Lucy Letby Case #3

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:
She did though, I read that she called in doctors saying things like 'he's going', telling other colleagues a baby 'looked rubbish in the morning' and then deteriorated quickly. It sounds like a mixture of God complex and Munchausens
She was standing in the doorway of one babies room saying they were pale 😩 as another nurse turned on the light to see the baby wasn’t breathing 😢 awful just awful 😢
 
  • Sick
  • Sad
Reactions: 2
I just *know* you’re the type to say “but I have black friends” 🥱

The ignorance around the criminal justice system in this thread is *astounding*
I have not one black friend 🤣 why would that ever be an assumption about me?! Unsure what you’re implying with that, peculiar. Barbie I don’t what your area is like in Brighton but where I’m from there’s not many black people so I’ve never been offered the opportunity, Muslim - yes.

Funny how you talk about ignorance when you’re happy de-railing a thread all about the murder and attempted murder on innocent babies to somehow push a totally irrelevant race agenda.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 11
I wouldn’t be surprised if they have kept some evidence back from the opening statements and once defence have started, the prosecution will bring it out to disprove them.
Unfortunately, this won't happen.

Both parties have to disclose all of their evidence to each, including when the prosecution have evidence that could indicate innocence.

If there's anyone intrigued about the processes with evidence and disclosure that have to be followed this is a really useful resource, quite a long read though.

 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 12
I would agree. This is not a case of maunchausen or by MH by proxy.
Slight tangent but what’s with the spelling “Maunchausen”? I’ve only ever seen it as “munchausen”. Also isn’t it FII now (fabricated/induced illness)? Certainly it was when I worked in safeguarding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3
Hello, been lurking here and find this case really depressing. Seen many posts saying she's a scapegoat but wanted to point out that she can't be because:
  • The hospital initiated the police investigation themselves. They didn't need to. They have one review done by the RCPCH that gave recommendations on improvements to reduce neo natal deaths. They could have just stuck with that report as the reason deaths were increasing, as no one was blaming anyone. If they wanted to hush it up that was their chance. They brought in the the police themselves.
  • Her colleagues had suspicions about her some months before the RCPCH review began. And a year before the police review began. So even before the hospital leadership knew anything, her own doctors/nurses were questioning her behaviour. So not like the police came in, and they needed to pin the blame on someone so blamed her.
  • The police would have had to review all the ward's case files as on many of these charges she was not the designated nurse. So they couldn't have just picked 'LL cases' by looking through her case files only. They'd have to review each one and read the detailed notes/interview people to find where she was involved, even when not supposed to. If anyone else was suspicious, they would have spoken to them too and since no one else has been arrested, means there isn't anyone.
  • She was often the only person in the room with the patients. They have door records of who went in and out, so would know if someone else had the same opportunity. They wouldn't be able to cover it up as the door records are electronic - you'd have to tamper with all of them, every day for a whole year to avoid detection. Also she herself doesn't deny being there. So a doctor or colleague couldn't be responsible if they weren't in the room, and she hasn't mentioned it in her notes or at interview.
  • If she is found guilty, the parents can still sue the hospital in a civil suit. Even if she isn't they still could. So blaming her won't protect the hospital. It would have been far easier to force a transfer for her, hush it all up, then get the police involved.
  • The case has taken 7 years and is still ongoing - will be for another few years. It has cost millions of pounds. Involved police, medical professionals and civilians. Police wouldn't assign budget and resources like this for a hospital cover up. They have nothing to gain.
Also seen comments questioning how the hospital took so long to do anything:

  • It's very difficult in the public sector to just suspend or sack someone. You need evidence of wrong doing and to show you have followed all the right HR procedures. Or you'd have to deal with wrongful dismissal tribunals, unions getting involved etc. Also you have to think from the perspective of her colleagues - even if you suspect something is not right, it's a huge leap to think they are deliberately hurting patients. You wouldn't want to blame them and ruin their career on a hunch. It seems like in Feb the doctor had suspicions, and then soon after her shifts changed. This was probably because on the day shift they felt more people would be around as witnesses, so that might stop her, or they thought the night shifts were tiring her out and she was making errors. Not clear. I do agree she should have been more closely supervised certainly! I did read somewhere that they also wanted to introduce CCTV but the medical staff didn't want that as it showed a lack of trust. I know unions kick off about stuff like this so it isn't easy to do.
Am uncertain on her guilt. But convinced she was behaving unethically/unprofessionally for sure. Irrespective of the charges, she should have undergone a performance and conduct review. The amount of personal patient information she had at home, was sharing on text and facebook is shocking to me. These are not secure methods. These are sackable offences in many industries. Also, her not following instructions and protocols is also shocking to me. She can't have been this overworked and prone to error if she was complaining to people that she was getting bored, and had so much time to attend to cases not her own. So I would have expected her to be more proactive in raising issues to leadership, being more thorough and following protocol after the first few deaths. None of this means she's guilty of murder/attempted murder though. I just question her work ethic based on what has been shared.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 35
Slight tangent but what’s with the spelling “Maunchausen”? I’ve only ever seen it as “munchausen”. Also isn’t it FII now (fabricated/induced illness)? Certainly it was when I worked in safeguarding.
I guess that's what happens when you're making stuff up? Just a theory of mine. Could be wrong and so called professionals spell it differently, who knows.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 6
Slight tangent but what’s with the spelling “Maunchausen”? I’ve only ever seen it as “munchausen”. Also isn’t it FII now (fabricated/induced illness)? Certainly it was when I worked in safeguarding.
I mean they also called it ‘Mumchausen’ at one point so who knows 🥴
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 5
Does anyone else find it strange that the number of still births significantly spiked during the year of the neonatal deaths LL is accused of? To me this screams of overall hospital negligence.
I was 100% in the guilty camp until I went over the FOI death chart that was posted and now I’m back on the fence.
Did LL so some strange things? Absolutely! But did she murder and attempt to murder those babies? I’m not sure.
Will be interesting to hear her defence and all evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9
Does anyone else find it strange that the number of still births significantly spiked during the year of the neonatal deaths LL is accused of? To me this screams of overall hospital negligence.
I was 100% in the guilty camp until I went over the FOI death chart that was posted and now I’m back on the fence.
Did LL so some strange things? Absolutely! But did she murder and attempt to murder those babies? I’m not sure.
Will be interesting to hear her defence and all evidence.
Is the defence starting today?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
The fact they were comfortable with who they suspected as a murderer teaching students and showing them procedures doesn't strike me as normal. I think the defence will point all this stuff out that's why I think there could be a not guilty verdict. They don't have to prove she never did it just tear holes in the prosecutions case until it's weak enough to create doubt.



Another spin put by the prosecution she was a band 5 staff nurse not a ward manager or advanced nurse practitioner. I don't even think she was a 6!!
ICU nurses are mostly band 5s (they shouldn’t be, but they are). I’ve worked with many who were extremely skilled and had decades of experience - you cannot make any inference from a registered nurse’s band. None of the trusts I’ve worked in give 6s just for clinical skills or experience, you can have masters etc and stay on a 5 forever. You’d need to apply for a more managerial role to get a higher band and not everyone is interested in that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5
Hi everyone, I’m new to these threads and have tried my best to catch up, but I’m sorry if I’ve missed anything. I have a couple of questions:

•is there any evidence that she Facebook searched for the families of others who died of natural causes? I know there’s been conflicting information about the number of other deaths on the ward, but surely at some other point in her career she’ll have encountered other patients who passed away. Then again, would the prosecution even look at that?
the prosecution for this specific case, will only be looking at what the police have submitted to them. It’s not the prosecutions job to gather evidence and look into potential criminality, the police do that.

anything that is referenced in the trial, will come from evidence submitted.

newspaper reports refer to police evidence that she searched on Facebook for the parents, and viewed their profiles, this will have been submitted in evidence for the trial which is why Nick Johnson KC referenced it in his opening statement.

im going to guess that after her first arrest, police seized her phone and were able to view her user history quite easily. Guess we’ll find out in the upcoming weeks the specifics but it is safe to say it is accepted fact that she looked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3
Is It possible on the start of the new thread can we have the details to the neonatal charities offering counselling for anyone affected by the trial please?
just incase anyone needs them ❤
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 15
I've just come accross this thread so don't know if this is known info or not, but consultants at the Trust were raising concerns for quite a while and the directors were telling them to be quiet. They were identifying Lucy has the potential problem at the time of the deaths and they were told to stop raising this or they would be disciplined for bullying her. Management at the hospital did not want to deal with this.
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Reactions: 22
Is It possible on the start of the new thread can we have the details to the neonatal charities offering counselling for anyone affected by the trial please?
just incase anyone needs them ❤
So far the ones I know offering support are
Bliss
Twins Trust
Spoons Charity (this is for anyone Manchester Based)
Sands
Tommy's

There is the Miracle Moon on Instagram, she is a Clinical Psychologist who has had a premature birth herself, she has links to various other pages of support for premature birth/baby loss & also ways to ground and calm yourself when it becomes overwhelming.

@Tofino is this something that could perhaps go in the Wiki?
 
  • Heart
  • Like
Reactions: 8
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.