No they are not claiming that the stock bags are contaminated just the first one that Letby hung up. The line remained contaminated after the bag was switched over is my understanding.
There were not multiple bags that were contaminated.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
There were not multiple bags that were contaminated.
So well put and everything I tried to say but not as well yesterday! I’m utterly baffled at the “it’s just my opinion” the NG super fans have! Yes you’re entitled to it but she’s on trial for child murder & there’s damming evidence of why she’s here, every day! But STILL they eagerly look for reasons why it still isn’t her. Crazy.
Ah thanks, so they're saying the rate on insulin infusion remained the same until the evening even after the long line and bag were replaced at 10am? Do we know that the giving set stayed the same? The nurse is saying she would change everything so you'd assume she'd change the giving set too but with some of the examples we've seen so far of practices in this hospital you can't assume anything
It’s crazy at this point people still can’t see it. I was prepared to be opened minded in the beginning. Yeah, I think cover ups do happen and of course miscarriages of justice do and have happened. But there is a reason she’s on trial and nobody else!
It’s obvious to me she won’t be walking free.
It’s interesting what we need the absolute detail on and what we just need an air of - tpn bag poisoned how exactly and doubting a leading professor in insulin to give a correct explanation vs oh that doc phoned the wrong person, what a crap unit babies probably all died by accident and poisoning is because they are all silly billies too. We are all waiting till we hear the defence but I wonder if it’ll will come under such scrutiny from people or we will just accept a few seeds of doubt about the unit being sloppy over the fact that Letby hung two bags full of insulin. Sorry I’m not feeling it after baby F. I just find it a struggle to see this debate around what happened that we are coming up with on the internet when the expert gave his evidence yesterday and Ben didn’t question the stuff we are so why’s that
We must be better than Ben and the insulin professor 
I thought he said both bags were contaminated? Letby signed for them.
Honestly what are you on about?It’s interesting what we need the absolute detail on and what we just need an air of - tpn bag poisoned how exactly and doubting a leading professor in insulin to give a correct explanation vs oh that doc phoned the wrong person, what a crap unit babies probably all died by accident and poisoning is because they are all silly billies too. We are all waiting till we hear the defence but I wonder if it’ll will come under such scrutiny from people or we will just accept a few seeds of doubt about the unit being sloppy over the fact that Letby hung two bags full of insulin. Sorry I’m not feeling it after baby F. I just find it a struggle to see this debate around what happened that we are coming up with on the internet when the expert gave his evidence yesterday and Ben didn’t question the stuff we are so why’s that
I don't understand a piece of the evidence so I'm posting for clarification, yeah I do like details, struggling to see why that's a bad thing? I'm not making any comment on whether it makes her guilty or innocent.
See this is interesting because I was sure I had read that it was only the first bag that was contaminated, that's what's confusing me. If both bags are contaminated then the rate of infusion remaining the same makes sense. But there are 5 stock tpn bags, is the explanation that LL contaminated all of the bags on the ward?
And Letby is so keen to find out how it’s going for baby F isn’t she, what his progress is. She wouldn’t be the first person to play roulette with bags. So if there is a contaminated stock bag does it mean Letby’s innocent? What about in relation to the next time it happens? So every other baby died naturally or because of the hospital (despite the reviews and physical evidence) and there is a different poisoner or two that worked F and Ls shift and the police haven’t caught them
Just not sure what scenario could make her innocent… but I haven’t heard the defence have I 
silly me. Or is it that we don’t mind if she’s not innocent but we’d prefer her to get NG on technicality - like all these men claiming sex game gone wrong when they rape and murder women during sex. Be clever enough and get away with it 
My frustration comes from the fact that, up to Baby E, the defence has just been failings/negligence and bad luck.
But, now that we’ve got to the insulin case, it’s ‘well there was actually a murderer, but it’s not Lucy and the previous cases are still just failings’
If people can’t see that Swiss cheese defence for what it is…I actually do despair.
But, now that we’ve got to the insulin case, it’s ‘well there was actually a murderer, but it’s not Lucy and the previous cases are still just failings’
If people can’t see that Swiss cheese defence for what it is…I actually do despair.
I don’t really know what you’re on about questioning the professor’s evidence either tbh because any of the three scenarios he felt were possible all start with purposefully contaminated TPN bags. It’s just interesting what you like absolute clarification on that’s all. So to you is it now more unlikely that Letby poisoned the bags because of the stock bag being contaminated? Who do you believe may have done it? Or you just feel she should be found NG because her hanging poisoned bags twice isn’t good evidence?Honestly what are you on about?
I'm not making any comment on whether it makes her guilty or innocent.
See this is interesting because I was sure I had read that it was only the first bag that was contaminated, that's what's confusing me. If both bags are contaminated then the rate of infusion remaining the same makes sense. But there are 5 stock tpn bags, is the explanation that LL contaminated all of the bags on the ward?
I'm questioning his evidence because it made no sense if there was only one contaminated bag. PP clarified two contaminated bags, now his evidence makes sense to me. That's really all I was looking for.
Ah ok well it’s good to follow the live feeds if you need clarification on things, it was also in a lot of the newspaper write ups. Should be quicker to find on there than questioning here too. Is it weaker now we know he thinks there were two bags?
I have been following the feeds, but the reporting isn't always clear and couldn't see anything in the BBC write up. The wiki also doesn't mention the use of a stock bag that I can see, just that a new bespoke bag was delivered at 4pm.
So after yesterday it’s confirmed Baby F was poisoned, the defence didn’t even argue against this.
So let’s say she’s found not guilty, what would happen then would police reopen case as someone harmed this poor baby.
I can’t imagine this to be the case though, I honestly think Baby F has turned this case round for anyone not sure and she will be found guilty and never be freed again.
is it just me, but I keep thinking she will change plea too…
So let’s say she’s found not guilty, what would happen then would police reopen case as someone harmed this poor baby.
I can’t imagine this to be the case though, I honestly think Baby F has turned this case round for anyone not sure and she will be found guilty and never be freed again.
is it just me, but I keep thinking she will change plea too…
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.
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.
I don’t even see A-E as all that different to the insulin babies. If anything I can be more sure it’s Letby when she has given treatment just before the collapses. There is physical evidence of overwhelming air in them. The huge amount and variety of witness accounts corroborate with each other and the physical evidence. Her behaviour is very suspicious in lots of them. The hospital failings have never shown they could have caused death, they just have to make you think oh look it’s possible these babies practically spontaneously combusted because the unit weren’t doing things by the book. If they were natural they don’t present anywhere near the typical way that the suggested cause would. If they’re down to equipment I believe it would happen regularly up and down the country when we know most preemies survive these days.
Sorry on a sliding scale of poor practice, where do we put shoving a load of synthetic insulin in a tpn bag with intention to kill and not following the correct guidelines for changing sets etc. baffled. Whatever happens with the line or giving set, doesn’t change that the original bag hung by Letby is full of insulin and so is another one she hangs later on.
I’ve also struggled to get my head around the TPN, my thoughts on opening statement were if the same giving set had been used. Which is ofc really bad practice.
She absolutely should have changed the giving set and said she did, if she did indeed then the evidence makes no sense. That’s the point I am making.Ah thanks, so they're saying the rate on insulin infusion remained the same until the evening even after the long line and bag were replaced at 10am? Do we know that the giving set stayed the same? The nurse is saying she would change everything so you'd assume she'd change the giving set too but with some of the examples we've seen so far of practices in this hospital you can't assume anything
Did he have a stock TPN bag first and then his bespoke bag hung by Letby at 12:30am or did he have a stock bag hung the day after?
Do you not think the fact the first tpn bag was full of synthetic insulin is slightly more important?
I think honestly somebody should get in touch with the expert or Ben because they don’t seem to realise what a huge mistake they’ve made and how nothing makes sense!
- Status