Lucy Letby Case #20

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:
Order Thread by Most Liked Posts
MmmB777

MmmB777

IdeletedbutI'mbackagain said:
Well, she wasn't the bay thrived as soon as it left her care.

If Letby wasn't doing it deliberately she seems to have a real blindspot about her own incompetence and the role it was playing in the deaths and crashes of all these babies.
Click to expand...
Exactly. She was designated nurse when the babies tubes blocked and caused a collapse, should she not have been monitoring baby a little better? Didn’t she only have this baby to look after too? I personally think she was deliberately neglecting the care of the drains etc. I’m not surprised there were comments. But by then it was known that serious problems and deaths were happening around her- bad shift, bad run, awful time, never before seen events, no obvious cause.
Then despite the problem of blocked tubes being resolved the baby is in a 20 minute resus event with 3 doses of adrenalin a short time after and she is alone there. The problem resolved and the next morning the same thing happens with no cause again and she’s there alone despite not being the des nurse. I think she knew exactly what she was doing allowing the baby to get blocked before hand. Again it’s either yet another highly remote chance of problem, no long term cause or plausible explanation to a prolonged cardiac arrest and unusual care trajectory/problem happening on her watch by total chance or she was causing the issue.
I don’t think we’ve heard a fraction of what’s been said in court on this one.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 10
Haveyouanywool

Haveyouanywool

MmmB777 said:
Exactly. She was designated nurse when the babies tubes blocked and caused a collapse, should she not have been monitoring baby a little better? Didn’t she only have this baby to look after too? I personally think she was deliberately neglecting the care of the drains etc. I’m not surprised there were comments. But by then it was known that serious problems and deaths were happening around her- bad shift, bad run, awful time, never before seen events, no obvious cause.
Then despite the problem of blocked tubes being resolved the baby is in a 20 minute resus event with 3 doses of adrenalin a short time after and she is alone there. The problem resolved and the next morning the same thing happens with no cause again and she’s there alone despite not being the des nurse. I think she knew exactly what she was doing allowing the baby to get blocked before hand. Again it’s either yet another highly remote chance of problem, no long term cause or plausible explanation to a prolonged cardiac arrest and unusual care trajectory/problem happening on her watch by total chance or she was causing the issue.
I don’t think we’ve heard a fraction of what’s been said in court on this one.
Click to expand...
The first unexplained collapse, requiring CPR, happened in the early morning hours on the 26th, when LL was designated nurse, the second on the 27th, when she was not designated nurse.
Dr H described an event at the start of the shift, evening of 26th into 27th, when LL was not the designated nurse, when baby H’s ET tube (breathing tube) became blocked. Dr H was bleeped to deal with this (presumably to change the ET tube). This would be a medically explainable event.
I don’t know if it was only me who was confused by this (due to the text about a blocked tube) but anyway just clarifying to avoid confusion. Or as little confusion as it’s possible to have in this case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5
MmmB777

MmmB777

Haveyouanywool said:
The first unexplained collapse, requiring CPR, happened in the early morning hours on the 26th, when LL was designated nurse, the second on the 27th, when she was not designated nurse.
Dr H described an event at the start of the shift, evening of 26th into 27th, when LL was not the designated nurse, when baby H’s ET tube (breathing tube) became blocked. Dr H was bleeped to deal with this (presumably to change the ET tube). This would be a medically explainable event.
I don’t know if it was only me who was confused by this (due to the text about a blocked tube) but anyway just clarifying to avoid confusion. Or as little confusion as it’s possible to have in this case.
Click to expand...
Ah ok thank you. I have found this baby/case the hardest to follow in this respect!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3
F1Grid

F1Grid

Haveyouanywool said:
Mail Plus Lucy Letby Episode 12 is very interesting. Apparently the ‘bitchiness’ was about Senior Nurses debating whether LL was capable of looking after the sicker babies in nursery 1.
Click to expand...
Not an unreasonable assumption. As soon as she's in there on shift babies start dying.

Understandable they attributed it to incompetence rather than malice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12
T

tay65

MmmB777 said:
Exactly. She was designated nurse when the babies tubes blocked and caused a collapse, should she not have been monitoring baby a little better? Didn’t she only have this baby to look after too? I personally think she was deliberately neglecting the care of the drains etc. I’m not surprised there were comments. But by then it was known that serious problems and deaths were happening around her- bad shift, bad run, awful time, never before seen events, no obvious cause.
Then despite the problem of blocked tubes being resolved the baby is in a 20 minute resus event with 3 doses of adrenalin a short time after and she is alone there. The problem resolved and the next morning the same thing happens with no cause again and she’s there alone despite not being the des nurse. I think she knew exactly what she was doing allowing the baby to get blocked before hand. Again it’s either yet another highly remote chance of problem, no long term cause or plausible explanation to a prolonged cardiac arrest and unusual care trajectory/problem happening on her watch by total chance or she was causing the issue.
I don’t think we’ve heard a fraction of what’s been said in court on this one.
Click to expand...
I was reading about baby H on I think The Mail and there were so many similarities to my grandchild who was born 6 weeks early (6 months ago) like baby H and weighing 5 lb and baby H 5 lb 2 oz. My grandchild was in NICU for two weeks but had absolutely no problems. I know baby H had a punctured lung but it's so hard to contemplate a baby of this size and gestation nearly dying on two occasions when it wasn't expected and they couldn't explain why it had happened. Whilst it was reported that the unit was stretched LL was only looking after this one baby and there were no other babies in this room so it sounds like she had free rein to do what she wanted without being seen.
 
  • Sad
  • Like
Reactions: 8
MmmB777

MmmB777

Haveyouanywool said:
Was court on today? Can’t see any reporting.
Click to expand...
I tried looking up the listing at the court. I think it’s saying they sat till 10:30?! I’m not sure though. I mean that’s when they usually start so I wonder if it was just to call it off 😖
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Reactions: 2
IdeletedbutI'mbackagain

IdeletedbutI'mbackagain

MmmB777 said:
I tried looking up the listing at the court. I think it’s saying they sat till 10:30?! I’m not sure though. I mean that’s when they usually start so I wonder if it was just to call it off 😖
Click to expand...
Would explain why we can't find anything on it anywhere though
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2
JCMSadie

JCMSadie

Baby H seems a bit less suspicious than the previous babies, but that might be because the reporting so far isn't very detailed. I'm finding it's only when I hear it all together on the Mail's podcast that things click into place. I need to catch up on the latest episode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4
M

Mysteryy

Been following this case on and off but can I thank all you wonderful Wiki contributors as it makes it so much easier to read all the reporting and information about the case so thank you ❤
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 13
F1Grid

F1Grid

Child I was the most convincing one to me in the opening.
Two nurses, including Letby, asked if the mother wanted to bathe Child I.

While bathing, Letby was "smiling and kept going on about much she was present at [Child I]'s first bath and how much [Child I] had loved it.

"I wished she'd just stop talking. i think, eventually, she realised. It wasn't something we wanted to hear right now.

"I remember it was Lucy who packaged up [Child I]'s belongings."
Click to expand...
Additionally, the parents were told there would need to be a post mortem. Hopefully this was done.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 7
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.