They have not said it wasn’t unexpected at the time at all surely?! Do you mean all of the doctors have said the deaths weren’t unexpected and they were poorly? I’m struggling again sorry. Even Letby herself has said in her texts they’re unexpected and a surprise, so do the replies. Some go to coroner and the causes of death are not always conclusive. Of course before the murderer was caught, other reasons for death would be on there and other explanations are given. Why would that prove anything? What part could this doctors mistake in the death play in the rest of the story for 22 charges. Why did the doctors mistaking all of Cullen’s victims deaths as explainable mean that Cullen was innocent. If anything, myers himself has said today this death is unexplainable and I don’t think anyone could say it wasn’t sudden (surely Letby should have seen the signs if anyone was to) - so why does this keep happening to Letby?
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I completely agree (if G), I think there has been lots of other incidents where she has harmed babies to varying degrees. Any they felt they have not been strong enough to prosecute they have to omit to not prejudice the jury, and ofc there was the murder charge where the judge instructed NG, as the prosecution ended up deciding not to offer evidence for it, and they are trying for attempted murder on that one instead.
I also agree there could be lots of instances of her cruelty to more babies (over just how long who knows). I don’t know if you’ve read about babies G,I and N yet? They are all babies that have (allegedly) been hurt using very cruel methods, methods that have inflicted noticeable pain on these babies. Again not sure if you’ve read about K, but I think it’ll be the hardest one to secure a conviction on, as the prosecution have already said there was sub optimal care with this baby.
I know a lot don’t agree but I do have empathy with some of the nurses and doctors we’ve heard from in this trial, a lot seem to be very affected and upset by what’s happened, and care very much about their patients, never mind get their heads around the fact their trusted colleague is actually a SK (if G). Aswell as that, as others have mentioned if it wasn’t for their skill in saving them, then there could have been far more babies that died. I wonder if when the trial is over whether we will then hear of any further allegations/ones that cps didn’t feel could be proved beyond reasonable doubt?
Hummingbird I think is significant, and in job title it mentions part of job will be having to travel to Merseyside (where the Women’s hospital that she’d previously been in is based), and the job is expected to last another 3 years. Some don’t read anything into this, but I think they’re looking for more of LL’s victims
I fully appreciate that, I think BM did a good job today, for a whole load of reasons already discussed today/tonight. But yes I’m not surprised a lot see this as another example of care not being good enough. I don’t think it’s given me personally any doubts on these deaths being down to hospital care rather than her, but I’ve already said I find it hard to see past her being G, so know this is biased. Luckily I’m not on the jury so my opinion makes zero difference at this stage (any stage at all really). The lack of PM still doesn’t explain the unexpected, and unexplained sudden death of E, if it wasn’t nec then what was it? I haven’t seen the defence offer any other credible explanation for E so far (appreciate still more to come). All I see is him muddying the waters, which he’s obvs done a good job on for some people. But I don’t see LL as any less innocent due to no PM, if anything I think it’s hurt the prosecution having no PM, but just not for the same reason you do. I can see many on the fence that were possibly leaning to G will be more unsure again now, and have more doubts. And can see some of the NG reaffirming their belief too. Again I guess it’s all how we interpret what we hear, and on our different life experiences too
Last edited:
There are bound to be parents following the trial that had a baby in NICU during her working years that have been reminded of small odd occurrences with her. Maybe they found her to be uncomfortable too and have since reported it.. They always say it doesn’t matter how small your information is as it builds a picture.
I’m assuming that is why the Hummingbird line of enquires is still open for people to submit further information.
I’m assuming that is why the Hummingbird line of enquires is still open for people to submit further information.
You have explained something very sensibly there that I have been picturing in my mind- the rashes and the confusion, different descriptions of things they’ve not seen before or since and the trying to find cause of death. It looks like incompetence, not knowing their a from their elbow… but it isn’t. They are literally fighting against an unknown demon. They are working against a force unknown to them. Of course they will not understand what’s going on or what the causes of deaths are but they have to conclude on best fit. They tried to seek answers, they sent some to coroner. They tried to ask other hospitals if mother’s conditions could cause things. Junior doctor taking time off thinking did I do something wrong. A nurse saying she couldn’t sleep, could we have done more. Colleague saying there was something odd about that night. Texts saying “what?! They were improving?” They are fighting a battle that they do not know they are fighting.
In addition to the harm the babies suffered and the turmoil the babies parents went through what the staff themselves were put through was nothing short of mental torture.
Thank you. Very well explained. I see why you couldn’t just put failure. Not sure where my ex-husbands death certificate is to check but I know there was medical uncertainty to why his condition (which he’d had for 28years) escalated to death, in the way it did, on the day he was supposed to be discharged. I absolutely never have, even now, suspected foul play.
Maybe this is why I’m not finding it quite so shocking as others.
Last edited:
I’ve only popped in and out but I’m hoping once mum duties are done tonight to have a good read of the wiki. From your posts @OldBlondie and a few other posters over the current discussion, there is a lot of sensible and open minded insight as to what can be expected as a reasonable standard within the nhs but I do find a lot of the blame culture around the nhs really difficult. I’ve worked with plenty of crap nhs workers and there are protocols to approach this. It’s broken for sure, but it’s broken from the top down (see the former bleeping health minister mopping up 400k - alongside the mp wage which in itself could play for at least four more doctors in that particular nicu) and we all make mistakes but equally what is right for one patient isn’t always the same for the next patient.
The chat around lack of pm.. a bit of understanding and willingness to understand why a pm would be done is so helpful.. if LL had removed oxygen from a patient who then had a cardiac arrest from a low oxygen level which causes heart attack/cardiac arrest.. ‘low oxygen’ doesn’t show on pm, it would be classed as a natural cause ie heart attack with no toxins etc and taken a year for inquest/closure for the parents. And no, not one person had reason to suspect foul play and if they dared to suggest they had done then all the backlash would be (correctly) against why they didn’t immediately call the police on suspecting it.
I’m happy to offer explanations where I can and I being as objective and transparent as possible - including agreeing where failings are evident. Medicine is not black and white, there is almost always more than one explanation for anything from a nose bleed up to a death. Making the decision re what the cause is and proceeding to treat it is one of the main distinguishing factors between what being a doctor is as opposed to other members of the healthcare team, as is holding hands up and admitting you could have been or were wrong. Let’s also remember that she was essentially a manipulating compulsive psychopathic liar, taking in to account the calculating harm she purportedly carried out.
I will let you know once I’ve read a bit more around the background @OldBlondie but I can see for sure the headline of ‘x number of families were interviewed as part of police investigation around LL’ once the verdict is reached. All we can reflect on now is how she’s kept out of the way of inflicting harm. How any of the families, or even the staff in that unit are able to trust another health professional again is beyond me though. I just can’t imagine how that would feel.
The chat around lack of pm.. a bit of understanding and willingness to understand why a pm would be done is so helpful.. if LL had removed oxygen from a patient who then had a cardiac arrest from a low oxygen level which causes heart attack/cardiac arrest.. ‘low oxygen’ doesn’t show on pm, it would be classed as a natural cause ie heart attack with no toxins etc and taken a year for inquest/closure for the parents. And no, not one person had reason to suspect foul play and if they dared to suggest they had done then all the backlash would be (correctly) against why they didn’t immediately call the police on suspecting it.
I’m happy to offer explanations where I can and I being as objective and transparent as possible - including agreeing where failings are evident. Medicine is not black and white, there is almost always more than one explanation for anything from a nose bleed up to a death. Making the decision re what the cause is and proceeding to treat it is one of the main distinguishing factors between what being a doctor is as opposed to other members of the healthcare team, as is holding hands up and admitting you could have been or were wrong. Let’s also remember that she was essentially a manipulating compulsive psychopathic liar, taking in to account the calculating harm she purportedly carried out.
I will let you know once I’ve read a bit more around the background @OldBlondie but I can see for sure the headline of ‘x number of families were interviewed as part of police investigation around LL’ once the verdict is reached. All we can reflect on now is how she’s kept out of the way of inflicting harm. How any of the families, or even the staff in that unit are able to trust another health professional again is beyond me though. I just can’t imagine how that would feel.
You have worded this perfectly - to the point it’s brought me to tears.
Sadly this is what the nhs has become these days. And I say that as someone who works for itIt really does and that's what I'm struggling with
I’m sorry. That is how I feel too sometimes.I am so interested to see your take on the wiki and insight into things. Thanks for your contribution.
I’ve been reading through summaries of each day and I’m fairly doubtful about her guilt
One of the experts, Evans or something of the like I think, does give me the vibe that he has a little pet theory about air and is trying to push it into everything. I saw someone also comment that some evidence given by nurses seemed like they were both covering for each other and that left a slightly poor taste in my mouth. The hospital also just seems a bit chaotic which is doing them no favours imo
LL has searched up plenty of parents so her looking at profiles doesn’t seem to be that suspicious to me. The one message I found odd was when a colleague said it was weird that so many deaths were happening that were similar and LL’s reply seemed like she was trying to ease suspicion by saying that the causes/events were different
I’d be interested in hearing about the deaths of other babies and whether there are any similarities at all with the way things happened. Though I’ve seen some mention on Reddit that it’s odd in itself that LL seemed to change her method and there’s a real possibility that deaths she had no part in (if she has had a part at all) have been included in the case
One of the experts, Evans or something of the like I think, does give me the vibe that he has a little pet theory about air and is trying to push it into everything. I saw someone also comment that some evidence given by nurses seemed like they were both covering for each other and that left a slightly poor taste in my mouth. The hospital also just seems a bit chaotic which is doing them no favours imo
LL has searched up plenty of parents so her looking at profiles doesn’t seem to be that suspicious to me. The one message I found odd was when a colleague said it was weird that so many deaths were happening that were similar and LL’s reply seemed like she was trying to ease suspicion by saying that the causes/events were different
I’d be interested in hearing about the deaths of other babies and whether there are any similarities at all with the way things happened. Though I’ve seen some mention on Reddit that it’s odd in itself that LL seemed to change her method and there’s a real possibility that deaths she had no part in (if she has had a part at all) have been included in the case
I’ve said it before, the NHS has just spent 100s of thousands of pounds to save my life. Everyone at the GP’s practice, from the receptionists up, have been fab.Sadly this is what the nhs has become these days. And I say that as someone who works for it
This was what the consultant said in an interview in 2018. ‘Unusual but not entirely unexpected’
This part reminded me of the prosecution witness for Louise Woodward who was absolutely adamant and testified many times about the baby having 'shaken baby syndrome' and how Louise was so entirely guilty because of the results he'd seen. He later then said years and years later that he wouldn't testify like that today and he shouldn't have pushed that theory so hard.
It fries the mind really doesn't it!
This part reminded me of the prosecution witness for Louise Woodward who was absolutely adamant and testified many times about the baby having 'shaken baby syndrome' and how Louise was so entirely guilty because of the results he'd seen. He later then said years and years later that he wouldn't testify like that today and he shouldn't have pushed that theory so hard.
It fries the mind really doesn't it!
Attachments
Dr Evans perhaps….?
Why would deaths she had probably had no part in be included in the cases? For a case to be pursued there has to be a certain level of evidence, not, oh we’ll just chuck them in too, like it’s a bag of liquorice all sorts.
It's not a criticism on individuals, but the staff shortages and cuts absolutely make a difference. I left not too long ago because even though myself and my colleagues were all passionate, competent, committed and dedicated to the job it was unsafe. There are undoubtedly issues with the culture in some settings and trusts, but honestly being way way under safe staffing levels is scary. One night shift I was the only registered nurse for 18 patients- even though the HCAs were brilliant that's just bloody ludicrous. Even when you Datix it its pointless as nothing gets done. Wait lists for scans etc at a year plus, it's heartbreaking. I am a huge advocate for the NHS and its great some are still receiving great care, but bloody hell if it was a person it'd be on DNR at this point.
Things weren't as bad nationally in the timeframe of the trial, but lots of things people are finding fairly shocking seem like business as usual to be honest. I will add my GP surgery is amazing, not sure how they do it as the demand is huge and like everywhere they are short of qualified GPs.
Well wasn’t the point that at the time she did think it was NECThisif there was any inclination that it wasn’t the correct cause of death, surely your conscience would prevent you from letting parents walk out the door thinking one thing when you were thinking another? 🥹
A lot of the evidence is circumstantial and based on her simply being there. It’s a pattern but it also makes it easy to include cases where she really may not have had any involvement and something “unexpected” simply happened - the defence will presumably address how unexpected those deaths actually would have been
The others aren't included as this is a trial specifically relating to whether LL is guilty or not, and so ones which don't have any evidence relating to that arent included. I do wonder if the defence will raise the others though (if they're allowed?) as if there were similar deaths but they aren't included as she wasn't present their omission is different to if they categorically know the reasons for their deaths so they aren't suspicious or unexpected at all.
Her simply being there when babies who weren’t expected to die simply up and just did that?
I don’t think the defence will be bringing much more to that particular table.
They’ll have their own witnesses so the tables may turn slightly. Right now we are hearing from witnesses that make the prosecution’s case stronger so really we should be thinking she is guilty
Though if I remember right there was a witness that agreed one of the deaths wasn’t that unexpected because the child was already in poor health, the only concern was how quickly they crashed
- Status