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

No. These were stable babies, they don't just suddenly die without a period of deterioration.
The only case I'm not 100% on is the baby with the chest drain.

No of course can't blame air embolism and so many on negligence, or air in stomach/ over feeding, but I expected them to dispute the cause of death for at least some of the babies. For example to possibly blame mode of delivery for injuries or bring expert witnesses to discuss cpr causing injuries. I thought there would be SOMETHING they could have come up with. The only ones I felt were completely indisputable where the insulin ones. I remember an expert medical expert was really grilled as he changed the cause of death to air embolism in 1 or more of the babies because he initially said prematurity or infection, but then changed and they said he changed it to fit the brief. That's what I meant.

I also noticed on the mail podcast that they gave started to say in recent episodes "attacks" instead of "alleged attacks". So is it generally agreed by both sides babies were attacked or is this a slip of the tongue.

I suspect because letby herself has stated that babies were deliberately harmed, the prosecution say it was her. She says it wasn't, but it's agreed that babies were deliberately harmed

I was surprised that there wasn't more attempt to provide alternative explanations for some, or any, of the incidents. Sewage is irrelevant as none died from an infection.

The defence boils down to "it wasn't me"

Yes exactly. The judge when addressing the jury has said the defence disputes the cause of death in some cases but I don't see any real tangible efforts to do this. But also reiterates that it's not for the defendant to prove innocence but for the prosecution to prove guilt. Something I forget as I'm not legally minded and really have no clue how these things work. I would have thought if prosecution says something about you, you would want to provide an alternative explanation but then as he says that's not for the defendant to do.

Although the burden of proof sits with the prosecution, I'd still expect alternative explanations to help shore up reasonable doubt

I think she defended herself better than Myers did!

But he is highly experienced and I guess he knows what he is doing

This happened to my baby. It is extremely rare and they don’t know what caused it. They hospital are doing a full investigation into what happened and it is likely that it will be investigated nationally. For some babies they do find a cause. The consequences can be heartbreaking even for the babies who survive.

This is what makes it highly unusual and probably very difficult for the jury. She agrees the babies were harmed - seemingly little attempt to provide any alternative explanation aside from it just wasn’t her that did it ?

So sorry. This case must be very hard for those affected by infant loss. I know of sudden unexpected postnatal collapse which has only more recently been documented, but again very rare and I imagine it would be unlikely to happen to a cluster of several babies. I knew of one cot death at the trust I worked at many years ago which happened in hospital but to a healthy baby.

It's hard isn't it and the jury have a formidable task ahead of them.

We are asked not to spectulate but I feel that's what this case is primarily based on. It's interesting at what point speculation goes from just that to there is no other possible explanation. The facts are what they are but you still have to connect the dots yourself to some extent. I think the prosecution did an amazing job and I know others have pointed out that the defence doesn't have to prove innocence or provide an alternate theory but it just makes you think that in all of these years if this is the best they can do then well....

Perhaps the defence will do an amazing job in the closing arguments ofplanting the seeds of doubt.

Does anyone know what the next week or so of court will look like? How long does one side's closing argument generally take - a day?

How do you prove it’s someone else other than Letby?

Causes on otherwise healthy babies seem to be grasping at straws with her explanations and yes it’s agreed that the hospital was filthy and standards of hygiene could’ve been improved there.

The prosecution lawyer counting aloud for 30 seconds to demonstrate how long LL left prem 25 week baby K to ‘self correct’ really got to me 😭 very powerful

Powerful in what way?

Powerful in the fact that sometimes we see measures of time and just think “oh 30 seconds, that’s not that long” but when you actually count it out you realise it’s longer than you think/remember. And then you contextualise it, that she was just stood there (as observed by Dr Jayaram) by the cot side just watching her desaturate (and Dr Jayaram surmises that the tube had been dislodged for between 30-60 seconds based on monitor data, and that’s IF the alarm had only been cancelled once) and the prosecution is still counting up to 30 and you realise that he’s still not finished and she could have done something sooner but she didn’t. And that’s if you lean more towards the 30 seconds rather than the 60 second

As the prosecution stated “It's uncomfortable isn't it? Even talking about it is uncomfortable.”

I dont understand what you mean. Was the doctor just stood there also? How old was the baby? Just newborn at 25 weeks or older? What was a level 2 unit doing with 25 weekers?

This is what I thought?? It raises so many other questions

No the doctor walked in and saw baby was in difficulty, letby stood watching. Data showed it must have been for 20/30 seconds. So he's alleged she was watching the baby struggle.

I think the podcast explained something like that had tried to get an in-utero transfer but there were no beds anywhere near (would have had to go to Bristol or somewhere) so it was felt to be safer to stay. Not sure if there were ultimately plans to transfer the baby out when a bed was available.

Baby was born premature at 25 weeks.

Baby was meant to go to a different hospital (Wirral’s Arrowe Park) but there were no beds available so she stayed at CofC until a bed did become available (transport had been arranged).

Alleged attack happened when baby was 3 days old

Dr Jayaram walked into baby desaturating (sats in 80s and continuing to drop) with LL stood at the cot side doing “nothing”. He asks what’s going on and LL replies along the lines of “She's having a desaturation”

Dr Jayaram intervenes. He notices baby’s breathing tube has been dislodged. He starts giving breaths etc

A machine that the baby was attached to has an alarm that is supposed to sound if sat levels fall to the 80s. Dr Jayaram said the alarm was not sounding. He wasn’t summoned into the room, he had only come in to check on LL as he had a bad feeling about her and didn’t feel comfortable with her being left alone with the baby.

Prosecution claim LL paused the emergency alarm (it can be paused for approx a min at a time)

Dr Jayaram immediately intervened and surmised based on monitor data that LL had left the baby to desaturate/removed breathing tube for at least 30 seconds, possibly up to 1 minute (and that’s on the assumption that she only cancelled the alarm ONCE)

LL claims that she was seeing if the baby self corrected