not B as written below as that was an attempted murder charge). LL was asking if there were any extra shifts going!

Text messages exchanged following the deaths of Child A and B show Lucy Letby asking if there were spare shifts going, adding: "Think I need to throw myself back in on Saturday."

The response: "Hopefully it might settle down by then."

Letby: "I think from a confidence point of view I need to take an ITU [intensive treatment unit] baby soon."

The response: "It does knock you a bit when things like that happen, but it's ok to have time out as well. Enjoy the sun


Also there's this about things she'd seen in a women's hospital previously.


Letby later adds: "Forget I said anything, I will be fine, it's part of the job. Just don't feel like there is much team spirit tonight x"

The colleague replies: "I am not going to forget but think you're way too hard on yourself..."

Letby referred to previous events she had seen in a women's hospital, and the support available following such events.

Recap: Lucy Letby trial, Wednesday, October 26

The trial of Lucy Letby, who denies murdering seven babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit and attempting to murder 10 more,…

www.chesterstandard.co.uk

What I don't understand is LL saying there is a lack of support when I get the impression the opposite is true.

 

[ColourPurple]

What I don't understand is LL saying there is a lack of support when I get the impression the opposite is true.

It comes across like guilt tripping. Trying to get what she wants... which is to be back in room 1.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I understand why they have to refer to them as Baby A, Baby B etc. but this is a reminder to the jury that they weren't just "letters. These were much loved little babies, little people in their own right but also somebody's son, somebody's daughter, somebody's little brother or sister, somebody's grandchild...

Good point, much loved and very wanted little babies. I wish they could have given them code names instead of dehumanising them to spreadsheet terminology

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

It comes across like guilt tripping. Trying to get what she wants... which is to be back in room 1.

I'm a fence-sitter on this case but this is odd, the wanting back to room 1. What's that about?

 

[Mimi82]

The texts....she also gets defensive again about how another nurse had heard the news about G. She has done this before. Why does she care how someone found out a baby had nearly died, or who told them? Why the guessing games over who texted the nurse? A baby has died/nearly died. Who gives a **** who told a colleague the bad news, or that they were even told....

I thought the same but, I question my initial thoughts to evidence such as this because I find it difficult to state anything about what it means when there is so little being released without further context. Knowing somebody well & how they text would allow a person to make a reasonable judgement on what the text means or shows or suggests. But when you don’t know the person writing it or other things surrounding it, it can be seen in so many ways. Some examples in this instance: wanting to know what has been said because they are guilty & want to try and work out whom knows what & if they are under suspicion and how to cover tracks better? A paranoid person who is worried about if they have done something wrong whether they have or they haven’t and whenever something goes wrong they assume they’ll be blamed? A nosy person who wants to know the ins and outs of everything? A person in a conversation we haven’t heard the whole of genuinely wanting to know who has said what? An obsessive & controlling person who needs to know all the details of every conversation. A person suspicious of others who is looking for specific answers… the list goes on… IMO the texts shared & the little I know about the person texting & with no additional context, I’m thinking she sounds anxious & sensitive about who has said what & to whom & that could be because she’s guilty of the heinous crimes she’s accused or because she’s aware that she’s under suspicion.

 

[Mimi82]

Good point, much loved and very wanted little babies. I wish they could have given them code names instead of dehumanising them to spreadsheet terminology

Yes that’s true but in court they are referred to by their names it’s just the reporters who have to identify them with letters & the parents and all involved will know this.

 

[ColourPurple]

Yes that’s true but in court they are referred to by their names it’s just the reporters who have to identify them with letters & the parents and all involved will know this.

Oh I hope so. That's been playing on my mind.

 

[Kemug]

I once worked (not in nursing) with a youngish woman who was forever checking up on staff on her day off. Ringing up to make sure they had remembered to do this or that. Occasionally called in. It annoyed the heck out of some people, not being trusted to do their job. She wasn't unpopular, but some people did consider her a bit weird and obsessed. She actually lived with her sister, brotherinlaw and their children. Obviously didn't really have much of a life of her own.

 

[mummyshark]

Thinking more on this charge for baby G.

At 2 am her nurse fed her 45 mls of breast milk.

"nursing note - 45mls of milk via nasogastric tube, with 'ph4' aspirates recorded. G was noted to be 'asleep' at this stage. The milk was expressed breast milk, plus fortifier and Gaviscon."

At 2.15 am baby G projectile vomited out of the cot.

LL then made a nursing note: "[G] had large projectile milky vomit at 2.15am. Continued to vomit++. 45mls of milk obtained from NG tube with air++. Abdomen noted to be distended and discoloured. Colour improved few minutes after aspirating tube, remained distended but soft. Reg. Ventress asked to review. To go nil by mouth with IV fluids. Dr called to theatre."


So clearly the implication is that 45 mls went into her empty stomach and 15 minutes later loads of milk was vomited and then 45 mls was aspirated from the tube.

The further implication is that LL had access to extra breast milk, because the designated nurse would have known how much breast milk the mum had provided, to feed her later (I think she was on three-hourly feeds).

I'm wondering if the prosecution thinks LL's text at 8.30 pm earlier in the shift was how she obtained the milk. Shame we didn't get the wording of it.

"LL texted colleague Kate Bissell enquiring about expressed breast milk for her designated baby for that night. The matter is clarified in the text conversation."

In Neonatal units, there is usually a milk kitchen. Mum's are advised to express milk 10-12 times a day to establish milk supply and babies start off with such small feeds and so it's very common to have an excess of milk. The milk kitchen will be locked but staff will have access. There will be a fridge and a freezer with a lot of expressed breast milk, including donor milk. LL would have had easy access to extra milk.

 

[mart321]

I remember reading a few pages ago about the ongoing investigation into LL which has apparently been expanded into 2025 and looking at COC and a Liverpool hospital.

Can anyone give details of this? What was the name ? I can't seem to find any articles about such an investigation that's all

 

[TheCraig]

I remember reading a few pages ago about the ongoing investigation into LL which has apparently been expanded into 2025 and looking at COC and a Liverpool hospital.

Can anyone give details of this? What was the name ? I can't seem to find any articles about such an investigation that's all

operation hummingbird