this is what I don’t understand when the child was already receiving insulin via injection
- 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’m glad we are finally getting on to the medical experts.
I think child e just had a one off dose of insulin, not something they were prescribed regularly.
A puncture mark wouldn't look that suspicious then if it was done in the same place around the same time. It's very strange anyway if she did do it it was experimenting what would cause death.
I don’t know if that’s the normal route for neonates though.
Would an insulin pump for neonates be subcut or IV?
Neonates have a different pathology. Their insulin deficiency is caused by pancreatic immaturity not diabetes, if that makes a difference.
Also if LL was setting up and administering the legitimate insulin. She’d be the immediate suspect.
Last edited:
They wouldn't of received it via injection it would of been IV sliding scale type, in small doses checking their levels every so often and the doseage adjusted
Anyone else see the tattle wiki get a shout out on one of the LL fb groups lol.
Yes I work with adults so I don't really know much about Neonate care .I guess she could have tampered with the bag to make her look less suspicious. The collapse wouldn't be immediate. If you have a massive subcut insulin overdose they would collapse pretty instantly.
What the radiologist has just said sounds concerning, but then could you argue that if this is a case of neglect because of things not being picked up / short-staffed / the problem with the lines etc. this wouldn’t really be classed a natural cause of death anyway? What do others think?
I just find it crazy that people can talk her 'out' of so many situations and that still doesn't ring alarm bells. Like weird comments she's made about the boredom, the note, the searches, the sheer number of babies etc etc. We've said it before but while yes on their own (well except the latter), you might be able to explain it, all together, doesn't that strike you as a huge red flag?
Well the famous saying is 'There's 3 sides to every story, your side, my side and the truth' The jury will always need to find that truth.With the blood I it might become a Letby’s word against this mothers word. In which case are we supposed to think this mother would misremember or be influenced into remembering it differently- I truly personally think that would be not only extraordinary but highly offensive - my opinion. I also believe there’s going to be a doctor that said they’d never seen such blood loss in a prem baby but I could be mixing a couple of poor babies there
I think because I'm a huge weirdo but I would never harm a fly. I'm entirely on the fence though, I hope she didn't do it and it was natural causes or a neglect/malpractice because these deaths sound horrific and painful for the babies. She would be worse than shipman who at least did a massive overdose of morphine on his victims (he was still a horrible evil bleep) These deaths are like experimenting there was no pattern.
ok My mistake I thought I’d read due to a spike in BG levels the baby was given an injection earlier in the day
I hear what you’re saying, if more medical evidence comes to light that is undeniable that she’s guilty, then yes all of the other stuff definitely compounds it and is part of the bigger picture and absolutely disgusting.
I just don’t think all of that has as much weight if the medical evidence doesn’t support it. I think most people are just trying to be balanced, there’s so many cases of people going to prison because of doing weird things and even medical evidence at the time making them look guilty - only for it them to be acquitted later on. We need justice for these babies and families but it’s also a complete disservice to them, if she takes the fall for this when it’s really a result of a much bigger problem with the NHS
Neglect doesn’t cause air to be injected deliberately.
Another point, this radiologist works at Great Ormond Street so I think (OK speculate) that his experience and knowledge will be superior to most.
I don’t think it’s always as straight forward as people think to read X-rays, MRI images etc. Often Drs do ask for a second opinion on images.
I think a lot of people are theorising and considering all angles rather than believing she's innocent without doubt, imo those who think she's guilty have much more of a bias view of what we are hearing.
For me context is key, there were more deaths and collapses than have gone to trial, what's going on with them? If deaths were considered so rare there, were these suspicious? Is it just that she wasnt presebt for them?
The comment about boredom isn't that odd to me, it's like soldiers who say they enjoy going to war as its what they have trained for; plenty of professionally trained people feel bored or stifled in some roles. Perhaps she didn't move jobs as she couldn't relocate or whatever, different levels often have nurses who have a pathway for feeds and so others would focus more on the medical needs, for example.
The note again depends for me what other notes were found, until we see those I don't know- this one seems to me like something she wrote whilst on a phone call and if we knew who that was to would make a difference.
If the rest of the circumstances are similar to baby A it seems like incompetence and lack of staffing across the ward and probably hospital is more of a factor potentially.
That makes sense, thanks for that. I am getting confused by his responses though - the defence just asked him if this could be a result of medical procedures and line placement and he said yes. Argh just hard to get your head around
Thanks again for sharing your knowledge, it’s really helpful 
He’s asked if it could sometimes lead to air in the system which is a yes - but this doc is saying he’s never seen this amount and the placement is indicative of it being administered - I imagine that’s to do with the force that would have to be used as to where the air ended up. He’s only seen this one other time - another baby in this case.That makes sense, thanks for that. I am getting confused by his responses though - the defence just asked him if this could be a result of medical procedures and line placement and he said yes. Argh just hard to get your head around
I suppose the thinking is that out of 25-30 nurses in that unit, surely at least one other nurse would have had similar numbers of collapses if the department was failing. There were only ever 15 deaths in that unit that year, and she was attending to at least 8 of them we know of. For only one nurse out of 25-30 to be attending to over half the deaths - how can that be the NHS failing if other nurses didn't have this issue working in the same dept/with same equipment. She wasn't even the most senior nurse, if we argue that she probably saw the most complicated near death cases. Surely the most senior/experienced nurse would have seen as many cases in her time at CoCH?
@slingo16
I thought you might be interested in this. I updated the list of allegations to say air embolus or bolus of air via NG tube.
There were 5 babies alleged to have had air embolus and 3 died, 2 survived.
There were 6 babies alleged to have had bolus of air via NG tube and 4 died, 2 survived.
I thought you might be interested in this. I updated the list of allegations to say air embolus or bolus of air via NG tube.
There were 5 babies alleged to have had air embolus and 3 died, 2 survived.
There were 6 babies alleged to have had bolus of air via NG tube and 4 died, 2 survived.
- Status