Lucy Letby Case #15

[PumpkinxQueen]

Is quite refreshing we all have different opinions but nobody is being bashed! Quite nice. A very open minded & accepting thread.

I am on the G verdict right now, though! It has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt that she committed these crimes, and I wonder if that CAN be proven? One quote from a detective on a TV show was “We know this person is guilty, we don’t have all the evidence - but every piece of evidence is a brick in the wall” - I think in this case, the wall is almost built, and that’s good enough for police/investigators etc.

All of these events singled out, doesn’t make her guilty. I think it’s all of these events compiled together make her a suspect.

 

[OldBlondie]

A genuine query for the 'definitely guilty' posters - I know we talk a lot about the 'overall picture' bringing you to the conclusion that she is guilty - but I wonder about the 'overall picture' of the failings of this unit, and how that presents in any other conclusions? I feel like the Dr's and witnesses constantly talk about how in context all of these concerns are minimised, but to me that feels dismissive of clinical failures.

Ok Fella I’ll bite. I have said in my posts about a million times. Even with all the negligence on that unit, it is still not enough to explain all these sudden collapses/deaths. If for whatever reason one example of negligence caused a collapse, then the treatment administered to counter act that particular problem (from the alledhed negligence) would reverse it. These babies did not respond clinically how they should have done, like the resuscitation attempts did not have the normal affect they should have. I’m explaining badly but even if a collapse was due negligence, the baby should still respond to any treatment given to counter act, and they didn’t. There’s loads of doctors and nurses and experts dismissing BMs defence theory on negligence being the cause, and then proving why said negligence couldn’t have been the cause. I also found Bohin so credible today because she acknowledged all the medical issues on the unit, as did the experts acknowledge underlying conditions in all babies we’ve heard so far and why they couldn’t have enough alone be the cause. Then when you add of all the circumstantial evidence that has been discussed in depth the last pages and last thread it’s a slam dunk for me. Just out of interest have you re read the wiki on babies E-Q? It seems those that have re read ahead have much different views to those following in real time and only looking at A-D and considering them as stand alone events, not looking at the bigger picture

hiya Fella, firstly this case is not built on Letby’s weird behaviour or being a bit odd. The case comes after two independent reviews concluding that the significant rise is deaths and crashes was not the result of failings. It also comes as a result of multiple consultants being concerned with the correlation of Letby being there for the unexplained events. This is typical of this crime. I imagine we are going to see a similar statistical picture as there are in many other healthcare serial killer cases - eg you become statistically a high percentage more likely to die or nearly die whenever Letby is on shift. Then you can see clearly that not only is she on shift but for multiple multiple charges, she is there at the time of the collapse or has recently administered/given “care” within the last 15 minutes or so. Again, that is a familiar picture for this type of crime. You cannot be that unlucky.
We are of course looking at every baby’s case in intense detail- do I think every detail of the care given has been perfect? No some has been poor. Most I feel has been more than ok. Sometimes they’re busy. Sometimes they’re not. Sometimes the babies are in worse shape. Sometimes they’re clearly doing well. Do I think this will have been the picture every year for this unit? Yes. Then why did they sometimes lose one baby a year? 2. 3. They’re losing this many a month with Letby the last to intervene every time. I’ve heard from a huge varied amount of staff that were there- do I think everyone of them are misremembering or deceiving the jury. No I don’t, I have no evidence for that or logical reason for it whatsoever. Many of them will be parents themselves and they’d be almost as evil as Letby to not give the truth and breaking serious laws. Some of the nurses and staff had worked in this unit for decades and some for much less than that. If they are all so hopeless and missed so much then why haven’t they been doing that for years on end? Why weren’t 4 babies dying every month or so with this team every year? But it’s only one person that’s there every time isn’t it! The junior doctors have become consultants, they are working for the WHO, they have nursed for 20+ years, why is it more believable that alllll these people got it wrong on these babies. Then you have the fact there are at times multiple hospitals involved who must have also been hopeless or bad at their jobs.
Why do the babies with air by their spines all have different reasons for it getting there when it is most likely air administered? The kind of air in volume and placement that they’ve never seen before from trauma? They had different conditions and different awful treatment and yet their presentation was the same in the way they collapsed and they have huge amounts of air. So this is just a coincidence and combination of varying poor care yet it produces the same conclusions for these babies . When the only person that’s stayed the same is Letby.
When we talk about Letby being weird, it’s not oh she dips her chips in chocolate or even she shops at bonmarche as a 25yr old weird that matters- not knowing what an air embolism as a level 6 nurse- more than weird. Standing in the dark watching a baby desaturate is the kind of weird I’m concerned with. Predicting babies that others thought were doing well wouldn’t leave alive weird. Searching families of multiple babies in this case before any link can be found to a supposedly innocent person weird - but they are linked. Some have air by their spines. That’s a big link. Some had insulin poisoning. That’s a big link. That’s some bad luck again for Letby that before all this comes out she’s linked them. It’s bad luck she got so anguished she wrote that she’s evil and killed on purpose despite also presumably thinking there would be nothing that could link her to these babies and nothing that could show she ever harmed them.
I do not believe these babies would have died had it not been for Letby sabotaging them and no accidental phone call, writing on a paper towel, dodgy note keeping is going to convince me otherwise. Yes in theory it makes the case look weaker to some but it doesn’t for me because therr Is far too much to say it cannot have been anything other than sabotage. There is no mistake in the insulin. There has to be another murderous nurse. Or is it more likely that she did that and she put air and milk and breathing tubes with force and venom because in her words ‘she’s evil. She did this. She killed them on purpose’.

What you said
I’m also at the point where I give up trying to explain why I think the way I do, people just seem to not actually read the posts. I spent ages copying and pasting so much from wiki and articles to back up every point I’ve made, to show how her behaviour is sinister, I’ve shown examples from further cases where you can’t make excuses anymore. And still some just refuse to read what’s been written. This is not aimed at anyone, but I feel like I’m repeating myself and no one is taking anything on board or actually reading what’s been written. Perfect example of how your view may change if you actually read page 4 of wiki before dismissing what we are trying to say regarding what we know now and using the rest of the cases e-q, @Weeder was on the fence, but was completely open to LL being guilty or not guilty. We’d discussed yesterday various reasons LLs behaviour became sinister. It was suggested Weeder re read page of the wiki. Suddenly lots of things that some of us keep repeating made complete sense, and swung weeder to probably guilty. She’s not completely there yet with all the medical evidence which is fair enough with weeder’s medical background. But the view on the circumstantial changed and all the points we had been making weeder could now see too. Sorry weeder just using you as an example of someone that actually went and read page 4 of the wiki. This is why I think some of us are at a cross roads. Many following this in real time are obvs only going on A-D which is all we’ve heard so far. But please before you keep dismissing our ideas just go and read page 4 of the wiki first. Anyone that has actually done that I think will understand our points a lot more clearly than anyone that hasn’t, and hopefully see why the overall bigger picture of all these cases put together is so important

 

[Lucyxxxx]

I've voted NG. Somethings really 'off' about all of this but I am finding it harder to understand some of her actions and I do see this pattern of her with the babies parents. If it wasn't for this niggling feeling I have I'd probably be in the guilty camp now.

 

[Treesy19]

Absolutely busted today. 100% sure that mother knows she went to feed at 9. No doubt about that imo. Letby has slipped up here by falsifying records. That mother absolutely knows what time she visited her child.

 

[Weeder]

Yes 1030-4 plus an hour for lunch plus other AM and PM breaks doesn’t leave much time at all. I know the legal teams will work outside of those times and I guess it helps the jury to have regular breaks esp in a case so complex but at the same time, it feels like no wonder it will take six months if you are only doing 3hrs a day of actual evidence.

That's court all over in my experience. Probably even worse in this case due to the sheer amount of work involved. I don't recall actually sitting down in court for longer than an hour or two at a time. It's all about the traipsing.

I got a notification that my last post was quoted, so I have read that and the posts since. Maybe I should explain what I mean a bit more about the one-sidedness just so it's clear.

Comments wanting a person who is currently believing NG to provide evidence as to their thoughts are unfair (at this point in time). The prosecution are presenting their case. How can those who may still think NG present evidence of it when the defence haven't started to provide their evidence yet? It's ok for people to feel unconvinced by the prosecution without being able to give a detailed explanation why. Even gut instinct should be enough at this point - unless posters are wanting threads to have higher standards than courts. Cases are for the prosecution to prove, after all, not for the defence to prove.

It's interesting that those with a medical or legal background are more likely to be the ones on the fence or erring towards not guilty. A comment towards one ex nurse that "hopefully" their opinion towards guilty would be crystallised when they heard further evidence, was obvious in its desire to ensure that person kept believing LL is guilty. That ISN'T general to and fro of disagreements.

People are also disputing WHAT the defence should have done in a certain situation, despite clarification by lawyers. There are lots of "well I think" comments when that happens, despite zero evidence to back those comments up, and facts presented by lawyers are overlooked because they don't fit the person's narrative. So it's hypocritical to want facts based conversation one way, to then ignore that when it suits.

So, while I think LL is absolutely guilty as hell, given I am not in charge of this or any thread, I would be wrong to try to tell people who think otherwise, what they are allowed to post, and that their posts must always stand up to factual scrutiny, when there have been piles of medical, nursing procedure and legal comments made by people who believe LL is guilty, that in no way amount to anything more than "I think" or are actually totally wrong. It's hypocrisy to accept this from one side yet condemn the other for doing it.

I hope that clears it up. It's not intended to have a go at any one person. It's simply that if I can see this as a person who thinks LL is guilty, how must those who aren't yet convinced feel? Or does noone care that lots of those on the fence or currently not guilty, seem to have stopped posting?

I agree. I'd like you to keep posting.
I do feel a little bit like some people feel like they led me by the nose to believe guilty. I'm a grown up, so am able to make my own mind up. I also think I could swing to NG or back to fence sitting following defence argument. I don't think there's much room for that here.
There are no winners. I think that's important to point out.

Also the medical witnesses so far aren't credible to me in part. I stick by that. I'd also like some understanding when I raise these witness issues. It's there in black and white and they're discussion points.

I'm keeping my emotions as light as possible here. I appreciate the jokes, but the sneering must stop.

 

[OldBlondie]

I’m only just catching up from last night. I know we’ve moved on but just few bits from last thread quickly that need no reply

@MmmB777 and @Faith61 I’ve been saying the past two days baby I is horrific, and to be one of the ones that really shows her guilt, far more suspicious stuff concerning that baby that some of the others

Somewhere in the middle of last thread I posted SS from a journalist that confirmed their were 8 witnesses connected to trial judge had ordered anonymity for, suggesting this was to do with them not being able to give evidence to the best of their ability if identity was revealed, suggests this is them maybe still working at hospital rather than connected to babies (I’d had the connection thought too which is why I asked the journalist Nice Fella Dan)

@Tofino excellent find on the photo taken of two triplets by LL I couldn’t find the info anywhere. Also glad we are hearing from radiologist today so hope this means we are getting pathologist soon

Well done to the fellas that managed to find sinister patterns of her FB search’s. Also last thing about handover notes. Loads saying handover notes she had could be a sheet that has other babies on it, BUT prosecution or defence did not mention her having the info for any other babies at home, than ones for this case. Plus with one baby it was a list of its drugs she had, so plenty of evidence at her home THAT SHE SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD

Everyone is entitled to believe what they believe, and that’s what this thread is all about respecting others’ opinions and being able to discuss them in a respectful way (unlike them FB huns). I just can’t see anything but guilty, sorry fellas. I would suggest anyone with doubts go reread page 4 of the wiki, I know it helped @Weeder sort out some of her doubts. One thing I can definitely say though this case is going to get worse as it it’s goes on, it’s going to be incredibly difficult to hear about some of the later babies, especially the suggested physical trauma she inflicted on them leaving them crying in pain(crying is not something neonates like this do)

There’s prob more points I wanted to say from last thread, but have forgotten now. So fellas I will just move on from old thread and start from what we are hearing this morning

 

[Deeznutslol]

Guys… I know I keep saying this but honestly who gives a shit if people don’t like what you post? If they think you’re a dickhead so what?

 

[Rosebud2022]

It’s going to get to the point where people say “Fuck you fella”! And it’s ok cos they said fella*

*Joking of course fellas

 

[PumpkinxQueen]

Can you all just stop?? Lol. We’re all here because we’re interested in the case, not because we’re interested in peoples interpretations of others posts If someone offends you - hit the ignore button and move on ????

 

[Lucyxxxx]

To lighten the mood here's what I would suggest if we had thread titles.

Being a nurse was always her passion
If there's one thing she's guilty of - its crimes against fashion.

 

[SamPam]

Myers must feel like a bastard questioning her, surely

 

[Rosie878]

That poor mother. How brave of her to take the stand.

 

[TapToBoreMeRigid]

Today has been the most upsetting day so far from a personal perspective. That poor mother.

I know that LL barrister is doing his job but it's not a role I could stomach.

 

[od12839]

Edit-don't lawyers advise you to give a lot of "I don't remember" answers though as well...

This is where the 'may harm your defence' bit comes in. If you don't want to answer the police questions you're free to say "no comment" or "i don't recall", it's entirely valid.

But if you change that answer later then your credibility tanks instantly. You can't now tell us Lucy stalked the families on Facebook because she was a dedicated nurse who grieved heavily over the deaths, without acknowledging that she lied to the police or that she literally FORGOT she was grieving. Neither is a good look for a defendant.

 

[Deeznutslol]

Do people actually feel like they can’t post here?? I’m genuinely the most hated poster on several threads on this site (bc I don’t agree with the general opinion of the thread) and every time I post I get people absolutely ripping into me, telling me to shut up, get off the thread etc. and it has literally never once stopped me posting . I honestly couldn’t give a single fuck if people disagree with me.

At the end of the day if people are getting irritated to the point they’re being rude, then they’re the sad ones for getting wound up over other anon users on a fucking gossip forum, but tbh that really isn’t even the case on this particular thread . Vast majority of people are really not rude at all here!

 

[stardust1]

Dear god..." she wasn't as worried "???is he actually joking now?

No....she was prob wanting to believe LL that her baby was ok....before "doing as she was told" and going back to the post natal ward...what point is he trying to make?

when my son went into respiratory arrest and needed ventilated they sent us out the room. Obviously I did as I was told because I trusted that is what he needed and they were going to help him. Wouldn’t all parents trust what the nurses are telling you?! What a stupid thing for him to say.

 

[MmmB777]

What reasonable, innocent explanation is there for this baby nearly leaving the hospital to bleeding to sudden collapse to dead in the space of what, 2 hours?

She was fucking doing nothing too. Nothing. Please tell me that we can any way compare that to a treatment being late or the wrong phone call or anything else we’ve heard. She wasn’t helping that baby. WHY. There isn’t a mistake she’s made that she could be anguished about or racking her brains about imo. That baby suffered trauma at her hands. How many of these babies did she have involvement with after death, bathing, photos, trying to involve herself in the memory box, taking to the morgue.
She put them through this and then poisoned their other child? I honestly am not an overly emotional person, not that I don’t have heaps of empathy and this case is very upsetting but hearing the mother explain how important it was she gave the babies her milk I related so so hard. She never got to give her baby her milk

 

[Deeznutslol]

I’ve not commented much in the last few days but I’m now veering towards guilty at this point tbh. I have been NG and on the fence but she’s just too sus.

 

[Weeder]

Morning! I’ve dipped out a bit (been a very busy week). I’m a bit lost after the last few days struggling to keep up. I’ve skim read but my head hurts . Polite ask, would humans mind putting some paragraphs in their long posts pretty please moving forward ?

I struggle to read big chunks without any, and I am finding my self passing over those quite often at the moment. So I am probably missing out some very valid points of discussion and just look like I’m being a nob and ignoring them.

I would be very great full if posters wouldn’t mind. But if you would rather not, that’s fine also . Happy Sunday everyone

I agree, reading a big wall of text makes me skim read.

The things I think defence will raise regarding the lines. I'm going to paraphrase some articles, some A&P and try and explain what I think will drive a big hole in Baby A (forgive me if I'm wrong about which baby)

I'm also back on the fence and wobbling round like a weeble. Leaning to guilty but KENT. The thing that sways me to guilty is as always the statistics and data about her presence, which leaves me kind of weeding out what I think are the medical failings

This might not have happened fellas but

In ITU and I've since learnt, in PICU the lines you insert in to the major vessels need priming with saline. The line insertion itself can leave miniscule pockets of air in the vein or I guess arterially in UAC, often resolved by further flushing with saline, and apart from thrombisis of the blood clot variety, embolism (full stop) is why you always keep something running through these lines, if you cant run bulk you run a blood thinning miniscule solution. (this is in adult but the same risk applies) ...lines have air in them pre application. I'm really really scared the clearly inexperienced Reg fucked up and didn't prime the line and tried to insert dry. I can't blame LL for this at the moment. There's also the question of 5 applications, one of which was possibly advanced too far. Funny how the line along the spine showing non radio opaque something (yes, yes, they say it's air, but bowel obstruction reads as air, some liquids like a blood filled cavity can read as air, holes can read as air..all they know is it isn't showing radio opaqueness and they think it might be air) and that's also the possible pathway of a mis inserted line, whereas it's not definite this is where injected air would coalesce.



This is all just me thinking out loud, but the Reg, I believe also whipped the line out during resus...so I'm concerned a misplaced line was moved backwards quickly leaving a vacuum in which multiple embolism were released in to or at least coalesced due to backward pressure.

Most of all if that line wasn't in the right place at any one time we're looking at cardiac tamponade, which I'm not sure we'll see on xray on a neonate. There are a lot of difficulties with spotting lines on Xray, many trusts have started using radio opaque guide wires which are left until xray then removed or they use injectable die. This is clearly heard in court when one expert suddenly realised the catheter wasn't where she thought it was. Normalising risking this in a tiny baby is sooooo fucked up. I think the consultant issues may be more widespread than Kent. Why oh why aren't they calling consultants after failed lines and acidotic babies? Arrogance? Fear?

Without knowing for sure this child didn't have underdeveloped lungs we can't know if CPR caused a pneumothorax/air bubble. I know the actual experts will have probably gone through all of this while coming to their own conclusions, but Kent shows us how far apart case notes and actuality can be and how protective staff are of their poor practice.

Now I'm going to be that person who begs everyone to read the Kent document, I have a friend partially involved in this situation. I would quite happily go slap that consultant. Her Grandson died having been discharged WAY early, underweight and not thriving, it's recorded as a SIDS.


So none of this is what I believe happened, just what could have happened but in the face of what seems to me to be medical arrogance and lies we might not get that far.

Once again, this is stuff that goes through my head because I don't know what happened . I'm going to take a closer look at baby D for my own satisfaction too. Something's not right there.

Once more for those at the back -----insulin deaths = guilty. A and D ..hmmmmm....





EDIT :chuckling at my dissing big walls of text, then I post this shit waffle

Edit No 2, Dye not die

 

[friedeggontoast]

If it’s a decision of who to trust over the first time mum who was clearly besotted with her twin babies vs. the nurse who falsified medical notes and lied then it’s a no brainer.

What does the mum stand to gain from lying?