Letby Case (part 2)

[OneFrenchEgg]

www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4652340-lucy-letby-court-case?reply=121815754

follow up, remember rules around discussion of active cases

The Chua case was raised because of the difference of levels of evidence.

The insulin cases are different in that Chua injected the saline drips, but it’s not been suggested drips were injected in this case.

Looking at the live feeds she is taking absolutely no responsibility for the failures in the care of these babies. Whilst keen to point out they were ill (with what?) she still cannot explain why they suddenly crashed - even ruling out incompetence of her fellow nurses on the latest child (G) I mean how does she know?!

I mean there is no explanation! It was either medical incompetence/negligence or it was caused on purpose

Baby G was fit and well, ready to go home then needed 3 resus’ with no apparent cause or explanation

It’s the same story over and over

I must admit, after today, I've found her answers slightly off. Like a previous poster has said why not just be honest with the small things, she seems to be even lying with the tiny details, when there is a logical explanation, which even if it wasn't true she could lie in a better way if you get me.

She also comes across very badly in my opinion. Cold and withdrawn and quite unlikeable. A bit petulant. Not sure what she is thinking.

It’s so bizarre!!

Things seem to be unraveling somewhat!

Is it normal to get details wrong on your handover sheet? Or make little errors or forget to put things on there?

He has found a lot of discrepancies with her notes

Opinions from a nurse would be handy?

My last ward had quite a few errors on handovers very regularly. There were also errors in handovers from theatre & recovery. It seems to depend on the place, other areas haven't been so bad

Would that be the case even where death or near death experiences occurred?

Not a nurse but another HCP responsible for writing notes that could/would in certain cases be assessed by the coroner. From personal experience, no you don't get small details wrong when something unexpectedly serious/fatal has occurred because you'll 100% read what you've written back to yourself at least a couple of times and (at least in my role) get a colleague to read over it too. In fact if it was a serious incident involving a paediatric, you'd be sitting down with the manager on duty to debrief and go through it.

The sewage backing up in the sink in the nursery. Someone must have Datixed that surely?

I found this odd. Just joining the thread now.

That’s not how it works.

the defence don’t have to do anything, never mind highlight a credible alternative suspect. It’s not a case of ‘guilty unless you can show someone else did it’
its ‘innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt’

sadly that misperception is exactly why wrongful convictions occur.

This used to happen in the treatment room when I worked on a paeds ward. A lot of nhs hospitals are falling apart. However this wouldn't cause an air embolism or overfeeding.

And yes we do sometimes make errors in notes and on handover sheets but like pp said if it's a death, serious incident or Safeguarding issue then you make sure your notes are absolutely spot on. My notes have been used in court for Safeguarding cases before and this is drilled into you as you a paeds nurse.

Errors in paperwork will happen, but like a pp said if there’s an incident you’d make damn sure it was right.

YY to hospitals falling apart, but I can’t imagine it wouldn’t be datixed. Sinks / sink traps are well known sources of infection. I’m not quite sure why she brought it up since none of the babies died of an infection but it seems from the live feed like it sort of brushed over once she said she hadn’t reported it.

Do we actually know that those are the cause of deaths though?
I know they’re suggested but apart from the insulin overdoses there doesn’t seem to be any medical confirmation of how the babies died?

I agree she does. And likely it will count against her even though it shouldn’t.

Ted Bundy was charming and personable but it wasn’t exactly an assurance of his innocence.

Oh interesting. Didn’t realise - so sounds like it is an irrelevant point to mention (the sewage point)

As far as I understand it, causes of death were medically unexplained. Nothing known to cause an issue in premature babies e.g. nec not infection, and sudden decline not gradual. And none of the NICU staff seem to have seen anything like it before.
And I’d presume that if you are aspirating 100mlnof milk and air from babies on much smaller feeds then there is foul play or gross negligence going on somewhere.

The defence obviously may have different explanations for these deaths. I’m not sure I’ve seen a convincing ‘not deliberate’ one yet.

TBH I’d be very surprised if the defence have an answer to these collapses at all as imo if there was much simpler explanations then we would not be seeing LL on the stand

She is getting her opportunity on each count to talk about staffing levels and so far there’s no concerns from her, mentioning sewage is a new one and interesting about blood being in a nappy mentioned nowhere at all except for today. Sometimes she is ruling out incompetence from her colleagues- today she questioned Drs abilities to put in chest drains?!

If they were overfed surely that would be proveable from stomach volume/contents? Or lung compression due to pressure?

isn't it odd that there’s no cause of death?
surely without a cause of death the manner of death eg homicide versus natural causes is difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt

I think that's what it would take me to change my mind at the moment. That's the crucial thing to this case and the reason she is on trial, nobody else had the opportunity (according to the prosecution). The defence are doing a hideous job, or they simple don't have much of a defence to work with.

But it's not how the system works either, look at Ian Huntley and the reason why they allow local police force information on dbs checks, it's not always a case of innocent if not convicted, there may not be enough evidence etc... And the verdi t is not guilty but doesn't mean innocent either.

Exactly. She was all over the place today with implausible or new excuses today. That could be because she’s innocent and clutching at straws though. It just doesn’t seem like the best defence.

The prosecution can’t even show how the babies died, never mind who did it or how.

sadly I think the human desire for vengeance in inexplicable and emotional situations often confounds with the actual justice.

fair enough if you don’t want to assume anyone is innocent, but using that approach we’d all be behind bars as a precautionary measure.

I'd bloody hope not - nurses are not always as well protected as some other types of professionals you'd find in a hospital. So if there is a fatality or near miss, any nurse should be triple checking their note. Whether they do is another matter

I don’t remember how many babies were over fed but there is evidence of far more milk being aspirated than is recorded being given for at least 1 baby.

Thank you, yes you’re right https://www.chesterstandard.co.uk/news/23186898.lucy-letby-trial-baby-girl-force-fed-massive-amounts-milk/