Lucy Letby Case #18

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
If she's not properly priming iv lines before connecting them she wouldn't have had the opportunity if proper procedures followed bc another nurse would have been there when she was priming it. From what I've read, she administered the fatal doses of air when she was connecting iv fluids or similar, so she did do it during the medication administration.
I know she wasn't following guidelines anyway because she's a cold blooded killer. She would have found another way. But I'm just saying there seems to be dangerous practice on this ward and the whole point of policies like this is to keep patients safe.
There seems to be a lot of, obviously misplaced, trust among the nurses on the ward.
It’s terrible that you shouldn’t trust your colleagues but… really, it looks like that’s the way you should look at it, unfortunately.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 12
Just listened to this week's daily mail podcast.
The discussion at the end around the reporting really made me think!, I don't know why,cos we are saying it on here all the time that we are only hearing snippets really of what's being said!!
For me,hearing it from the journalist themselves though, just put it into context. So much will come out at the end of all this!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 18
Man I wish she hadn't done this. If the babies had died naturally at least as sad and as awful as it is it was inevitable and nothing would of changed it. Nasty nasty woman.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
  • Heart
Reactions: 19
Today is meant to be quite technical so let’s hope the reporting is good even if they can’t report detailed info. I honestly think she did it and with allll the time it’s taken to get to this point and have the cps prosecute LL then we’ll defo find out more info once the trial is over.

It’s so nearly Xmas and I just wish she’d own up to it and save those parents all this dragging into 2023 and let them go into the next year with some justice and some form of relief
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 14
Man I wish she hadn't done this. If the babies had died naturally at least as sad and as awful as it is it was inevitable and nothing would of changed it. Nasty nasty woman.
That’s one of the worst things. If they’d died naturally, you could at least try to come to terms with it knowing nothing could have been done.

To know that actually she killed these babies and they should actually be here now must be the most heartbreaking thing. She stole their lives and she stole these babies from their parents.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 17
There seems to be a lot of, obviously misplaced, trust among the nurses on the ward.
It’s terrible that you shouldn’t trust your colleagues but… really, it looks like that’s the way you should look at it, unfortunately.
It's just dangerous to trust that much, these procedures are in place for a reason. I've worked in some fantastic teams and trusted them absolutely, but I've never counter signed a drug without checking it with the other person and never written notes on someone else's behalf. I don't think you do those cos of trust, I think you do them because you're burnt out and run ragged and have started to let things slip. Either way it's not right, I hope the nurses involved have had access to some good supervision to improve their practice.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 16
I often think if she’s done this, why would she take it as far as a trial? Why would you want all these details aired?

However, then it occurred to me that when you’re on remand awaiting a trial, you’re in a remand prison. You have more privileges than a lifer for example, including additional visits and money to spend. If you’re aware you’re guilty, but if you plead guilty you’re straight to your sentence, why wouldn’t you just wait for the backlog to clear and be held in a remand jail for 2+ years? 🥹
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 16
I often think if she’s done this, why would she take it as far as a trial? Why would you want all these details aired?
However, then it occurred to me that when you’re on demand awaiting a trial, you’re in a remand prison. You have more privileges than a lifer for example, including additional visits and money to spend. If you’re aware you’re guilty, but if you plead guilty you’re straight to your sentence, why wouldn’t you just wait for the backlog to clear and be held in a remand jail for 2+ years? 🥹
Plus there’s a chance she could get off and she’s probably hanging on to that. Some people also will never admit what they have done even if they have been convicted.
There’s quite a few people that have gone to trial, even though it’s been obvious that they’ve done it as they’ve not wanted to admit to it.

It’s just awful for the families of the children.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 18
If found guilty she will receive a whole life tariff surely, due to the number of victims and the fact she was a nurse? I can see why she'd fancy her chances of it going to trial rather than just pleading guilty.
There probably is an element of her enjoying the parents anguish in court too.
 
  • Sad
  • Like
  • Sick
Reactions: 14
If found guilty she will receive a whole life tariff surely, due to the number of victims and the fact she was a nurse? I can see why she'd fancy her chances of it going to trial rather than just pleading guilty.
There probably is an element of her enjoying the parents anguish in court too.
She’d never get out of prison. BA got 13 consecutive life sentences I think
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6
I’m just trying to think about if she didn’t do this what I think happened. So if you accept none of these deaths were murder, surely they’re still down to negligence? And potentially LL’s negligence as you can’t get away from her being involved with everyone one of these babies before their collapses.
so in my mind, they’d have covered a charge of unlawful manslaughter as well if it was such an “unknown/grey” area evidence wise. As these babies shouldn’t have died.

Therefore, I can’t go around to that thinking because there MUST be more to it, evidentially, for them to have gone for murder & attempt murder charges. I appreciate they still need to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt.

I’m just musing my own thoughts here. Sorry if this doesn’t make sense haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: 15
If found guilty she will receive a whole life tariff surely, due to the number of victims and the fact she was a nurse? I can see why she'd fancy her chances of it going to trial rather than just pleading guilty.
There probably is an element of her enjoying the parents anguish in court too.
I reckon Wayne Couzens has set a precedent for a whole life tariff where you’ve used your role to carry out the murders and the impact that has on public confidence etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 15
My god, after your post i was fascinated and read up about this - how awful and very sad 😢

Apparently Amelia stated that she liked to watch the babies she ‘farmed’ with the tape around their necks and that ‘it wouldn’t take long after that’

so chilling! Heartbreaking as well that some of the parents tried to reclaim their children only to find no trace.

There are some strange people in the world ..
All Killa No Filla did a podcast episode on her recently for anyone else interested. Think they did BA a couple of years ago too, gonna listen to them again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Professor Sally Kinsey is going to give evidence for a and b aswell as F. I think this shows that even for the prosecution we’ve still not heard all the evidence for the first babies. It’s reminded me about the expert pathologist too, so presume they will give evidence for some of these first babies later in the trial
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12
Professor Sally Kinsey is going to give evidence for a and b aswell as F. I think this shows that even for the prosecution we’ve still not heard all the evidence for the first babies. It’s reminded me about the expert pathologist too, so presume they will give evidence for some of these first babies later in the trial
It's curious how they are piecing it all together so far. It largely seems chronological but every now and then it swerves slightly. They say this current evidence also relates to another baby later on yet they choose to cover it now, which says to me that they must feel this bit is really strong for baby F evidence. Otherwise they would surely have either done it after baby A and B, or wait until whichever baby it relates to later in the trial.

Unless this is the only time the witness was available, but that makes no sense to me in a 6 month long trial.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8
I often think if she’s done this, why would she take it as far as a trial? Why would you want all these details aired?
There could be many reasons..
- She might enjoy reliving each case and causing further suffering to those involved.
- By going to trial it is giving her six months out of her cell plus all the time away from the wing with her solicitors in the build up to the case.
- The case brings her further attention. I imagine her parents fawned all over her during the past few years and basking in everyone talking about her.
- She knows they don’t have concrete proof it was her that did it so it was worth a shot at pleading not guilty.
 
  • Like
  • Sick
Reactions: 16
That’s four medical experts now confirming symptoms of air embolus for baby A.

74D9968B-95D2-4B07-9C98-8F3285EC7A18.jpeg
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 16
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.