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

Where would whoever tampered with the bag get the insulin from? I know that some drugs would be kept on the ward but would insulin? And wouldn’t it be a controlled drug and need signing for? If it was taken then wouldn’t it be noted that there were vials missing?

Ive always thought it wouldn't necessarily have yo have come from the hospital - anyone with a diabetic friend or relative could easily take some of the supply.

@StarryKnight Insulin was kept in a locked fridge with other controlled drugs, as well as alongside the TPN bags.

A nurse being questioned as a witness stated that the keys were usually kept in possession of the nurse in charge, “but any one of us could ask for the bunch of keys and forget we had it in our pocket”. The nurse also didn’t think a log was kept of who had they keys at any particular time.

I’m not sure if any of the insulin was ever found to be unaccounted for but with baby F, Letby confirmed that she had signed for a lipid syringe the shift before and the prosecution say she should have had someone to co-sign for it. So whilst in theory you are meant to have someone co-sign for certain things it looks like this wasn’t always the case.

I must admit though, I am curious at to whether any insulin was found to be missing and if they did regular stock check of the fridge 🤔

Insulin is a very very potent drugs at very small quantities. Thus it isn't possible to stock check. I've never worked anywhere where insulin was stock checked in units, only in full bottles/vials. So you would maybe know if a bottle was missing but not several units.

You still haven’t answered the question. 🙂

They did a stock check or audit, whatever they call it, and found that 6 vials of insulin were used that year compared to 2 or 3 the previous year.
I work nicu and insulin is not a controlled drug, anybody nurse can access it with the drug keys.

The original post has been moderated but if you look on here you will see the answer, most people agree they were attacked. I didn't say she attacked them if thats what you thought I meant but it's general consensus that most people accept that the two insulin babies were attacked at the very lrast. By most I mean most not sure how to answer differently.

Not sure about your passive aggressive smiley face??

@Prevmidwife @fairgame84 thank you for your input guys! It’s all very interesting, I didn’t know that insulin wasn’t a controlled drug.

The smiley face was simply to show there was no bad feeling behind my question - which even now you haven’t answered. But I give up.

Mira

Are you a barrister?

@GemmaN17 i agree with you. There’s only one way this is going.

and Mira isn’t going to like it 🫣

Are barristers allowed to discuss their cases in great detail or to analyse their approaches once the verdict is reached? Or do they have to maintain confidentiality and keep quiet in case of a future appeal? I'm with Mirabai that there are so many arguments that, ostensibly, the defence could have made but didn't. I'm curious to know why not.

Caveat: I'm actually more interested in the arguments than whether LL is guilty or not guilty. Deaths are generally tragic whatever the cause but I've no personal investment in the situation. I guess I've a social investment in that when unnecessary or unexpected deaths occur one likes to know why and to take preventative action where possible. Otherwise, I'm much more interested in the legal and evidentiary processes.

Which arguments do you think they could have used?

I don’t think they would make it known to the jurors if all medical experts refused to refute what the prosecutions experts and witnesses had said.

I feel like there is a lot of dejavu on this thread... are we all just repeating the same arguments and questions and answers over and over.

Interested to hear the defence closing statement anyway.

In comparison to NJ Ben Myers does not seem to have had a high work load

NJ is doing his best to get justice for these families. He is meticulous and not leaving anything to chance.

I have to say when Myers had his chance it was over fairly swiftly - I’m not sure if there’s going to be a sting in the tail or if he has realised that he is going to be associated with this case for the rest of his career.

If you are free and available then apparently you have to take the case - regardless of who, what, where, when - but would you be happy to fight the corner of a potential child killer?

Nicu nurse here.

Insulin kept in fridge. Saline is not. We draw up the insulin mix with saline in a 50ml syringe and it is a continuous infusion on a sliding scale following the guidelines based on baby's blood glucose level. And generally only used on the teeny prems (22,23/24/25/26 weekers)

If a baby dislodges it's breathing tube, especially a 26 weeker. No nicu nurse would wait for them to self correct! They can't self correct hence the breathing tube

The monitor also records trends, so the Dr would have been able to see the desaturation on there and for how long.

You can pause the alarm, but, if a baby on a ventilator is desaturating, you act immediately to establish if the tube has been dislodged, you raise the alarm if you're alone or you neopuff until help arrives.

The summing up of the prosecution (reported live by Chester Standard)

”Mr Johnson lists the common events for the babies in this indictment by categorisation.

By ones who collapsed despite having good air entry but saturations were dropping: Child A, C, D, G, H [second event], I [third event and fourth event], M, O [twice], P.

By bleeds and/or bleeding in throat: Child C, E, G, H, N, plus 'false note by Letby' in K.

Unusual discolouration: Child A, B, D, E, I, M, O, H.

Suffered life-threatening collapses out of nowhere then recovered very quickly:
Child B, D, H [both collapses], I [events one to three], M, N, O, P.

Children who collapsed when designated nurse left or leaving the room: Child C, D, G [first event], I [second event and fourth event], K, N [first event], P [third collapse - when doctors were out of the room], Q [slight variation - when Letby got herself out of the room].

Premature babies screaming/crying unrealistically at time of collapse: Child D, E, I, N.

Children who collapsed shortly after being visited by their parents: Child B, H, I [first event], M, N, O, P.

Children who recovered quickly when taken to other hospitals: Child H, I [after 3rd collapse], N, Q.

Mr Johnson says Child K's tube never moved after being transferred out of the Countess.

When Letby participated in inappropriate post-death behaviours: Child C, I, O.

Poinsoned by insulin: F, L.

Mr Johnson says if Letby had not sabotaged seven babies, they would all have gone home. The other 10 babies, Letby attempted to murder.”

No. Why do you ask?

I don’t care how other people interpret the case, I’m here to see what I think.

I asked the other poster who she was referring to as “most” as the media reporting is neutral, this thread is divided and the people I know personally following this case, mainly lawyers and medics - are as undecided as I am.

Maybe she was referring to people in her own circle/family/profession

or maybe the Facebook groups/tattle ? And here

Surely that was obvious to you?

If you know a lot of lawyers then don’t you think that BM knows what he is doing? Or is he really that bad? Surely you must have seen this sort of approach before?

could it be that no one was prepared to testify?

If you are talking about Baby K, that is incorrect. On three separate occasions, Baby K was found to have desaturated due to her ET tube becoming dislodged, and it was repositioned.

For the second and third occasions, the baby was sedated, so it is close to impossible for her to have dislodged her own tube. For the second occasion, Lucy Letby was proven to be cotside immediately before the collapse, as a result of timed computer records. (I was in court to watch this very important part of the cross-examination).

On the first occasion, Dr Jayaram walked in to find Letby standing over the baby, doing nothing, while the baby desaturated with the tube dislodged. The alarm was not sounding, meaning that Letby had paused it. A combination of how the monitor alarm pauses work, and the baby's oxygen levels, led Dr Jayaram to estimate that Baby K had been desaturating for 30-60 seconds. The baby was not sedated at this time, so it was possible - though rather unlikely given her prematurity and inactivity - that the baby could have dislodged the tube herself. However, Letby was just watching her, doing nothing. Initially, she claimed that she was waiting to see if the baby self-corrected. When it was confirmed that this is a terrible thing to do for a baby that premature with a dislodged tube, she changed her story to say that she doesn't remember being there at all and that Dr. Jayaram is lying.

After moving to another hospital, Baby K survived for three more days, and there were no more tube dislodgings. At the Countess hospital, her tube dislodged three times in four and a half hours, twice while sedated.

As if you know loads of lawyers and medics!

Polls on social media, tattle and Reddit are certainly not undecided.

If you are talking about Baby K, that is incorrect.

No the baby in the £8.5 million negligence settlement.

Sorry what?

I don’t read social media.

If I have understood correctly, witnesses are either called by the prosecution or the defence, though can obviously be questioned by both sides. If that’s the case the defence must be pretty limited as to who they can call if all the medical staff were called up as prosecution witnesses.