Lucy Letby Case #19

[candyland_]

I wish we heard more detail on letbys police interview today, I thought once they got to that more would be revealed. But we had more information during the opening statement. I suppose perhaps this will be gone over in more detail once letby takes the stand, that is, if she takes the stand.

I think it might be covered in the podcast. They are usually good at sharing more details about the texts.

 

[candyland_]

 

[OldBlondie]

The prosecution are saying that at 2am LL caused the “event”

 

[OldBlondie]

When did they say the pharmacy had been ruled out? I must have missed that

Pharmacist was on stand, went through how the tpn is made up with the chart etc, and said there’s no way insulin would EVER be put in tpn. Was on live reporting yesterday and the round ups last night, there were few posts on here last night about it but they’re probably on the last few pages of last thread cos this new one started today

 

[Treesy19]

Ahhh ok.

I thunk I was thinking more for the extra feed the baby has supposedly been fed by LL.

How would they know from the vomit if that was EBM? They wouldn't be able to tell surely?

I think they would be able to tell which yes

 

[Treesy19]

I was wondering the same was it LL that gave the feed or the nurse that had been looking after baby G initially

Wonder it Letby did something to that feed before the desig nurse fed her with it. No way of knowing or testing it given it was vomited out almost immediately. Can’t put anything past Letby.

 

[IdeletedbutI'mbackagain]

I think it will really just help cement my thinking either way, I can’t help but feel there’s a whole load of info missing / gaps and I’m interested to see what they bring.

Oh we definitely aren't getting near the same info as the jury are, that's why whatever conclusion they come to I will have to agree with them. What are the chances of her just being found guilty of the attempted murder of the two insulin babies I wonder?

 

[Blockedbyadmin]

What I want to know is when was she employed there? They can’t have just started in March 2015

 

[housebythesea]

I presume there have been no similar unexplainable collapses and unexpected deaths on that ward since her removal….

It's going to be something of a meaningless statistic, as the status of the unit was downscaled so they won't have been taking babies who are so unwell. I would have a huge number of questions about the stats, so I hope the defence covers that

 

[slingo16]

But you have been arguing two separate points this whole time. In one breath you are saying basically was it even synthetic insulin? And then the next you are saying it is, but could be innocently explained.

The fact that baby F was administered with synthetic insulin is 100 percent indisputable, the unit may have or may not have realised this at the time, there is certainly questions marks around the standard of care at the unit. I think it is a failing that it wasn’t looked into further but this doesn’t change the fact baby F was given synthetic insulin. Many experts have stated this without a doubt now, there is ample of research out there that supports this it isn’t just a theory. This really is how synthetic insulin works, and no alternative explanation has been given, because there really isn’t one. Myers is not disputing it took place just stating letby isn’t culpable.

What is a theory right now is ‘how’ not if. If you want to come to the conclusion that letby is innocent, the only other plausible explanation would be someone on the ward accidentally putting insulin in baby F’s TPN not once but twice. I know which is more likely.

That’s the thing though I don’t think it is indisputable, you don’t need to be an expert to understand that c peptide and insulin have a relationship so the obvious conclusion of the test would be the explanation we’re hearing now (synthetic insulin) I’m struggling to see how they saw these results that apparently can’t be disputed in anyway and point to one explanation only and nothing is done. The only way that works is if we have another possibility which they used to explain the situation at the time.

 

[Justacatindisguise]

View attachment 1775952
She’s contradicting herself here isn’t she? She had seen the baby vomiting and then can’t recall it.

I think they mean she didn't recall the second time. Badly written.

 

[avabella]

It looks like she is falsifying notes again. Trying to make it look like it was written by another nurse View attachment 1785057


Maybe staff did report things and it got brushed aside like the concerns made my consultants.

True, but it feels like there must have been a precedent set for that type of messaging to occur, does that make sense?

 

[slingo16]

Why is the 100 day thing relevant? There’s no other mention of certain milestones correlating with attacks,

she attempted to murder the baby twice on the 114th day of life, a completely insignificant number and given the prosecution are basing there case around circumstance and patterns, the 114th day fits alot better than the 100th because in this case we see multiple attacks happen in quick succession of each other a number of times in this case and by that I mean we’ve got 16 charges (I think) that happen within a day of another charge, and we’ve got I think 8 charges that actually happen on the same day as another charge. Which is really interesting actually and for that reason my opinion is that the 114th day is much more relevant because it actually fits the pattern that the prosecution said would start to emerge

 

[stardust1]

What’s the program called please?

HMP Full Sutton: Evil behind bars x

 

[tay65]

Was there an accident on the roads near by the other day did I read? Imagine the stress of being one of the big players in this case and having to phone to say you can’t make it

Yes but it seems even the small players manage to stop the trial i.e. jury members.

 

[friedeggontoast]

It most definitely does though, the fact the did nothing gives room for another possible reason imo

What’s the other possible reason? Hospital cover up?

 

[Tofino]

If I wasn't guilty I would absolutely take the stand.

Particularly if I'm looking at life behind bars....I'd have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Is it her decision?

I'd be screaming from the shitting rooftops!!

It will be her decision, Myers can’t stop her. But he might advise not to. I don’t know how much he can advise her though, is their laws about ‘coaching’?

 

[slingo16]

Yes what reason are you putting forward that they justified the results?

The reason I’m putting forward? I don’t need to put one forward I’m just wondering how the crazy levels were explained at the time hopefully I’ve made my point more clear this time?

 

[Tofino]

In one of the courtroom sketches LL is shown with a notepad and papers in hand. Probably is insignificant but I did wonder whether she could be making notes and reading up on the evidence in preparation for taking the stand?

i did read at some point in the trial that she was making notes and passing them to her legal team. But it was a while ago so can’t remember where I saw it reported.

 

[Windowtothewall]

Re the attack on her 100 days celebration and the attack on the babies due date. I wonder did the parents joy and hope and her colleagues happiness at these babies little achievements just made her incredibly and irrationally angry!??

I think we discussed this in one of the threads way back, don't think I was 100% on board with that theory back then but it seems more plausible now the more babies we are hearing about.

It's like how cute things like kittens and puppies can make people irrationally angry or how when your are so overcome with how cute your baby is your just wanna nibble them.

Haha, think that was me talking about the cute aggression theory. Tbh back then, I too was just speculating and trying to find a reason. Now I realise I haven't a clue why she does what she does.

Still cute aggression is a fascinating theory in general.