- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Baby N I found particularly horrendous, especially as baby N is one of the only babies injured to do with bleeding. This was after LL had text a colleague saying she’d Googled the bleeding condition that N had, Google said baby only had 50/50 chance due to this, then that baby has bleeding, that I fully believe she caused. I think this shows how devious she was by pre setting the scene to colleague about the baby having condition and therefore only a 50/50 chance, and shows she was calculating in picking this baby for the purpose of thinking it would be easy to cover her tracks. I dislike BM today even more than I did! Imagine saying the mum was mistaken about how horrendous it was to hear. I honestly think some of his questioning is going to get more ridiculous as we go on, cos he knows he’s nothing to work with so all he can do is try to discredit pretty much every witness
. For me it just makes her seem more guilty, the more ridiculous he seems to be
Last edited:
Tiny me rail.
When my mum died in her bed at a nursing home she had to have a post-mortem. Not because it was suspicious as such but because it was sudden and she was alone.
Maybe because this poor babies death was attended by physicians a pm wasn’t necessary?
Was there any indication in the (falsified) nursing notes that the baby had been bleeding from the mouth? How did the Dr know that 13mls of blood had been lost?
Not making excuses. Just wondering.
When I had my baby in 2009 visitors had to sign into the maternity ward at reception and state the time. I think this should be a standard practice.
However with phones these days we all document everything via photos, Snapchat, WhatsApp etc. Most things we do are timestamped because we all live through our phones. Mum would have whipped out her iPhone had it happened recently noone would be able to deny the time frames or blood and she would have little defence.
However with phones these days we all document everything via photos, Snapchat, WhatsApp etc. Most things we do are timestamped because we all live through our phones. Mum would have whipped out her iPhone had it happened recently noone would be able to deny the time frames or blood and she would have little defence.
I wondered that. Even if good reason to write retrospectively, on a night that she even said was quiet, why 8 hours to write that note that happens to try and give an explanation for why mum may have seen blood around the mouth...which I am assuming she is trying to pass off as 'mucky aspirate'Letby's note for 8pm at August 3 is written, written at 4.51am retrospectively, to say: "Mummy was present at start of shift attending to cares."
Why is an 8pm note being written retrospectively (after baby died) when nothing appears to have been happening at 8pm to delay writing notes?
Same with the suicide of a family member - was obviously clear how they died, but given their age etc, they still needed the post Mortem. Do any religious grounds prevent a PM? Always thought it would be done in a hospital for a baby, especially when death wasn’t ‘expected’.. (?) also just for medical research reasons etc
on that program I mentioned there was a suicide who needed a PM even tho it was obvious. I’m not sure if family can just point blank refuse but google says there must be consent? So if hospital have convinced the mother to not get one maybe she said no or simply didn’t want ome
I wonder if the postnatal ward had notes on mum too. I’m sure they would have wrote something like “8pm mum expressing milk to be taken to neonatal ward. Pain relief given ” or “7pm mum happy and off to neonatal”. I requested my notes and they document regularly.Letby's note for 8pm at August 3 is written, written at 4.51am retrospectively, to say: "Mummy was present at start of shift attending to cares."
Why is an 8pm note being written retrospectively (after baby died) when nothing appears to have been happening at 8pm to delay writing notes?
good point they should do. When I was waiting on discharge to go round NICU I had to wait on someone to complete notes so they knew I hadn’t just done a runner
seems a bit stupid to just try discredit the timing with no actual evidenceI’d personally hate the idea of my tiny babe being cut into and examined etc
so I’m not judging the parents decision at all, definitely odd though! I guess COD was perhaps seemingly clear idkHopefully they will hear from the midwife that supported the mum and the staff member Letby claims to have spoken to. This will discredit her lies.good point they should do. When I was waiting on discharge to go round NICU I had to wait on someone to complete notes so they knew I hadn’t just done a runner
i had to check but it was the night shift before she wrote that to her colleague so I guess this shift may have been busier. Still, from what we are hearing about the conditions of those two babies she was assigned to and the sequence of events, it doesn’t appear there was anything significant happening at that time to delay writing 8pm notes.
I hope we do. Not because I doubt the mother but I want it to be crystal clear what a lier Letby is!!
I think as she blindly trusted the medics and they suggested there wouldn’t be much point of having one, she just agreed not to. Slight Me rail but my brother had a pm, coroner advised us not to read report, we did and now I completely understand why families are advised against reading. Anyway sorry, the point was that what is done during a PM can be very very upsetting/distressing for loved ones to think about, and I can fully see why the parents didn’t want anymore done to their little precious baby who had already been through enough, especially after hearing the mum was too traumatised to even bath the baby after. It was also extremely unexpected too, so the parents would have been in shock and it could have affected their judgment, so they just went along with what the medics said
Covering her sorry a ..devious witchLetby's note for 8pm at August 3 is written, written at 4.51am retrospectively, to say: "Mummy was present at start of shift attending to cares."
Why is an 8pm note being written retrospectively (after baby died) when nothing appears to have been happening at 8pm to delay writing notes?
We don't know if they're supporting her to be fair, perhaps they feel for various reasons they want to be present. Imagine how frustrating it is for us to not hear all of the detail the court hears them amplify it by x amount if they weren't to attend. I can't even imagine what it must be like to have a child accused of this, personally just my opinion I think them attending perhaps indicates they're open minded rather than blindly supporting her? Either way bloody horrific all round.
It was recorded that the day shift staff attended to cares at 7pm so mum wouldn’t have needed to do that again before 8pm when Letby claims she was. I’m sure the day staff will remember if mum was there or not too. They would have documented it.
I made the mistake of listening to the podcast this morning AND reading up on this trial. I can honestly say it was a big mistake as it truly felt utterly overwhelming.
If I was on the jury, I do not know if I could handle the information they have been given.
It's an utterly distressing case and I wonder is it possible for jurors to ask to leave the trial if they mentally and emotionally become too overwhelmed?
If I was on the jury, I do not know if I could handle the information they have been given.
It's an utterly distressing case and I wonder is it possible for jurors to ask to leave the trial if they mentally and emotionally become too overwhelmed?
We rarely think about the suspects family - unfortunately it often ends up that their entire lives are imploded too, with jobs & friends etc, I imagine that’s very difficult to deal with. I think I always have a base level of empathy for the suspects family(s) - but my empathy primarily lies with the victims families, obvi.
And there’d be CCTV! The hospital I gave birth in had a crazy number of cameras & buzz in camera systems to access the maternity/neo ward!
I agree with what you say, also the defence will have advised the parents to attend everyday. I know they still have a choice whether to or not, but they maybe believed LL at the start, and with defence advising them to attend, it would definitely look awful for LL if they just stopped now
- Status