I know what you are saying and I think with most other subjects of wrongdoing I'd agree, but when it comes the risk of babies literally dying, I really don't think there is any excuse if people genuinely suspected her and did nothing if management told them no. How could you live with yourself if you truly believed that and just accepted it and went on with your day? I couldn't let it rest and I would shout to anyone and everyone until I was heard. You go into NICU work to protect babies, this is the greatest act of protection you can ever give them.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I wonder if any nurses she worked with will be witnesses. I guess they would have to explain what they did to try stop it. I can’t remember where I read it now but I read someone say the consultants did raise concerns but they were told to stop and accused of bullying. If someone was to say raise the issue with management but management have deleted the evidence can the police still get that back? Also would that even be relevant for Lucy’s case or would that be an issue for a separate investigation about the trust?
How is it easy for IV bags to be contaminated accidentally? How could you accidentally contaminated a bag with insulin?
She signed for and hung the bag. As it was a TPN bag it ran over a long number of hours. That means the baby would continued receiving the illicit medication long after she finished her shift.
We had a nurse when I first qualified, she wasn't going around killing OAPs but she was severely incompetent and with all the mite in the world my ward manager and the matron (who's office was unfortunately/fortunately based on our ward) tried to keep her under supervised practice. She was taken off nights (but still rota'd in for a night shift every now & again) and had to do pretty much everything under the watchful eye of a band 6 but there were times where the staffing just couldn't allow for that, we were a cross dependency cardiology ward we couldn't run the risk of pulling a staff member off a ratio just to watch her. There were times where she too would often also have a student following her about.
It was tit, it was scary, but it's the way it was.
In the end, it took a serious never ever event to be witnessed by another member of staff during a cardiac arrest for her to be reported to the NMC and ultimately struck off.
I imagine, its not an easy process to manage when you have unsafe staffing ratios, and your suspicions but no concrete evidence at that time to move forward.
It was tit, it was scary, but it's the way it was.
In the end, it took a serious never ever event to be witnessed by another member of staff during a cardiac arrest for her to be reported to the NMC and ultimately struck off.
I imagine, its not an easy process to manage when you have unsafe staffing ratios, and your suspicions but no concrete evidence at that time to move forward.
The defence haven’t actually said that I don’t think. They are saying she wasn’t there when the second bag was replaced but not sure that rules her out as the medical expert is saying the giving set could have been contaminated by the original bag. And because the problems started with the original bag it must have been that which was contaminated.
And the second one they aren’t even denying she was involved, just that there was an issue with the paperwork??
The concerning thing here is, it’s seems they have very strong evidence that this was a deliberate act. Defence haven’t offered up a natural explanation like he has with air embolus. So if it wasn’t Lucy, then who was it?
also worth repeating that there were two sets of twins where one from each twin had insulin poisoning and the other from each twin had air embolus. It’s very hard for me to accept that it’s just a coincidence. Especially when insulin poisoning is probably going to be proved beyond reasonable doubt (whether it was Lucy or someone else)
Attachments
Wow wow wow. Incredible work there. I hadn’t realised that’s two sets of twins (within triplets) with one of each being killed in the same way. Jesus Christ. Statistical chances must be… this is absolutely insane. I’m not going to say what I want to say but it involves a key and throwing it away.
It's a difficult one isn't it. I'd like to think I'd have said something, perhaps by gently suggesting to a manager that she was not competent and I had concerns rather than a direct accusation of harm. However, as you say, it's so easy to sit here and say it. Who knows what the reality of the situation was. I do wonder though if those involved are now struggling with guilt or 'what if' given the extent of the charges.
What I'm also finding difficult is that you'd assume someone committing these crimes would have psychopathic traits. Yet I'm not seeing anything like that reflected in the evidence so far, nor in the way people have spoken about her previously. She will have had pysch evaluations and it will be very interesting to see if and how the defence refer to them.
This also doesn't seem to fall into the category of gaining attention via being the hero of the hour, given she doesn't actually seem to have been involved in saving or attempting to save any of the babies. Her outlined involvement has specifically been identified as being present at the point of or immediately prior to deterioration. It is possible though that this may become clearer further on in proceedings.
I’ve just realised there is a typo on the defence statement (actually from the leader) they say child E but I think they mean child F.
i think the insulin ones is going to have a lot of time specific evidence and be quite complex.
I think this shows why it’s important to not look at evidence only in isolation. Patterns matter.
i think the insulin ones is going to have a lot of time specific evidence and be quite complex.
I think it was ‘only’ one of those four babies that died fortunately (any is too many), the two insulin poisoned ones both survived.
I think this shows why it’s important to not look at evidence only in isolation. Patterns matter.
Last edited:
I’m still on the fence, but think she will somehow be found innocent.
Many potential coincidents on a ward where for a layperson, it would be expected for some patients to die regardless of a murderer on the scene.
Was the grievance with the NHS raised by her or raised against her? If the former, surely she would have felt like there was a target on her back - hence the paranoid note?
Many potential coincidents on a ward where for a layperson, it would be expected for some patients to die regardless of a murderer on the scene.
Was the grievance with the NHS raised by her or raised against her? If the former, surely she would have felt like there was a target on her back - hence the paranoid note?
If she were guilty of the crimes she's accused of would it be a sentence for each murder/attempted murder or rolled into one?
This is the statement I am referring to. The bag was hung when Lucy was not on shift and she has not come into contact with it? How could she have spiked it then?
Attachments
i think they sentence for each one but then judge will decide if they run consecutively or concurrently. If she gets convicted of any I could see her getting a whole life sentence. This could be one of the worst crimes this country has ever seen.
Interesting point you make about wether the nurses who were around feel any guilt. I wonder if any still work on that ward. I guess a lot of it is actually hindsight which would be quite hard to live with even more so if she is found guilty. I’d also imagine I would feel quite worried about dragging my self into all this mess.
In regards to the to psych reports they must have deemed her ok or else it would be diminished responsibility and she wouldn’t be able to stand in court? The pros said there was more things to come in regards to what was in her house so maybe that will explain a motive? All we know so far is they seemed to make her out to be a busy body and not doing what she was asked, facebook stalker, strange rambling notes, pictures in camera roll that could be questionable. Those isolated alone doesn’t make anyone a murderer but I think over time it will all link together to form a bigger picture. If there was a reasonable explanation would prosecution risk people questioning the authenticity of their evidence? Too much of a coincidence for me to look at it innocently.
It was said in the opening statement
Attachments
Not sure what the evidence is to say that she didn’t touch it as in theory she could have injected into it without people noticing (short staffed and no one seemed to notice much) also pros are saying the new bag could still be pushing insulin through from the first bag. (Anyone feel free to correct me)
So do you think there’s so many occasions that babies died or nearly died when Letby was around but this insulin poisoning incident was a different murderous nurse? Letby asked the police whether they had the bags.. interesting for someone with not a lot to say!
I just don’t know what to think.
this just threw some doubt on her guilt for meI think the sky news report fits with the leader/Chester standard.
My understanding is this
Bag 1: first TPN bag Lucy had contact with
Baby started collapsing with the insulin probelms
Bag 2: Bag replaced when Lucy not on shift or not around
Baby continued to have problems.
Sample taken from bag 2. Medical experts saying bag 2 could have been contaminated by bag 1 (giving sets? Im not sure where these fit but he’s the medical expert so hopefully he will explain to jury) or bag 2 could have been contaminated.
But because baby had problems shortly after bag 1, bag 1 must have been contaminated.
i agree there are many questions here but it was only the opening statement so will have to wait for the specific evidence to get a better understanding
The bag could have been injected into and left for an unsuspecting nurse to change over to. (Look at stepping hill) You could also see that as a way for Lucy to get people off her back.I just don’t know what to think.
With the psych evaluation, I meant more in terms of if they will reveal anything about her state of mind or conditions she may have suffered/be suffering from. As you say, she's clearly been assessed as fit to stand trial and has pleaded innocent rather than diminished responsibility. I'm actually wondering if her defence will be that she was overworked due to staffing levels, unwell with anxiety etc and therefore made mistakes, hence the deaths not being 'her fault'. I'm not sure how the insulin related deaths will fit into this though.
Eta: Having seen your above post...that's a good point, she could just say it was nothing to do with her and suggest someone else did it.
- Status