Lucy Letby Case #13

[Milktray]

Following on from

Lucy Letby Case #12

Last thread: https://tattle.life/threads/lucy-letby-case-11.34665/ Wiki: https://tattle.life/wiki/lucy-letby-case/ Today’s live link: https://www.chesterstandard.co.uk/news/23089264.live-lucy-letby-trial-monday-october-31/

tattle.life

Please take a look at the Wiki by the wonderful @Tofino for further info about the case.

If you need support
Links to charities offering support if you are struggling with the details of the trial

Bliss: [email protected]

Spoons Charity (Manchester based)

Sands

Sands | Saving babies' lives. Supporting bereaved families.

Sands works to support anyone affected by the death of a baby; improve the care bereaved parents receive; and create a world where fewer babies die.

www.sands.org.uk

Tommys

Saving babies' lives - Charity for Babies | Tommy's

Tommy's is the largest UK pregnancy and baby loss charity, funding research into stillbirth, premature birth and miscarriage and providing trusted pregnancy and baby loss information and support.

www.tommys.org

Miracle Moon on Instagram

NICU Clinical Psychologist | Dr Frankie Harrison (@miraclemoonuk) • Instagram photos and videos

6,308 Followers, 1,395 Following, 598 Posts - See Instagram photos and videos from NICU Clinical Psychologist | Dr Frankie Harrison (@miraclemoonuk)

instagram.com

 

[OldBlondie]

I think ‘off’ might be more that she was pissed off, as opposed to upset, as she was allocated a baby in room 3 but wanted to get into room 1.

Yes that’s what I thought off as in pissed off, as the colleague, says something like no don’t worry you were just upset. I think the report that had this message in was quite detailed and I’m sure it was off as in behaved off, rather than physically off work

 

[Wellthisisinteresting]

Thanks Milk-tray I read how to start a new thread and then walked away

 

[Stiltoncheese]

I was thinking about the text to her colleague who advised counselling and time off at end of June. If she did take some extended time off, it may account for why there was a gap in incidents until August. Be interesting to see if prosecution mention anything about time off etc?

Not sure what to make about the texts though. At face value and without all the extra context we have, they don't seem that unreasonable. She is clearly looking for the reassurance though even if she ignores the compliments. Yet because we know what we know, they come across as more sinister. I'm trying to look at it objectively but it's hard with the prosecution bias and not much defence input so far.

 

[tinkertailorsoldierspy]

She seems to like to diagnose the causes of death (so as to deflect from the truth perhaps?) and also refuses to talk to a counsellor (for fear of disclosing something she shouldn't?)
I don't know, it's all very suspicious to me.

 

[Haveyouanywool]

For a second I thought, wow the tide’s really turned. Then oh, it’s just me

 

[OldBlondie]

I was thinking about the text to her colleague who advised counselling and time off at end of June. If she did take some extended time off, it may account for why there was a gap in incidents until August. Be interesting to see if prosecution mention anything about time off etc?

Not sure what to make about the texts though. At face value and without all the extra context we have, they don't seem that unreasonable. She is clearly looking for the reassurance though even if she ignores the compliments. Yet because we know what we know, they come across as more sinister. I'm trying to look at it objectively but it's hard with the prosecution bias and not much defence input so far.

Agree with all, and you’ve explained it far better than I could, sometimes things make sense in your own head but not on here (my head). There’s just so much I see as sinister, but it’s as a whole picture rather than individual events as you say, actually same as the collapses/deaths really, as a one off they could maybe be put down to anomalies, but overall in the bigger picture they can’t be

 

[IGiveUp22]

I’m still in camp guilty but not sure about those texts that someone just posted in the last thread. I think they can be viewed as someone who is struggling to come to terms with unexpected deaths (via hospital negligence) however the rest of her behaviour doesn’t fit that (well what’s been presented so far). I can’t explain away some things but I could accept a delayed response to dealing with the deaths as she’s said in those texts

 

[OldBlondie]

She seems to like to diagnose the causes of death (so as to deflect from the truth perhaps?) and also refuses to talk to a counsellor (for fear of disclosing something she shouldn't?)
I don't know, it's all very suspicious to me.

Yes very good points, at this point I just can’t see any of her actions as that of an innocent person. There’s just too much coincidence and bizarre behaviour and unexpected collapses for me personally. I see so much now as big red flags, but fully accept that it is partly biased as I am more convinced of her guilt now than ever, the more we hear, or even re reading opening statements and looking for info that I’d forgotten about. (I know others see the opposite tho). Be interesting to see if many/any of us swing to NG once defence properly starts. I know there’s a lot on here that followed the Star trial, does anyone remember if there was a massive shift of votes on here from guilty to NG once the defence started their case?

 

[EllsBellsWells]

The texts from today don’t seem that weird to me, I think they make her out to be a lot more human than anything we’ve seen before. Of course that could be an act! She might have all sorts of intent behind them that we can’t see and she could of course be lying but if you thought she was innocent (and some of the jury might) these could actually make you feel sorry for her. I’m sort of surprised the prosecution has included them! Because they don’t seem to obviously prove any guilt or wrongdoing, unless it’s just the comments from other staff about patterns etc?

But then that just makes me think if they were genuinely concerned/suspecting of anything then they should have reported her. I also don’t think if I suspected a colleague of being a murderer/bad at their job I would confront them with it! I wonder if we’ll hear from the people who sent these messages?

 

[Wellthisisinteresting]

Although I do believe she is guilty from everything so far I honestly couldn’t say that I would imprison her for life at this point
( waaaaay to go yet I know)

I was hoping for more expects concluding the same outcomes, fob evidence, more damning searching, more damning texts that that knock it out the water for me.The note is the strongest piece of evidence so far I can see, I don’t feel I have a clear picture for baby D on what happened

sorry just rambling my thoughts from today.

 

[SamPam]

Yes very good points, at this point I just can’t see any of her actions as that of an innocent person. There’s just too much coincidence and bizarre behaviour and unexpected collapses for me personally. I see so much now as big red flags, but fully accept that it is partly biased as I am more convinced of her guilt now than ever, the more we hear, or even re reading opening statements and looking for info that I’d forgotten about. (I know others see the opposite tho). Be interesting to see if many/any of us swing to NG once defence properly starts. I know there’s a lot on here that followed the Star trial, does anyone remember if there was a massive shift of votes on here from guilty to NG once the defence started their case?

We didn't have the vote option on the threads. I for one wanted to hear the evidence against Star's mum, I was already convinced of SB's guilt.

 

[Former_Antelopee]

For things I think:
- the whole mum saying she was hovering, as others said if she was meant to be looking after the baby isn’t that normal in an ICU? Even if she wasn’t the designated nurse, could the designated nurse have been on a break or had to go somewhere so Lucy was looking after the baby for a short time?
- I don’t think it’s weird that she doesn’t accept the compliments I’d do the same. Also if she doesn’t believe it’s true I can see the ‘I killed the on purpose’ and not accepting compliments as her not believing she is good enough and feels she killed them purposely for this reason.
- the whole not wanting to talk to a counsellor, again I wouldn’t want to I’d rather deal with it myself and talking to friends about it would help me but I wouldn’t want to go and speak to anyone else, I’d mostly deal with it alone.
- the medications it says she signed for them but then when it says the baby crashed it said Lucy was called so I assumed she was not at the baby when she crashed? Which makes me think the other nurse gave the medication?

 

[paulpercy666]

not sure about much except to say, i don’t think that her not wanting to go for counselling in and of itself is suspicious - purely because the times in my life when i have been through some extremely traumatic things, i havent wanted to speak to a therapist either despite the encouragement of friends/family, not because ive done anything wrong or am lying about what happened, i just felt completely unable to verbalise my emotions and didn’t see much point in it. in fact, I felt (at the time!) that it might even make things worse.

not saying it’s not relevant here, just some other posts implied that not wanting to speak to a counsellor was automatically suspicious

 

[OldBlondie]

Although I do believe she is guilty from everything so far I honestly couldn’t say that I would imprison her for life at this point
( waaaaay to go yet I know)

I was hoping for more expects concluding the same outcomes, fob evidence, more damning searching, more damning texts that that knock it out the water for me.The note is the strongest piece of evidence so far I can see, I don’t feel I have a clear picture for baby D on what happened

sorry just rambling my thoughts from today.

You are right, although the prosecution did make it clear it was a very difficult case. So I don’t think a lot of it is as clear cut as we would like it to be. Which is why I think a lot is ultimately going to be down to what the jury’s interpretation will be of the evidence. I think there’s still so much to hear yet too, so I prob shouldn’t, at this point, be set on guilty. Although with not being on jury I think it’s ok for us to be convinced one way or another if we want

We didn't have the vote option on the threads. I for one wanted to hear the evidence against Star's mum, I was already convinced of SB's guilt.

Oh sorry I thought you had a poll on it like this one. Was there any general consensus one way or another when discussing, or was there lots of people in both camps like on here? Did you notice anyone went from guilty to NG once defence properly started? Sorry for so many questions but I’m really curious about whether a lot of people change their mind once defence starts (I know obvs some will, but I mean more in general)

not sure about much except to say, i don’t think that her not wanting to go for counselling in and of itself is suspicious - purely because the times in my life when i have been through some extremely traumatic things, i havent wanted to speak to a therapist either despite the encouragement of friends/family, not because ive done anything wrong or am lying about what happened, i just felt completely unable to verbalise my emotions and didn’t see much point in it. in fact, I felt (at the time!) that it might even make things worse.

not saying it’s not relevant here, just some other posts implied that not wanting to speak to a counsellor was automatically suspicious

Sorry I was one of those posters, and I think the same as you, nothing wrong with not wanting to go to counselling, it’s a personal decision, and not strange in itself, it just feels strange in the overall context/picture of LL. Apologies if it came across as anything other than that. I know people have different experiences, and also deal with them differently, and I wouldn’t ever knock anyones personal approach to how they deal with it

 

[SamPam]

You are right, although the prosecution did make it clear it was a very difficult case. So I don’t think a lot of it is as clear cut as we would like it to be. Which is why I think a lot is ultimately going to be down to what the jury’s interpretation will be of the evidence. I think there’s still so much to hear yet too, so I prob shouldn’t, at this point, be set on guilty. Although with not being on jury I think it’s ok for us to be convinced one way or another if we want


Oh sorry I thought you had a poll on it like this one. Was there any general consensus one way or another when discussing, or was there lots of people in both camps like on here? Did you notice anyone went from guilty to NG once defence properly started? Sorry for so many questions but I’m really curious about whether a lot of people change their mind once defence starts (I know obvs some will, but I mean more in general)

There was quite a split on FS's (Star's mum) guilty verdict, some believed she was more culpable than her sentence reflected, other's believed her low intelligence and the coercion in the relationship were mitigating factors. I think the majority were convinced of SB's guilt from the off.

 

[avabella]

So to clear this up in my head - and I'm not being facetious or wanting to start arguments - but what *is* appropriate texts to a friend/colleague and what 'should' they look like? Because to me they don't read all that badly at all. I could well see myself texting back and forth along similar lines, I just don't get what the missing parts is I'm missing (and maybe it IS me missing the mark here?)

 

[OldBlondie]

There was quite a split on FS's (Star's mum) guilty verdict, some believed she was more culpable than her sentence reflected, other's believed her low intelligence and the coercion in the relationship were mitigating factors. I think the majority were convinced of SB's guilt from the off.

Interesting thank you very much for the reply. Seems it was a lot more clear cut than this, in both evidence and opinion

 

[slingo16]

was she questioned about the note at all? Or was it found after her police interviews?

 

[OldBlondie]

So to clear this up in my head - and I'm not being facetious or wanting to start arguments - but what *is* appropriate texts to a friend/colleague and what 'should' they look like? Because to me they don't read all that badly at all. I could well see myself texting back and forth along similar lines, I just don't get what the missing parts is I'm missing (and maybe it IS me missing the mark here?)

So some of them to me come across as being all about her, and attention seeking. I’ll fully admit some of that is because I find her so guilty, so there is bias with a lot of what she does and says. I find it sinister in the bigger picture when you add it all together. I assume that’s the prosecutions aim, and why they’re presenting them as evidence like this. I also have had experiences with an ex who was attention seeking all the time (txts give me same vibe), and I used to have a friend when she was single really wanted a bf, so she’d send some boys txts saying about what a bad day she’d had at work or uni or whatever, just so they’d ask why what’s wrong and poor her etc. she openly would say to us she did it for attention from them, not the same as this I know, but that’s why I personally have interpreted some of her messages like that. I also will say I know that’s down to my personal experience and thoughts, and also exactly why I understand other people will interpret them in completely other ways, ie they’re just innocent txts about being upset to colleagues. Hope that makes sense typed out, it does in my head anyway

was she questioned about the note at all? Or was it found after her police interviews?

This is just a guess so if anyone knows for sure pls correct, but I think the note will be talked about in more detail once we’ve finished hearing the evidence on all babies, it will maybe then be disclosed what her response to it was. I’m guessing she would have been asked about it as she was interviewed I think 3 times, at least two anyway, and they would have found the note when they searched the house, although not sure if that was done before or after she was arrested (arrested twice too I think). We should get some kind of explanation for it from defence (that she’s given to them about it) though, even if she hasn’t explained in any police interviews