Lucy Letby Case #2

[Lovecraftian]

Hi there. Been following this case for a while and it absolutely beggars belief that someone could do this to a baby. Absolutely heartbreaking and I would not rest if someone did this to my son, only born in July.
Re: motivation and the God Complex; the god complex seems to be the common explanation for medical practitioners who kill, alternative being Munchausen by proxy.
God Complex was the only speculated motivation for Shipman as he

 

[catlady29]

I just read on an update the she searched I think Baby Es parents on Facebook on Christmas Day...I mean come on, that is not normal. Still waiting for the defence before I decide on my opinion as to guilt/innocence, but so far all looking a bit creepy.

 

[Lovecraftian]

Sorry for broken post…


God Complex was the only speculated motivation for Harold Shipman as he never spoke of his crimes and was deeply affected by the slow death of his mother from cancer that lead to a fascination with power over death. It’s commonly thought Shipman initially thought of himself as an angel of mercy speeding dying patients along, but his greed and arrogance overwhelmed him and he began killing patients who annoyed him or to pinch jewellery and cash (he and his wife were hoarders). They reckon he was only caught at the will forgery as he subconsciously wanted to stop; he made a gamble at forging a will very badly - either he’d be stopped or he’d retire with the cash.

I remember Shipman very vividly and how news and locals at the time couldn’t believe his guilt. Keep that in mind with Letby. One person I know from Hyde refused to believe his gp was a mass murderer for years. Of course Letby is innocent until proven guilty, let’s hear all the evidence out.

 

[Sendparent]

I think you’re getting annoyed over nothing, There’s a huge difference between the needs of your SEN child and a safeguarding issue that poster was talking about. I spent years as a legal Secretary so I can see why a social worker would check up on a parent where abuse of a child is suspected. Its absolutely relevant if a vulnerable woman should keep away from a man known for child abuse, is telling you they do yet posts photos of them together on FB.

If that happens then the legalities of how they use and collate that information come into play. Sometimes its a bit like the police, a 'crime' has to be committed before they act.

Why assume I am annoyed, I've explained the law behind it and the law is what matters. Surely you understand if you work in the legal sector how important it is to follow the law so you don't jeopardise a case in court. Which it has done in previous family court cases. Who suffers then? The child and the social worker. If it needs to be done then they need to go down the correct avenues to do it.

I never said anything about the needs of my SEN child, I said from experience of having a SEN child (most of us have involvement with the child disability social worker team) and from a professional point of view in this area I knew the law on it.

The law is also there to try and stop professionals like LL from searching out people on social media. It is not just for social workers. Because of this law LL will not be able to claim it was right or normal for her to be searching families on social media.

For the record I think it should be easier for social workers to get authorisation because at moment the majority of requests for serious child safeguarding concerns are refused. When it comes to people like nurses, they don't need to be searching for families.

 

[super grateful]

I'd be curious to see or hear the layout of the ward and how far away each bay/area was from each other and from the nurses station.

In one case it said the alarm sounded when the allocated nurse was at the nurse station and when they got to the child, LL was in there when she shouldn't have been.

Any nurses or HCAs on here...how normal is it for a colleague to attend to an alarm of a patient that isn't theirs if the allocated nurse isn't immediately present? To me, it doesn't sound unreasonable to do, especially on a NICU with very unwell babies. But with the other evidence being presented, it can be shown to be sinister.

Not unusual at all. Every ICU I’ve worked in, if you leave your bedspace (for equipment/meds/family chat/toilet/ANYTHING) you give a mini handover to the Nurse next to you. So they can respond and act in your absence.

Also whenever an alarm goes off it’s “are you okay in bed 3?!?!!”. 99% of the time it’s nothing and you have it controlled. But yeah always aware and ready to help when needs be.

Would also be interested in the layout!

 

[liz9090]

My heart breaks for the families having to endure the trial,l. The question is why did she do it? Was it the saviour complex thing where they poison them and then try to save them? or did she just get a kick out of killing babies Munchausen's by proxy? Her saying in text messages "it's their fate" wtf their fate was to live she ensured they stood no chance. She is up there with Beverly Alitt and Harold Shipman.

 

[TwooTwooTwitTwitTwoo]

But she's saying that natural causes can't be ruled out due to no PM so how can the prosecution ask for her to be taken seriously about it being deliberate

If she is giving her opinion as an expert witness about what would be the cause of death, what would have caused the symptoms and that in her opinion they would have been caused by deliberate means, then her evidence is taken as fact. Stating that she can't rule out natural causes due to a postmortem not being carried out is simply her addressing anything the defence could pick apart. Giving her expert opinion is enough because expert witness are different to bog standard witnesses.

*Caveated by saying I don't know in what capacity this person is speaking as I've only kept up with the case via this thread so I don't know how they were introduced to the court.

 

[Takemetoyourbuffet]

Why assume I am annoyed, I've explained the law behind it and the law is what matters. Surely you understand if you work in the legal sector how important it is to follow the law so you don't jeopardise a case in court. Which it has done in previous family court cases. Who suffers then? The child and the social worker. If it needs to be done then they need to go down the correct avenues to do it.

I never said anything about the needs of my SEN child, I said from experience of having a SEN child (most of us have involvement with the child disability social worker team) and from a professional point of view in this area I knew the law on it.

The law is also there to try and stop professionals like LL from searching out people on social media. It is not just for social workers. Because of this law LL will not be able to claim it was right or normal for her to be searching families on social media.

For the record I think it should be easier for social workers to get authorisation because at moment the majority of requests for serious child safeguarding concerns are refused. When it comes to people like nurses, they don't need to be searching for families.

Absolutely agree with every word of this, very well put!

 

[Stiltoncheese]

If she is giving her opinion as an expert witness about what would be the cause of death, what would have caused the symptoms and that in her opinion they would have been caused by deliverate means, then her evidence is taken as fact. By stating that she can't rule out natural causes due to a postmortem not being carried out is simply her addressing anything the defence could pick apart. Giving her expert opinion is enough because expert witness are different to bog standard witnesses.

*Caveated by saying I don't know in what capacity this person is speaking as I've only kept up with the case via this thread so I don't know how they were introduced to the court.

They haven't actually spoken yet other than what they have stated to prosecution as part of the case building as they are still on the opening statement. I guess they will expand fully on their opinion when they actually take the stand

 

[clare999]

Thinking out loud also … but why would she not “kill” the baby she was looking after and a different baby? Or would that be too obvious to point the finger at herself maybe interested to see her defence ! Still haven’t decided what I think get if she’s innocent or not

 

[catlady29]

Just a little random thought...does anyone now find that pic the newspapers use of her, the one with her holding a baby grow, now find it really a sinister pic...empty babygrow. God I hope so bad she didn't do it, its too horrible to contemplate a nurse doing this to vulnerable babies

 

[amb1505]

Trying to keep up with this thread whilst at work is so tough! I’m so invested

 

[HarJR289]

I used to work for a high street bank and we used to regularly look up our regular customers on Facebook on our lunch break and have a good laugh at their profile pics etc.. id imagine it's common enough.. people are just nosey

well that’s not a nice thought. Anyhow, this is slightly more understandable as you are looking at a variety of different people, once, collectively. It sounds like she was doing it obsessively and in her own time. Like the grief posts that the families inevitably posted would have gave her some self gratification of her actions. A lot of serial killers take a memento from their victims as a sentiment from their crimes, maybe this was how she got her kicks.

 

[MrsDimSum]

The insulin in the feed is now confusing me? I have heard of insulin being added to saline fluids in especially small babies.

however they say this was a feed bag? Which I assume if fed by tube into the babies stomach? I always thought insulin couldn’t be taken orally as the stomach acids break it down too far for it to be effective which is why diabetics have to inject insulin into the bloodstream?

 

[StatusWoe]

Well, after all that discussion of social media snooping I think I'll go and change my Facebook name. My friend did this when she started training as a teacher because the kids always look for people's profiles.

 

[CoffeeandCookies]

Only up to baby E and I’m already struggling to keep up.
Is there a list anywhere of which babies were related to each other and which survived and those who did not?

 

[Lucyxxxx]

What's people's thoughts on a poll for the next thread? Be interesting to see what percentage think she's guilty/not guilty?

 

[amb1505]

What's people's thoughts on a poll for the next thread? Be interesting to see what percentage think she's guilty/not guilty?

great idea, would be interesting to have a few through the trial to see how/if our opinions change throughout

 

[StatusWoe]

She is up there with Beverly Alitt and Harold Shipman.

Speaking of Bev Allitt, wasn't she the one who stayed with friends while under investigation and then (non-fatally) poisoned one of them as well? Maybe I'm thinking of someone else, but if it's her then she had massive red flags even outside of her 'work' life. I'd be interested to know if there are any signs of attention-seeking behaviours in this case too. Anything suspicious outside of work? I struggle with the idea that someone could do something so horrific and not be a walking red flag in their personal life.

 

[OH.FFS]

What's people's thoughts on a poll for the next thread? Be interesting to see what percentage think she's guilty/not guilty?

I think you’d have to included an undecided too. But a poll sounds good. I’m still very undecided and wouldn’t make my final decision till I’ve heard her defence etc. but, it’s grim and not looking good for her so far.