Lucy Letby Case #19

[friedeggontoast]

On the podcast they said she occasionally passed a note to her solicitor.

“Do matalan deliver to prison?”

 

[IdeletedbutI'mbackagain]

She's an evil piece of shit. No one on this earth is that unlucky, she deliberately harmed these babies because she herself is lacking what it is that makes us human, empathy. A bored twisted freak.

 

[HappyGoss]

He's probably having his balls waxed for Christmas. He seems the type

 

[candyland_]

Due dates are a huge significance when you have a premature baby. I believe they would usually aim to be home around this time?

It’s heartbreaking to read that mum would read and sing to Baby G and she would smile back at them. She stopped reacting to them after the first attack. As a mum and auntie those smiles mean everything to you and she has taken that away from them.

 

[HappyGoss]

See if people were giving evidence about me that could put me away for my whole entire life with a massive target permanently attached to me I'd expect us to be visible to each other when they are giving said evidence?


Don't get me wrong I do think she is G on some of these counts so obviously should never see outside a prison wall ever again but some of the precedents that are being set in this trial are really worrying to me.

Oh believe me if she was my colleague I would be sat in that court looking directly at her when I gave my evidence. I'd like to think so anyway but then again.....

These Nurses have worked alongside her, they've questioned her guilt, their own sanity. They've supported her whilst the death rates were increasing. They've drank with her and danced with her. They've mentored her and been mentored. They've absolutely trusted her. They know more about her and the crimes shes committed than we ever probably will. They have nursed and cared for the babies she's killed.

They must be absolutely devastated.

So if they want a screen, whether to protect their identity or so they don't have to look at the monster then yes, they should have that.

 

[I’mThankyou_]

Bsbdbd

No I agree, I just think overfeeding is more likely to be a mistake than any other method of murder in this case. It’s not going to be easy to establish malicious intent

I dont think it was or can be a mistake. Her feed was documented, before feeding a baby in neonatal you would check 1) when they was last fed 2) the volume of their feed. You'd also verbally double check it with their named nurse.
The overfeeding was a deliberate act to harm baby G.

 

[candyland_]

I can’t read beyond the father’s statement about her no longer smiling. It’s so heartbreaking.

 

[Milktray]

I'm still in the unsure frame of mind only because I haven't heard the full thing and things just haven't fully 'clicked' for me yet. The Facebook searches, photos on her phone and paperwork, to me, are just background noise - because I bet if they investigated the other members of staff they would also find the same (some posters on here have already said they would probably have a sheet stuffed in a pocket etc). I guess the context is what is missing for me. Are they talking box files upon box files of babies sheets organised in a system, or some crumpled up pieces in a drawer? Are we talking multiple pictures of irrelevant things, or one picture of a card which really, proves nothing? I think the bigger picture for those things are missing, it's just adds a wee bit of speculation for me.

It may well be that once the defence have had their say, that will be the 'click'. I just haven't heard the full story, and I don't like to make a judgement based on one side.

A good example of this is the Star case - the prosecution said they had video evidence of Savannah hitting Star in the car ( ) - lots of people said the video evidence was really grainy and couldn't really be made out. So when the defence came and Savannah claimed she was doing 'the claw' from the Jim Carrey film because Star liked it (Star being 16 months old and the film being about 16 years old), it locked and loaded that that was completely untrue. Does that make sense? Had the defence brought out videos and pictures of Savannah doing 'the claw' with Star at other points in time, it wouldn't have rung quite so suspiciously.

@avabella having been on other trial threads with you, I know that you like a fair trial and like to wait out for the defence. You've always said that you disliked the 'burn them at the stake' mentality. This trial being no different. I appreciate your opinions and questions...along with everyone else's!

 

[Tofino]

Not more significant than another baby, more significant than the attack which took place later in her life when she would even more stable than at the 100 day mark, the prosecution are trying to give a reason for the 100 day attack but they can’t give one for the 114th day because there is no significance around that number

The 100th day was meant to be a celebration of how far the baby had come. It was symbolic. That was the day Lucy chose to attempt to murder the baby. I hate to be so crude but the only reason there were more attempts on the 114th day is because the baby didn’t die on the 100th. She was just trying to finish what she started - which started on the 100th day.

 

[mRsKbRoOkS]

Also i think to be attacked on her due date is pretty bloody massive! How is that a coincidence. Seems very significant to me. I’m just imaging the parents now talking about how today is the day she should have been born. I’m sure it was very prominent in their minds that day. I can imagine they would have been particularly emotional, and made them reflect how far they had all come, I bet it was a point of discussion between them and the nurses on the ward.
I’m sorry but that can’t be a coincidence, surely not ?! Does anyone else feel the same as me on this ?

No no it’s the only thing we’ve been told as to why they think she’s responsible for the first attack. They’ve not even explained the attempt at all

I don’t think we have ever had a explanation for any attack or murder have we ?

 

[Windowtothewall]

"Is it that she is an extreme premature who had long-term inotrope and vent dependency and now she is older and doing more for herself...it just takes a little...something to tip her over."

I find this is an odd diagnosis for any clinical or medical profession to just assume a premature baby on support is going to just tip over when unsupported. Surely you'd assume that getting to be older and doing more for herself means she's getting healthier and a fighter and so less likely to just randomly be tipped over by something.

It really bothers me that a neo natal professional has just gotten to the point of assuming prematurity or being a tiny baby equals death. She said this about the tiny 800lb baby (C) too, that their death was because they were so premature. Along with the comments on fate, seems more a religious type stance than one that is scientific or clinical. Interestingly the defence BM is going with as well.

 

[PsychoticPrincess]

From today's report:
"In the early hours of September 8, Child G was moved to Arrowe Park, where she had been born weighing 1lb 2oz.

Medics suspected sepsis as Child G required ventilation support with 100% oxygen but gradually she improved and was breathing for herself a week later.

Her markers for infection also fell as doctors ruled she was clinically stable and no longer needed specialist care as she was returned to the Countess of Chester on September 16.

Letby is accused of overfeeding Child G with milk through a nasogastric tube (NGT) and/or injecting air into the tube."

It's evidence like this which really concerns me - the medics at Arrowe Park suspected sepsis, and clearly she had raised markers of infection which gave rise to this suspicion and which subsequently fell. It was also a week before she was breathing for herself again, so not the miraculous and instant recovery which I think they have tried to portray. That suggests to me that there was a very obvious cause for her deterioration, namely the sepsis. Surely that's a very easy one for the Defence to challenge?

I would say a 1lb 2oz baby coming off a ventilator and breathing independent after only 1 week is pretty miraculous to be honest. And the fact she made it to 100 days with very little issues, I don’t see any obvious cause for deterioration at all except LL.

 

[raspberryjuice]

Surely there are other babies celebrating milestones at various points, we’ve not heard of any of them being attacked

I disagree on this. Other babies we’ve heard have been attacked have been celebrating milestones. Coming off a ventilator, coming off cpap, going on to NG feeds, being able to have breast milk for the first time or a first bottle feed, first bowel opening etc. They are all milestones in a neonates journey and things the parents and staff will have been celebrating. They may not have had cake and a banner to mark the milestones like they did for G’s 100 days, but they are still mini-milestones that will have been celebrated and clear signs baby is on the right path and reassurance for the parents that baby is doing well. Just like G reaching 100 days.

 

[DianaBanana]

Are we really saying nurses can’t make mistakes? Come on now, I’m sure there’s protocol for a lot of things in life and mistake still happen in all sorts of professions, just a hypothetical scenario I’m not any sort of expert but given the retrospective taking of notes I think it’s possible for feeds to not be documented and done twice accidentally. Again not saying that’s what I think happened just a scenario off the top of my head I’m sure there are millions of way a mistake like that could happen

So do you think she made this same mistake 3 times? There are 3 attempted murder charges for this baby. All overfeeding and air.

 

[candyland_]

Lucy hung the bag and the baby deteriorated within an hour and then she took a keen interest in their updates.. That’s enough for me.

I would have liked to have heard details of what she said in the police interview. Far what it’s worth she seems fairly cooperative.
When I was watching 24 Hours in Police Custody they showed the officers forming opinions about their suspects after their interviews - I’d like to know what they thought of Letby because they didn’t stop pursuing her until they were able to charge her.

 

[HappyGoss]

I bet her parents wish they could have anonymity, poor buggers

If I was a professional who had worked beside her and I was called as a witness I would want to do so anonymously. Her actions will follow them around forevermore so I guess they're taking steps to reduce that.

Some of their reactions in the stand are telling. The way the turn away from her, wasn't one behind a screen? How very distressing for them all.

She's destroyed families, careers, trusting friendships and so much more. Yet day after day she sits there with her gormless, nonchalant face.

No wonder her ex colleagues don't want to look at her.

 

[Lucyxxxx]

Pages behind but I'm at the part of reporting where it's been said the baby has level 5 quadriplegic cerebal palsy and stops breathing when she goes stiff. Not to make it about my baby but I've always moaned what a pain in the arse it is when he goes stiff and it makes it impossible to dress/change his nappy and then you have this poor little baby . Also although an MRI can't always give a full picture of the brain until 2 and CP isn't always detected via MRI for a level 5 baby it would of been blatantly obvious on the MRI (I've only read about one MRI being normal so far). Precious little girl this one was already one of the extra upsetting ones for me but her having CP obviously hits home more. Nawwww poor little fighter baby girl

 

[helcob1977]

My god, I've managed to stay relatively emotionally detached from the evidence so far but this has really shaken me. It is absolutely beyond comprehension that any human being is capable of this. I've had to sit down and get myself together I can't believe this is real.

 

[raspberryjuice]

I dont think it was or can be a mistake. Her feed was documented, before feeding a baby in neonatal you would check 1) when they was last fed 2) the volume of their feed. You'd also verbally double check it with their named nurse.
The overfeeding was a deliberate act to harm baby G.

In addition you’d also check the positioning of the NG. For those without experience of this you remove a small amount of stomach contents and check the acidity. For G, having been fed 45ml of milk minutes before, would clearly show completely undigested milk in babies stomach. At this point you’d realise baby was already fed. There is no accidental over feeding.

 

[Appletiser]

Just replying to @avabella ’s post on previous thread ..

Feel a very similar way re her appearance !

As someone said ages ago, she just looks like your goofy old friend from uni! Quite an attractive face, not drop dead gorj but pretty in a plain-ish way, someone that looks approachable and non-intimidating … I don’t want all that to factor into how I feel about what she’s potentially done something so abhorrent but it’s been hard to separate the two. I wonder how I’d feel had I never seen a picture of her?

and yes about the intrusive thoughts, I have had them all my life and they’re a bugger!
I’m sure a lot of neonatal nurses have them because they are caring for something so tiny and so vulnerable, but of course that doesn’t mean you would harm them.
My counsellor ages ago told me actually people who have intrusive thoughts are LESS likely to cause any harm and they are disturbed and distressed by the thoughts