Lucy Letby Case #7

[Warpaint]

I think there's been about 5 different Lucy's been invented in this thread today.

The lack of info about the trial is showing as people are posting the same things and discussion over pages and pages little details with no context

 

[Daisydunn15]

Relating to the tv show she said she was watching, she says to her colleague by text about it “it’s interesting seeing how we are portrayed to the public“. Something strikes me as odd about that, it’s like she‘s loving the attention around her job. She could’ve had a god like complex where she believed she was above the ‘public’ because of her job.

Most people I know in health care enjoy watching things like 24hr in a&e. Not that weird.

Totally disrespectful.
If that's the case we couldn't never use any witnesses statements in any trial because they could simply be "misremembering". Imagine telling a stabbing victim who saw their perpetrator stab them without any other witnesses that there statement was worthless because they could be misremembering?!!
It's this attitude that results in a lot of adult child abuse victims being dismissed.

But that's exactly what does happen in cross examination?

 

[friedeggontoast]

That's completely different though because the parents weren't the one accusing LL of the crime. Their statement would have been made after they'd been told of the allegations. So it would colour her judgement completely.

When the parents were told of the allegations they had no prior reason to suspect her of anything. If I was told my GP was suddenly being investigated for something awful, I wouldn’t then instantly view them in a different light? You’d just give your own experience.

 

[Lackofimagination]

I think there's been about 5 different Lucy's been invented in this thread today.

The lack of info about the trial is showing as people are posting the same things and discussion over pages and pages little details with no context

I think the reporting on the trial needs to improve we’ve got 6 months of this and If all the papers can’t get the same story straight how on earth is it coming across to the jury

 

[Tofino]

View attachment 1660607

“kept going on” is the red flag for me. Saying it once could be put down as well intentioned but badly received (which is understandable) but the mum has been quoted to say she ‘kept going on about it’. We need to hear the statement in full but I feel like that sounds more like a memory that’s stuck in her mind as being a bit off. Perhaps just narcissistic behaviour, making somebody else’s trauma about herself, but it still gives an ‘off’ vibe and forms part of the bigger picture. Especially combined with all the attention she got from her colleagues after baby A died.

 

[friedeggontoast]

Most people I know in health care enjoy watching things like 24hr in a&e. Not that weird.

I’m not saying her watching it is weird, just the choice of words about how they are portrayed to the public.

 

[StatusWoe]

I agree although part of me wonders based on what else we have read about her if she was just really awkward and weird and didn’t think before she spoke . I know I have had situations like that at work and thought oh tit afterwards .

It could be that her awkward, insensitive comments to the parents were a result of not knowing how to deal with their grief. That's why she mentioned wanting to avoid them (parents) in her text as well. It would even shine light on her career choice, i.e working with babies who can't hold a conversation is preferable for someone who doesn't have great bedside manner.

I'm finding the reporting very confusing because so much of the context is missing.

 

[Windowtothewall]

That's completely different though because the parents weren't the one accusing LL of the crime. Their statement would have been made after they'd been told of the allegations. So it would colour her judgement completely.

Actually you don't know when their statements were taken. It might have been before the first arrest. In which case they wouldn't have known she was suspected.

There are grape victims who only contact the police to report a historic grape because the police are asking for more information about a certain person charged or because they see it on the news. Or years later when they feel ready to talk about it. Child sexual abuse can be prosecuted years later as well when children are adults and ready to report.

As standard, we don't go around doubting the victims of a crime (like the parents are) and their memories. I think you would be grateful of it if you are ever the victim of a crime and only remember details after a time has passed, or a suspect has been arrested, once you've had a chance to settle your mind,

 

[Lackofimagination]

The huge thing for me with the tv programme is the fact that two days later a child in her care died under those circumstances

 

[Instafamousssss]

I think the reporting on the trial needs to improve we’ve got 6 months of this and If all the papers can’t get the same story straight how on earth is it coming across to the jury

Well we aren’t the jury so it’s only really important that the facts are given in court and journalists are probably just reporting what they remember and or what they can be bothered to write up about…which obviously isn’t helpful for us but the truth of it is we don’t actually matter that much. They are writing these up very quickly to keep us ‘up to date’ so take them with a pinch of salt I guess

 

[Emmelina Ball]

The huge thing for me with the tv programme is the fact that two days later a child in her care died under those circumstances

It was said here that actually that episode didn’t air until after she had said she watched an episode so it wasn’t the same episode.

 

[Wowitsme]

For when people are saying it’s strange that she never was involved with any suspicious behaviour prior to 2015. The police can only investigate a certain time frame so from x time to y time. I can’t give full details as to why this is as I watched a you tube video on it.

also regarding the insulin in the TPN bags, they seem to be alluding to the fact that the giving set (the tubing that connects the bag to the central line) was not change between bags therefore still allowing the insulin to be delivered even when there has been a new bag attached. This is bad practice as the giving set should be changed with every bag change.

The part that stands out is the fact she was there for 7 unexplained deaths, it is rare within nicu to be present for 2 unexplained deaths let alone 7. For example in 3 years on a level 2 we had one baby pass away and that was expected and this is also a hospital not meeting cqc expectations of good. The fact the hospital did not investigate these incidents further sooner is a very sad point.

Also regarding the notes there is a common saying in nursing that if you didn’t document it then it never happened. This is because you cannot say something happened if there is no record of it whether you’ve said or done something.

 

[Lackofimagination]

Well we aren’t the jury so it’s only really important that the facts are given in court and journalists are probably just reporting what they remember and or what they can be bothered to write up about…which obviously isn’t helpful for us but the truth of it is we don’t actually matter that much. They are writing these up very quickly to keep us ‘up to date’ so take them with a pinch of salt I guess

My point was at the moment it doesn’t seem the best organised and as strong as it needs to be to get the truth for the babies and the parents and to lock up a *potential* mass child murderer.

 

[Windowtothewall]

I get what you’re saying completely but I am a victim of grape and my memory is shot. I couldn’t tell you the truth now years on under oath because I cannot remember. Trauma does a lot to the body and mind.

If your memory was shot, you just wouldn't say anything though. You'd admit you didn't remember and they wouldn't use that as evidence. Would you choose to perjure yourself or put the wrong person away?

My husband works with sexual assault victims in CID and there are many many many victims who remember every single detail of their grape even years later. I am grateful the police and CPS don't automatically dismiss their statements as mis-remembered because it's been years later. In fact, they have a huge campaign to try and get victims to come forward no matter how many years have passed.

 

[teeniebopps]

To be honest doesn't everyone have someone at work who seems obsessed and doesn't have a life outside of their job.

I’m a manager in Social Care. One of my staff team has a busy life, children a partner etc. she works part time but is always messaging me about work when I am in work and off work. It really annoys me and I just politely reply, albeit I will delay replying until I can be bothered. She likes to replay over what was said by certain people etc.
Another colleague I used to work with, would ring and text me about everything that was going on when I was on leave. I was glad when she left as I got fed up of not being able to have a break from work. The same person would also reminisce about all the people that have had care from us, she would search them all on Facebook to see how they were getting on. I admit that I even became party to this and it was easy to get carried away looking at people to see what they were up to.

 

[Daisydunn15]

As standard, we don't go around doubting the victims of a crime (like the parents are) and their memories. I think you would be grateful of it if you are ever the victim of a crime and only remember details after a time has passed, or a suspect has been arrested, once you've had a chance to settle your mind,

Completely disagree with this. Everyone deserves a fair trial, and these are alleged victims. LL's defence should be able to question their recollection of events in the same way that they would question anyone else.
Nobody is questioning that they've been through something horrific but that doesn't mean that whatever statement they make should be taken as gospel.

 

[Milktray]

People saying the mother could mis-remember because of the emotion/trauma of the situation. Can you imagine if grape victims were told as standard, that their memories are crap because they were traumatised by the situation?? What a terrible, dangerous precedent that would be for any victim of a crime.

Yes, but a criminal trial relies heavily on other evidence. Its not a case of being heartless, it is fact that memory can become distorted during trauma. That is a fact. Nobody is saying it to be cruel. Nobody is saying it to discredit the parents grief.
I have been in this situation. My memory is still to this day, messed up.

Collectively with documentary evidence, chain of events etc, then witnesses/statements are more powerful.

 

[Instafamousssss]

My point was at the moment it doesn’t seem the best organised and as strong as it needs to be to get the truth for the babies and the parents and to lock up a *potential* mass child murderer.

Yes I’m saying in court it’ll be much clearer and make a lot more sense because they want justice, reporting it to the media won’t make a difference to the verdict so I’m just saying of course it isn’t going to be organised and yes it’s very annoying

 

[Windowtothewall]

It was said here that actually that episode didn’t air until after she had said she watched an episode so it wasn’t the same episode.

The trailer of the episode aired a week before and the only thing in the trailer was how air in a baby's bowels can cause suffocation. Baby B was then found to have air in bowels (but they managed to save him).

 

[Lackofimagination]

Yes I’m saying in court it’ll be much clearer and make a lot more sense because they want justice, reporting it to the media won’t make a difference to the verdict so I’m just saying of course it isn’t going to be organised and yes it’s very annoying

But don’t you think it should be organised? For all of the people who have received care within that hospital however not directly affected but for every person who’s had a doubt or heard a rumour I think the reporting from the court should be sold and factual not shoddy reporting on such a serious matter. As much as we aren’t the jurors public opinion matters