Lucy Letby Case #18

[Tofino]

I’ve updated the wiki with all of last weeks reporting. Unfortunately can’t fit all of the child F reporting on same page as child E so we now have a sixth page.

Lucy Letby Case contains live reporting links, opening statements for both prosecution and defence including opening statements for each child.

Lucy Letby Case 2 page contains evidence heard for Child A & B (twins)

Lucy Letby Case 3 page contains evidence heard for Child C

Lucy Letby Case 4 page contains evidence heard for Child D.

Lucy Letby Case 5 page contains evidence heard for Child E (twin).

Lucy Letby Case 6 page contains evidence heard for Child F (twin).

 

[raspberryjuice]

I do agree, but can’t get past him calling the mum a liar, I thought he was absolutely brutal on her tbh. I know it’s his job etc but I still think he took it too far. But yes at the end of the day he has to do his job, and look at it objectively as you say, and separate it. But as a human being on an emotional level, how you can do it I don’t know. But if she gets the best defence possible (that she is ofc entitled to), then there should be no chance of an appeal, so there’s at least that I suppose. I do hope there’s support for every single person involved in the trial, it is already, and will continue to be utterly harrowing

I’ve just been thinking about this and actually it might have been quite a clever move on his part to be so harsh on the Mum.
BM is clearly a very clever man, he doesn’t get to his level otherwise. He’s read far more evidence than any of us know about yet and he’s probably sat with LL for many, many hours going over this. He can see in black and white just how bad this looks, he will know exactly any defence available and he will of course have come to his own conclusion. His role as her defence is simply to ensure a fair trial. He can’t go and say she’s innocent or lie to the court if he knows (ie she’s confessed to him) but he can believe she’s guilty himself as long as it doesn’t impact her receiving that fair trial. Things like cross examining a grieving mother on how her baby was crying is going to stick in a jurors mind, because she will obviously be distressed recalling it. It’s stuck in all of our minds because it was so horrible to read but imagine being sat in that court room and seeing it in person. From a defence POV he’s done exactly what he should and questioned her - so LL is getting her fair trial - but actually on a different level it helps the jurors see the mum is absolutely telling the truth. He was like a dog with a bone and it will be imprinted on a jurors mind now and he knows it.

It was also under his questioning that Dr Bohin apologised to the parents in court - again, very powerful and something that will stick in a jurors mind. His questioning lead to that - so LL is getting a fair trial - but again it actually helps the prosecution because it’s strengthening that picture of regret all these doctors and nurses have that they didn’t stop this sooner.

There are other times too when he’s questioned an expert only for it to fill in a couple of gaps or for the expert to be so strong in their opinion it’s strengthened the prosecution.

Child F we know was poisoned and he can’t dispute it, but he also hasn’t actually done anything to dispute LL’s involvement in hanging the bag or anything else. Their opening statement says they may dispute her involvement for Child L (the other insulin poisoning) due to documentation. But for Child F, he’s offering nothing to say “it wasn’t her”. He’s asked a few questions but none of which actually dispute anything the prosecution are claiming. She’s still getting her fair trial because he’s questioning parts of the evidence. But it’s very clever he’s doing that without trying to claim it wasn’t LL.

Just my thoughts. But I think BM is playing a very clever game. And I think he believes she’s guilty, he’s just absolutely ensuring a fair trial as is her right.

 

[Rippedjeanmaybe]

And just to give people an idea for those that think NICU is a death sentence…

A 24 week prem baby has about a 60% chance of surviving

A 27 week prem baby has about 89%

A 31 week prem baby has about 95%

This is from Tommy’s if anyone wants to look, but it just gives people an idea for those who don’t know much about premature babies. Most of the babies at the countess were 30 weeks+

just because they were premature, it does not mean they were going to die.

 

[LittleMy]

Or you know, we could just behave like adults and respect that other people have different viewpoints to us, and not be snidey about it?

 

[wideningperspective]

THIS! I even asked those voting NG on the poll to offer up who they think it was if not her & only one response saying oh just don’t want to believe it the evidence is in black & white for all to see, she’s a murderer & I find it so uncomfortable that she’s got strangers fighting her corner just to be controversial on SM

I really think we should be respectful to all opinions. I have been mainly on the NG up until today. I was waiting to hear more objective evidence, which has come today. I think it is a broad statement to make that people are fighting her corner to be controversial.
Having people on both sides is what makes for a good educated discussion. Seeing things through he eyes of others is a skill. Anyway, thought I would intervene and get my opinion across because this thread has been so professional and informative. We don’t need to be disrespectful

 

[candyland_]

I think it will be heartbreaking for the parents that had twins/triplets to watch them growing up knowing how different things should have been.

I know it’s nowhere near the same but my daughter was a twin pregnancy but I lost one very early on and I still have moments 13 years later when I look at her as an only child and think there should have been another sibling beside you.

 

[Haveyouanywool]

I have always thought how blessed people are to have twins. I wonder if she was jealous of their good fortune which is why she particularly targeted them.

I’m a twin but I don’t know how blessed my mother felt. She didn’t know she was having twins until after my twin sister was born, during a home delivery, and the midwife said ‘there’s another one in there’ and I came out, bum first, 20 minutes later. We both weighed 6lb 6oz.
That was a long, long time ago!

 

[Blockedbyadmin]

I am so confused by this. Nurses, when off duty, have to text the other nurses to make sure only the dose they’ve signed for is administered?

As a nurse you don’t sign for something if you aren’t there or the one administrating the medication. In 15 years practice I’ve never seen this before. It’s bad practice and could lead to her defence

 

[dual2099]

There is a reason why the ‘salsa’ texts are important.

The colleague says ‘ you really need a break from this happening on your shift’

So she made sure it didn’t happen in her shift.

So it didn’t look like the ‘bad run’ was just happening on her shift.

It’s obvious to me this as set up so it would happen when she wasn’t there.

Hence why the texts are important.

 

[docmum]

What a day. My head is spinning. I’ve found the evidence incredibly difficult to process today. Yes it’s the prosecution evidence only and I actually hope there’s excellent evidence to counteract what has been left ‘hanging’ so to speak. I can’t get my head around *someone* - not necessarily the defendant, knowingly poisoning a bag with a lethal dose of a drug, with knowledge of how to override machines so that the nurse looking after the baby 1:1 was totally unaware the baby was being poisoned directly in front of them. I have been in the nhs nearly 20 years and I have been tearful more than once today trying to comprehend *someone* could do this. Because it was done somehow. My heart aches for the babies, the parents and for those staff who were actually being humiliated by one of their own. The unit has failings for sure, but please objectively look at those insulin levels, and then look at a miracle survivor baby

The point I wanted to make was that I know the nhs fairly bloody well. I can’t explain further, maybe that’s a good thing! But I hate this trial. For those who feel she is not guilty or feel unsure, I can appreciate and understand why based on lack of beyond reasonable doubt evidence etc, but tonight I can understand indecision based on just how the actual feck anyone can be capable of deliberate actions such as these. I think a lot of the conflict today has been based around disbelief and I’m right there with it. Again, I can’t imagine the disbelief within those staff members giving evidence, and the police who waded through literally tons of notes to get here.

Am bowing out for tonight. Will no doubt be back in the morning but I got dockid in for bedtime snuggles earlier and decided to keep them here for the night to recharge my belief in the world. Sending love to all as I know everyone is finding this tough for various reasons, but I am captivated by the thread and the insights, and we have a hell of a rollercoaster ahead of us

 

[od12839]

So Facebook people are saying it is foul play but not Lucy . A nurse has mixed it up but not Lucy .
seems it’s everybody else’s fault but Lucy

let’s just say she didn’t kill the babies then why are people blaming everybody else but Lucy ?

This is why the Facebook lot are so bizarre. If you want to say "it could have been someone else" then fair enough, but "it had to be someone else it can't have been Lucy" - why not? What insider info do you have that exonerates her? Maybe pass it over to her defence....

 

[mRsKbRoOkS]

I think she is guilty, but I still want to ( or did yesterday) discuss the bags. It is important, the defence will pull this apart one way or another. We arn’t going to have all the information, not even close, however, if we can come up with something logical for each of the three professor’s explanations with the little info we have then how is that a bad thing.

We are on baby F, the insulin and contamination of the bags are literally the main part of the trial right now. Why wouldn’t it be discussed ? When the Facebook searches come up in court, or the messages, these are main point of topic at the time. I rarely add much in relation to them, as I don’t have Facebook so can’t comment if I’d stalk or not but I agree with many posters thoughts and I never get annoyed or frustrated by the discussion (not saying anyone does I’m just saying generally). There are parts I can’t follow or fully comprehend so I don’t say much, but it is fine for other posters to crack on and I read along.

I’m camp guilty but I found yesterday going back a forth with posters, with a slightly different mind set than me, pretty helpful. It opened my eyes to certain aspects of what is expected during nursing practice but also cemented my thoughts further.

It really doesn’t matter what any of us think, we all know that, but for one reason or another we are here. For me, apart from wanting justice served for these babies and families (whether that be because of letby or hospital negligence), I genuinely find the whole trial process fascinating right down to what the hell compelled this women to do this (as morbid as that sounds). I’m not looking at it emotionally at all half the time just trying to be objective. Though I won’t lie when I hear the parents evidence I waiver and feel sadness and anger (who wouldn’t).

Any way rambling now hope everyone is okay today, let’s keep it amicable please

 

[Lucyxxxx]

You know what as well now I'm looking at it differently little things are popping into my head. My youngest was a very high risk pregnancy. I was told before the birth he would be in neo natal for at least a few weeks, I had my own room before the birth and he had a crash team with equipment waiting for him when he was born as they said he would have breathing difficulties. I had a haemorrhage during the birth and he was 4lb 10oz, he needed NO assistance whatsoever and was straight on the boc boc like a trooper. The next day we were released. He had those blood sugar tests and they told me he had to have 3 successful blood sugar readings in a row to be discharged and to be aware babies never have 3 in a row straight away. Of course my baby had 3 in a row straight away. I've said it before in the thread he does have mild CP (doesn't stop him trashing my house and wreaking havoc though) but my point is little tiny babies are alot more resilient and strong then we give them credit for.

 

[Helpimafish]

Or you know, we could just behave like adults and respect that other people have different viewpoints to us, and not be snidey about it?

This is the dream but doesn't appear to work like that

I've been reading these threads since they began, I would say probably with morbid curiosity. Its unbelievable and absolutely horrifying if she is guilty. Some of the evidence against her appears very suspicious but other parts also feel so strongly littered with sub optimal care that I don't see how it could solely be pinned on Lucy. I'm flip flopping between unsure then slightly leaning toward guilty.

I dont comment much but I find the discussion between most people to be very interesting and it definitely highlights things to me that I hadn't thought of or considered. Whether the posters believe she is guilty, innocent or they're unsure, most appear to be respectful and are having polite discussions around their differing opinions.

Unfortunately, there seems to be a couple of posters hellbent on berating anyone who doesn't see things the same way that they do. To be so invested in a case that you're becoming frustrated and bashing strangers on an anonymous forum, on a daily basis, is a good indication of needing to take a step back if you ask me.

 

[candyland_]

I am surprised that the insulin levels weren’t investigated given that they were ‘on a bad run’ with the amount of deaths and collapses there has been within a couple of months. Nurses were already commenting it was odd so I would be interested to know what was said once the levels came back unless the nurses weren’t made aware.

I also wonder if Lucy’s texts at Salsa was her waiting for news of his collapse.

 

[Faith61]

To ease the tensions perhaps we could all take a leaf out of Hollie Dances book and get lit for Lucy?

Maybe!!
The sarcasm and digs at those trying to discuss or god forbid is unnecessary and feel its helping no-one
We're all here for a reason and all want justice for those babies and families who are at centre of all this ( next to LL.obvs) I just don't understand why people can't be respectful of others....
I'm lost, I've no clue what the feck is going on with these bags and I've used TPN for years...I just hope the jury have more info than us....I don't see why people are being ridiculed for discussing it! Just uncalled for

 

[swoopyloopy]

I think she was trying to move the spotlight off herself. At this point lots of her colleagues were pointing out how she was having a bad run plus there was the thing with one of the doctors. I think people were starting to suspect her and she knew it. My theory is that she contaminated a couple of bags in the hope that they would get used over the next few days and move the spotlight onto someone else.
I’d love to see her rota, I wonder if she was off duty for a few days and therefore planning to have a baby deteriorate while she was nowhere near the place.

 

[hopefullynottoday]

I need absolute clarification on it as a nurse who regularly sets up TPN as it makes no sense. A new TPN would go through a new set. So NO contamination would occur. A new long line, is sterile and has all brand new attachments. No contamination possible. I think that some part of the original was reused, when it shouldn’t have been and his evidence doesn’t disprove that at all. Poor practice and then the nurse who did set up the second bag has lied. The odds of a second bag being chosen at random are worth getting clarity on don’t you agree.
A afterthought when I posted last night was that TPN is removed from the fridge 4hours prior to use as it can’t be given cold, so maybe one was preselected and out of the fridge and that allowed a second one to be contaminated.
I don’t agree this is nit picking at all. Some examples of contamination with prices of equipment just don’t add up to me, someone who physically sets up TPN regularly.

 

[raspberryjuice]

I know why he’s trying to discredit them, but surely even BM knows there’s limited literature to reference because it’s not ethical to go around injecting people with air to study to produce further literature on its presentation and effects? He can’t keep banging on about them all referencing the same paper when that is all they have available.
If only the staff at COCH had had a crystal ball, perhaps they could have produced their own study on the effects of injecting air in to a tiny neonate as LL seemingly saw no issue with doing so. Arguably she’s the leading expert on how it presents as she’s probably seen it more times than anyone in else in that room at any point in these proceedings and can tell us all much more about it than any medical paper.

 

[avabella]

Why is it that questioning the evidence heard makes you a super fan or cult follower? Hasn’t it occurred to anyone sniping that asking questions and clarifying can actually cement a guilty thought process? Honestly it’s getting really tiresome reading snipe after snipe about how we must be better experts than the professionals etc. It’s actually so insulting! I’m asking questions because *I* don’t understand what I’ve read, or because I don’t have experience in that area.