I thought this but then would it not have been wise to say something from the start, it pretty much throws the whole thing off. That’s why I think they aren’t going to say well such and such died the same way while she wasn’t there or else it physically couldn’t have been her. I don’t know how they will explain the insulin tho after she said it was deliberate.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Today’s coverage 31.10.22 : https://www.chesterstandard.co.uk/news/23089264.live-lucy-letby-trial-monday-october-31/
I feel similar about the defence tbh, he's been very proactive. Considering he can't actually bring in any of his own evidence yet, he's started getting points across already.
Will be interesting to see how it develops and if there is substance behind it, as the trial goes on.
Still clueless on the insulin cases myself though.
I guess could look at that both ways - he lets the prosecution lay out their 'strong' case, make it like there's no room for doubt and then bam, the big defence. Defence is last so that's always the most recent info in the minds of the jurors.
Did the unusually high rate of unexplained deaths stop when she wasn't allowed near babies or did CoC continue to have babies die of insulin or air?
I've been trying to follow as much as I can so apologies if this has been covered a million times.
Hope everyone is keeping well folks.
I've been trying to follow as much as I can so apologies if this has been covered a million times.
Hope everyone is keeping well folks.
A reminder that the Lucy Letby trial is due to last six months, so although the court case is now entering the fourth week before a jury, there is still a long way to go before its scheduled conclusion.
This from the Chester Standard today,
Reading this kind of puts it into prospective that we have hardly heard anything yet and still lots to come.
Poor parents as I bet lots of them will be in court most days
This from the Chester Standard today,
Reading this kind of puts it into prospective that we have hardly heard anything yet and still lots to come.
Poor parents as I bet lots of them will be in court most days
The unit was downgraded so it's almost impossible to make a comparision.
Even though the unit had been down graded, air or insulin could have been used to kill/harm less premature babies.
I very much doubt there would be any more cases of insulin (especially), or air deliberate harm as vigilance would have been heightened.
I agree with this. Regardless of whether the unit was downgraded or not, if the killer had still been working there then I’m pretty sure they would have carried on killing, whether the babies were less vulnerable or not. Or they would have moved onto another hospital and started there… like most serial killers, unless they are put in prison, it seems very hard for them to stop.
BA started attacking the people she was living with after she was suspended…
I keep thinking the same, however, surely the police and NCA , whilst working with and investigating the hospital, (which surely they would have done before LL became a suspect??)would have taken that into consideration and " looked at that at the time?
But i do see your point.
Those events would be extremely rare for any unit wouldn’t they, well staffed or not? So would be incredible for them to have carried on or happened outside of Letby’s presence when they don’t happen in general.
Going to find baby D difficult to hear I think, I know a few people that were left with waters broken for too long and babies had infections at birth. All survived, including two born early and had very little problem once on antibiotics for a while.
The insulin has to have been deliberate, there is absolutely no doubt about that at all, those two babies can not have had those levels of insulin in their bodies without it being so. I think personally the entire case and other charges have been brought about based on those two attempts. Had the insulin cases not happened I don’t think they would have been confident that the other collapse’s were deliberate. With the insulin it really is a case of who not if! And with everything else in the mix it points to Letby. If it’s not Letby and the other charges are just pure coincidence and bad practice then they still have the insulin poisoner at large! I highly doubt that.
Exactly this...there is no other explanation....so if look at the " picture" then it isn't looking good for LL..?
Just a musing out loud if I may - if someone has 'mastered' a technique and it's working well (apologies for how flippant this sounds), why would they change to something that potentially would be detectable? That's also puzzling me.
A few ideas..
- because their current technique is under scrutiny
- because they enjoy the game of what they can get away with
-because of opportunity
- because they’re murderous bleeps.
I don’t think there is an explanation to be fair but it could have been opportunity, boredom as in a lot of killers kill for the thrill so if that method wasn’t “exciting” enough anymore then that could explain the switch, they could have switched to something more detectable in order to get caught…as someone else mentioned, a lot of killers WANT to be caught. Or it purely could have been cockiness. We won’t know as there are many reasons although we’re led to believe a lay persons, killers don’t change their MOs…some of them do
@avabella
I’ve wondered this but as you can see from what I share below the hospital decided to take no further action as child L improved. This suggest to me that they equally weren’t doing their jobs properly and wanted to avoid further investigation. Perhaps they thought someone simply messed up somewhere who knows ? Equally we know from research that had those babies died it is not as simple to detect death by insulin poisoning. I’m guessing her goal in these cases were murder and if successful it’s way harder to prove!
In the hours that followed, Child L's glucose levels fell abnormally low. He was given additional doses of glucose, but they proved ineffective.
The answers to these levels were found after a lab sample sent to the Royal Liverpool Teaching Hospital laboratory came back with results some time later.
The results of the test were "grossly abnormal", but nothing was done about it as Child L had, by the time the results came back, returned to normal.
The reading was "at the very top of the scale" the equipment could measure, the court hears.
There was no correspondingly high level of C-peptide: it was within the normal range. The only explanation for this anomaly is that what was being measured was synthetic insulin, which had not been prescribed to Child L but was stored and readily available in the neonatal unit.
I’ve wondered this but as you can see from what I share below the hospital decided to take no further action as child L improved. This suggest to me that they equally weren’t doing their jobs properly and wanted to avoid further investigation. Perhaps they thought someone simply messed up somewhere who knows ? Equally we know from research that had those babies died it is not as simple to detect death by insulin poisoning. I’m guessing her goal in these cases were murder and if successful it’s way harder to prove!
In the hours that followed, Child L's glucose levels fell abnormally low. He was given additional doses of glucose, but they proved ineffective.
The answers to these levels were found after a lab sample sent to the Royal Liverpool Teaching Hospital laboratory came back with results some time later.
The results of the test were "grossly abnormal", but nothing was done about it as Child L had, by the time the results came back, returned to normal.
The reading was "at the very top of the scale" the equipment could measure, the court hears.
There was no correspondingly high level of C-peptide: it was within the normal range. The only explanation for this anomaly is that what was being measured was synthetic insulin, which had not been prescribed to Child L but was stored and readily available in the neonatal unit.
Last edited:
My DiL waters broke about 2 days before my grandson was born. He was healthy at birth but had a very slightly raised ESR. He was administered prophylactic (precautionary) antibiotics, via a cannula is his hand, for a few days, so was kept in hospital a bit longer.
He was absolutely fine, thankfully, no other signs of infection (no raised temp etc).
I personally think the note (the words she wrote and the fact that she kept it) plus the insulin, her vague answering in police interview, do indicate that Letby was resigned to the fact that what she was doing was out of control and that she would be caught eventually. IMO.I don’t think there is an explanation to be fair but it could have been opportunity, boredom as in a lot of killers kill for the thrill so if that method wasn’t “exciting” enough anymore then that could explain the switch, they could have switched to something more detectable in order to get caught…as someone else mentioned, a lot of killers WANT to be caught. Or it purely could have been cockiness. We won’t know as there are many reasons although we’re led to believe a lay persons, killers don’t change their MOs…some of them do
Yes and it sounds like baby D was on a positive curve in terms of baby’s recovery from infection. It will be a tough listen. This is a baby that should 100% have survived it’s problems and the coincidences of presentation to other babies in this case cannot be coincidences for me.
From doing a bit of googling it is clear that insulin poisoning after death is very hard to detect!
This academic article title stood out to me
Is insulin intoxication still the perfect crime? Analysis and interpretation of postmortem insulin: review and perspectives in forensic toxicology
Says to me if successful she thought she would easily get away with it. Makes me wonder has she actually been successful previously? I mean there are apparently other deaths not included in the charges. Could these possibly have been insulin related, but she was successful and they were deemed as dying of natural causes? Scary thought !
This academic article title stood out to me
Is insulin intoxication still the perfect crime? Analysis and interpretation of postmortem insulin: review and perspectives in forensic toxicology
Says to me if successful she thought she would easily get away with it. Makes me wonder has she actually been successful previously? I mean there are apparently other deaths not included in the charges. Could these possibly have been insulin related, but she was successful and they were deemed as dying of natural causes? Scary thought !
- Status