Lucy Letby Case #14

[Haveyouanywool]

No offence fellas, getting a bit fed up with the Dr and hospital bashing.
I’ve not long finished over a years worth of cancer treatment, costing hundreds of thousands. No delays, even with Covid, in diagnosis, chemo, surgery, immunotherapy, radiotherapy, follow up MRIs, CTs
The main stay of the chemo unit, a male nurse, has been there for decades, everyone knows him. Always rushed off his feet, but good. Nice cup of tea and a sandwich if you’re there at lunch time.
Free wigs, and fittings, free boobs, lymphoedema sleeves free and fitted by a nurse. volunteer podiatrists and massages (bit limited at the end of Covid). First phone call to the GP she had me in that afternoon for a face to face, immediate referral. GP’s also great with aftercare, meds etc.
Not everything can be perfect 100% of the time but when you need it, don’t forget what you’ve actually got!
Sorry for the personal derail fellas!

 

[Rosebud2022]

So I might have just emailed Mark in the hopes he might let me know what’s happening this week in regards to the live reporting. I was dying to use the word Fella somewhere in there, but thought on this occasion it would probs be better not to

Imagine he replied “I know which group you mean and I’m not working this week fella”

 

[Facehugger]

Allitt was known as the 'angel of dearh' and killed babies with air bubbles or insulin. I remember it all very well as the case was close to me. In a perverse way, she thought she was doing these poorly babies a favour 'saving' them from a possible life blighted by various disability, alongside what was then 'Munchausens by proxy' & wanted the attention. The sad thing is that some of the babies who survived are now even more disabled because of her!

I think Letby has done the exact same. She's guilty. They've not spent 7 years building a case for nothing, they must be very sure of their facts for the CPS to proceed with prosecution.

 

[OldBlondie]

*FELLAS, slightly breaking news

I have something to share I can confirm that Dan from Twitter (bbc reporter) is most definitely a nice fella. It had been niggling at me that journalists kept reminding us that they can’t report babies names, family or witnesses connected to the babies. And it got me thinking something, are some of the medical witnesses actually related to the babies, down the rabbit hole I go with the thinking along the lines of the theory that parents had something in common to do with being medical. So thought I’d ask Dan if he could clarify are some witnesses possibly related, or is it as some suggested and they perhaps still work at the hospital. This was the convo, @Tofino i took your advice on board on what I have should have said to mark Fella in email yesterday, seems this tactic was more successful what a nice fella Dan is, and we all have to be super nice about his live reporting from here on in, although tbf, incidentally today he actually had far more tweets and detail than Judith. Also asked him about the live reporting everyday, and he confirms he will be there til the end Definitely a good fella this fella. Only wish I’d managed to get the word Fella into one of the messages
**Not suggesting now that any of the babies are related to medical staff just in case there’s any confusion, just sharing what he said in relation to the query

 

[Parsnipface]

Facebook is for divvys, huns and outraged racists. Say what you like about here but we've been mostly respectful and defo have had intelligent discussions from all of us in the g/ng/undecided camps.

Facebook would draw conclusions based off of one headline from the sun and her year 4 school report.

 

[OldBlondie]

So I might have just emailed Mark in the hopes he might let me know what’s happening this week in regards to the live reporting. I was dying to use the word Fella somewhere in there, but thought on this occasion it would probs be better not to

 

[StatusWoe]

Thank you for taking the time and explaining it all clearly to me. It’s actually mind blowing going through this. I’d struggle if on the jury, although I know they can ask about anything they’re unsure of. It’s just the sheer amount of info your brain has to process

Us on the jury:

 

[Tofino]

Fellas, I went down a bit of a rabbit hole researching Ben Myers to see if there was any indication of him bringing out any big evidence later on (if he has a particular style). I know this won’t interest everyone so I’ve put behind a spoiler so as not to clog up the thread. also not looking to get into debates about it as it’s all just speculation anyway and I just found it interesting. But it’s in relation to him defending Jordan Monaghan who was found guilty of murdering two of his own children and his new partner years later. He got minimum 48 year term.

Spoiler

I found the below listed under Ben Myers on exchange chambers website which is a case he was involved in which I thought sounded quite similar with cross examination of complex medical evidence. It was actually the very top one so might be the most recent but technically he ‘lost’ as Jordan Monaghan was found guilty.

R v JM: Multiple murder of family members by suffocation and poisoning. Complex medical forensic evidence requiring cross-examination of eminent experts across multiple specialisms including paediatrics, paediatric pathology, neuropathology, cardiology, immunology, histopathology, radiography, paediatric surgery, toxicology, pharmacology and genetics.


The children had a couple of unexpected unexplained collapses before fatal ones. Even the post mortem didn’t bring up anything suspicious

There is a lot of articles but these stood out as being most interesting. I’ve picked out some interesting bits. I’ve so far not found any articles where he brought in his own experts but if anyone is also interested feel free to see if you can find any.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-58885924

Duncan Smith QC, prosecuting, told the jury that both Ruby and Logan suffered a "collapse" and were seen by medics in the months before their deaths but no serious medical condition was found.
He said they both recovered prior to a final fatal event, when Mr Monaghan "unlawfully and deliberately" obstructed their breathing.

A post-mortem examination concluded she had died from acute bronchopneumonia, but Mr Smith told the jury the pathologist was "mistaken" as Mr Monaghan had deliberately obstructed his daughter's breathing.


https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co....aghan-jury-urged-clear-triple-murder-accused/

“The prosecution have a theory, a pattern, they rely upon very heavily.

And he said a dozen medical experts could not say definitively what caused the collapses and deaths of the children, and concluded the cause of their deaths was “unascertained”.

Mr Myers said, in fact, there was an obvious and natural cause of death in the case of Ruby, in that she had been diagnosed with acute bronchitis pneumonia.

Monaghan is alleged to have smothered Logan in a cubicle at a local swimming pool, out of sight, where he could be alone with the child.

But the allegation of the murder of Logan was built on “very tenuous stuff” Mr Myers told the jury.

And he said the “really unsatisfactory aspect of this case” related to the absence of any physical evidence of smothering.



https://www.lancs.live/news/lancashire-news/blackburn-dad-jordan-monaghan-trial-22036001.amp

Interesting questioning that I think is similar to some posters on here have alluded to with current scientific knowledge of neonates.

Ben Myers QC, defending, asked the witness, as genetic testing was at the forefront of scientific discovery, just because the current knowledge we have does not identify a genetic cause for a death, does not mean one might be found in the future as the science advances.

“That is correct,” the witness replied.

Ben also went on to represent Jordan when his sentence was reviewed. He originally got min term of 40 years but it was increased to 48 years after the review.

Anyway I’m coming to the conclusion that I don’t think with defence barristers a guilty verdict is necessarily bad for their career. I think it’s about ensuring they get a fair trial like PP said.

 

[PenelopeTitsDrop]

I think that Mr Myers taking on the Monaghan case as well as this one, shows that he believes in the rule and processes of the law. Everyone is entitled to a defence, and as the accused has pleaded not guilty, then he is doing the best job for them that he can, within the law, irrespective of whether he personally believes LL is guilty or not. He's able to put that aside to do a job society needs him to do. Anyone who was falsely accused would be grateful for that ability.

So I vote Ben Myers is a good fella in my eyes

Edited to say I don't think he has anything up his sleeve either. It's just that there is little he can do except try to cast reasonable doubt on a very compelling prosecution case. He will absolutely know that there is a very high chance LL will be found guilty on the basis of the evidence. It takes courage to defend a case like that. Kudos to him where others may have walked away.

Ben Myers making sure the law and due process is followed to the letter, means there is also less chance of LL being able to appeal on a point of law or process if she is convicted, thus dragging the families through more appeals. So he's doing society a big service in my opinion.

 

[Tofino]

Just listening to the latest Mail podcast about baby c. It’s making things a bit clearer actually.

For the first incident Sophie Ellis was out the room and when she heard the alarm and went back in Lucy was standing over the incubator.

For the next one, they’ve made it clear (finally!) that there is a computer/desk in room 1, opposite the incubator, which Sophie Ellis was sat at but she had her back to the incubator. When she turned to attend to the baby when he collapsed again, Lucy was at his cot side again.

So being in the same room on the computer doesn’t mean the nurse would see Lucy if she did anything. Pretty bold if she did do it.

 

[Daisydunn15]

I don’t suppose we have any Italian fellas amongst us? Fellarellas shall we say. I really want to know more about Sonya Caleffi but there is hardly anything written about her in English it’s all Italian.

I'm not but I vote for any Spanish fellas to be Faellas.. like paella.

 

[raspberryjuice]

Going back to the notes and handover sheets found during a search of her home… I get that some people take these home accidentally, and most would get rid of them when they found them. It’s not on the same scale confidentiality wise but I accidentally bring home copies of rotas, holiday requests, absence records for my staff when I’ve shoved them in my pocket and forgot to empty them at the end of my shift. I obviously shouldn’t, but it does happen and I get that.

But according to the RightMove sales history on her house (link shared on here earlier this week) she bought it in March 2016. By this time we’re already on to Child L. If you hadn’t already disposed of the notes/handover sheet you accidentally took home when you got home from that shift and found them, or thrown them in confidential waste on your next shift - surely you’d get rid of them when you were going through all your stuff to move house/organising in your new house?

 

[PenelopeTitsDrop]

I've said before, to the layperson, it feels to me like day to day the unit was run by the seat of its pants. Maybe that's how hospitals are run in general up and down the country, which is horrifying, but to an outsider (me), it's a very bleak picture.

Most hospitals ARE run by the seat of their pants. They have been underfunded in real terms so that staff are expected to do a lot more with fewer resources... including people.

I do think, though that despite me thinking LL is guilty, the temptation to see every cock up through the lense of malevolence is what may make her actually walk free, as blaming her for everything will cast sufficient doubt that it could sway the jury's minds.

LL could be a murderer AND make cock ups, same as the other staff on that unit. Phoning the wrong parents on purpose makes no sense because it would draw more attention to her. The number on the paperwork at the end of the bed would be for the baby undergoing resus. The number for the other baby's parents wouldn't immediately be to hand at that bed. So I am going for someone pressing last number redial by accident, a mistake which shouldn't happen, but if made by LL is in no way related to her being a murdering cowbag. If LL did it deliberately and the Dr didn't immediately realise what had happened (e.g. last number redial) the Dr would have gone apeshit and the staff would have remembered it.

Same as the calculations going missing. It's precisely the sort of shite that happens, particularly in a busy area with loads of staff...stuff gets knocked and goes flying in a hurry. LL checking how the colleague knew the dose could be seen as a person who likes to try to get colleagues into trouble. Not ALL her actions should be viewed through the lense of trying to kill in my opinion.

The ward can be chaos, innocent mistakes can be made AND LL could be a murderer.

Sorry to ramble but I hope you see what I mean.

PS paper towels are totally the norm. Noone wants to spend the time finding a clean bit of paper in a resus situation. You grab what you can and write it up properly afterwards. Every second counts.

 

[coffeeandwine]

There is no good reason to tell off a colleague for calling her help. Lisa Walker is right: you can never have enough help in a situation like that. Even in MH when there's an incident it's always better to have back up that you can turn away if need be, than to need extra help and not have it. Fully feel like she was pissed off at having her plans scuppered and the mask slipped because that is not normal behaviour from someone in her profession.

 

[Parsnipface]

Those poor fucking parents.

Why the fuck would LL bollock a colleague unless she was trying to hurt a baby? No reason.
It doesn't seem like she wants to bring them back from the edge of death does it, (for the praise/god complex type) it seems like she wants to leave a fucking body count. She was snappy because she was fucking angry.

I initially thought she'd maybe got a weird little buzz from the killing and deaths, she maybe had fantasies and just acted upon it and carried on like a shop lifter getting a buzz. I always felt it was all anger based and she was hurting those babies to punish others and enjoy the grief.
Now I think she's more calculated than I gave her credit for initially, now I feel she potentially even sought out this Job in the way Ian Huntley chose working at a school.

If she didn't do this she's the unluckiest cunt I've ever heard of.

 

[DianaBanana]

I think the clusters in Facebook searches are interesting, where she’s searched for 3 sets of parents in a row.

For example, on the 5th October she searched for the parents of baby I, twins E and F, and then baby H. All in quick succession. Why?

Baby I did not die until 23rd October (there had been one attempt before the mentioned search), and baby H survived (2 attempts in Sept) So why is she searching them all at the same time? If she’s innocent, why does it appear that in her mind, there is a link between them?

This was before suspicions were raised and she was moved to day shifts. So I don’t see why an innocent person would link these 3 families at this point.

 

[Stiltoncheese]

I see Ben Myers still pushing the narrative that baby Ds breathing issues were poorly managed but yet another doctor is saying that they have never seen baby do this before or since and yet another with the weird mottling. How many more cases can Ben try to defend it as poor care when they all had totally different presentations but almost identical crashes with rashes not seen before.

I've been on the fence up to now as feel we haven't really heard anything tangible from the defence and that may make a difference down the line, but I am struggling to get past how many very experienced medical people are saying they have never seen this in any cases before these and that the deaths were all sudden and unexpected.

 

[TennisTina]

Hi fellas, I'm a new lurking fella and have signed up just to join you all! I'm undecided at the moment, purely on the basis of it being only a little way into a long trial but overall, if pressed, I'd say it's not looking good for LL.
One thing I am wondering is, if it wasn't LL at 7pm and holding phone, surely the nurse it was, assuming they remember such a balls up as that call and can maybe be confirmed by swipe at 7pm, surely they'd have been identified/would have come forward? Oh yes, that was me holding the phone that time etc.

It's tempting to think she might have cruelly planned the call but it's also within the bounds of possibility that it was an error from a previous call etc.

So that's my tuppence worth so far, fellas. I think I might be an unimaginative basic bitch but I've never been to matalan, peacocks or Bon Marche

PS I thought the mother of Baby D said she remembered the clock said 7pm, which was why she was clear on the time. Perhaps I've got that wrong tho, someone might confirm.

I feel, in their heart of hearts, her own parents will have a gut feeling about whether she is capable of this..

 

[MmmB777]

I think even if she had misunderstood the dosage of the insulin - there would be no reason for it to be in the TPN bag. It’s been said many times by nurses on these threads that it isn’t administered this way because it’s difficult to accurately measure the dose going in at any time, it binds to the bag and the line etc. So even if by some stretch she had accidentally messed up the amount to give the baby, she wouldn’t do that and also mess up putting it in a TPN bag. And we know it was in the bag because baby was gradually getting worse throughout the day so it was still going in.

Absolutely this. It was no accident at all. Somebody on those shifts wanted those babies to die and I think it 100% was the person that wrote ‘I’m evil. I killed them on purpose’.

 

[coffeenow]

I’ve said it before but if the mother believes she saw LL “around 7pm” and LL clocked in at 7.26pm, then it absolutely could have been Lucy.

If something happened to me at 4.26, I’d probably say it happened at 4… especially if I was being interviewed about the fact years later.