I shall continue on with the Sky News video I have been covering in the previous part titled Sky News Special Programme: How the police caught Lucy Letby.
Before I continue, I’ll mention that today I had my first taste of knowing what was coming with being public about my stance on this.
I don’t go onto Twitter very much these days as it’s one of the many places I’m pretty much shadowbanned, but after claiming that I currently believe that Lucy Letby is innocent and has been thrown under the bus I’d soon received a response claiming me to be a ‘Simp’ that was sick to support a murderer because I apparently fancied her.
It’s no biggy, and I sort of expected it anyway. I’m quite nervous about writing my opinions on this because I’m aware of how so many people seem to solidly believe that Letby was guilty, but I feel the large majority of those people are simply relaying the tones and narratives portrayed in the media.
I really do currently believe this to be a shocking and phenomenal case of mass hysteria, and one even if the proof came out many would still try to bury to save their ego and pride. Anyway, let’s get back to the Sky News video, which we’re ten minutes into.
The video plays on, and as the reporters lead up to another anaylis of how Lucy Letby was ‘caught’ they repeat the words of how distressing this was for the families involved. Fully agreed, but watching this whole thing still leaves me with an off-vibe, like there’s something not quite real happening here. Maybe it’s me, but all I can do is watch further and see how much more there is for me to disect. I know that when we get to the notes she’d written with the quotes ‘I did this’ and ‘I am evil’, there will be plenty for me to unpack of why I think those words have been completely turned against her.
After a short clip of one of the investigating officers quoting that they’d always tried to keep in mind what else it could have been, the report then explains how Letby started her role in the Countess of Chester hospital in January of 2012.
It then goes on to detail that three years into Letby’s role as a nurse there there was a rise in mortality rates in the ward from January 2015, three years into Letby’s role.
I myself would certainly be interested to find out if any of the current staffing team had joined around that time, or had returned from a long holiday. Especially as my first thoughts would be that despite my knowledge of groomers working hard on people, I couldn’t help but think ‘hmm, so it took her three years to suddenly develop this dark side?’
The report then plays a series of graphic images portaying the layout of the hospital where Child A had died on June 8th 2015, in nursery.
The clip explains how at 8pm Letby was half an hour into her night shift, and was the designated nurse for the baby boy that night. 26 minutes later Letby called a doctor over to Child A’s incubator as the child’s condition was deteriorating rapidly.
Staff began resuscitation, and an on-call consultant responded to the emergency. The baby died just before 9pm, less than 90 minutes into Letby’s shift. Air had been injected into his bloodstream.
At this point into the report it’s obvious that I need to go over the trial again. But what I find myself asking is this – Who exactly had reported at the time that air had been injected into the bloodstream of a child patient? But more importantly – where was the review meeting about this?
This whole case concerns me, because the failing in this is huge and across the board as a whole staffing team. But if staff were so sure that air had been injected into a child patient, which I’m not denying, then where was the initial concern at the time? Why exactly were the police not called in at the time, but a year later.
They have also mentioned in the report that Letby was on shift for all of the baby deaths at the time. Again, I illiterate my point that there could be someone lurking in the shadows being very clever about all of this, waiting until Letby was on shift. Also, what about the other deaths when Letby wasn’t on shift. Could she really be taking the flack for the team here. Could Letby have been the one given the jobs, or prepared to do the jobs that few others wanted to do? Some of us have seen those dynamics themselves, and if she really did care then of course she was going to stick around. It’s the feeling I currently have about things, but lets see how this goes.
Key point though – was there any sort of review or disciplinary about this immediately after the event? If not, I would ask massive questions as to why and consider it a huge team incompetence, again leading to wider questions to be asked about the team dynamics here.
Back to the video.
The clip then explains that on August 5th, where at 1:54 in the morning child F, in nursery 2, had suffered a sudden drop in blood sugar and a surge in his heart rate. Letby was in the same room at the time attending to another child.
Child F survived, and the blood tests on him revealed that he was given insulin that he didn’t need. There had been no reason why, no baby on the ward had currently been subscribed it.
KEY POINT – Where was the investigation into the missing medication at the time. Having worked in roles with people myself I am certain for a fact that if medication had been taken from the cabinet then nursing staff would know about it because of the sort of logs taken down to prevent overdoses and the like.
I could actually be completely wrong about it having no understanding of life inside of a neonatal unit, but I would have presumed that if medication had been missing at any point then there would be some sort of record about it, unless nurses do not actually count out the number of tablets in a medicine box.
Another question then would be, would Letby have access to insulin through another means? Was she prescribed it by a doctor? Or who else would have had access to it, or was responsible for logging the details of the medicine cabinet.
The Sky News report continues on, saying that it was that summer of 2015 that colleagues became suspicious.
That’s quite a powerful quote that is there, but maybe it’s always important to question which colleagues exactly.
The reporter in the news report quotes – “They were told it was unlikely there was anything going on, and were urged not to make a fuss.”
“Dr Ravi Jayaram was one of those that spoke out. He said he’d become extremely uncomfortable with Lucy Letby working on the unit.”
“And this pattern continued as there were more babies which lost their lives or suffered unexpected collapses.”
On 23rd June 2016, Letby was looking after a triplet, Child 0, in nursery 2.
The baby boy became unwell. Another nurse suggested that Child 0 was to moved to nursery 1 where the most poorly babies are cared for. The report goes on to say that Letby disagreed, and the baby collapsed.
He recovered but suffered two further collapses, and at 5:47pm the baby was pronounced dead.
The report quotes that the lead consultant, Dr Stephen Brearey, quoted that Child O should have responded better. Without trying to put any bias into my writing, Brearey is one of the handful of staff that Letby had nicknamed ‘The bastards’. For what exact reason is currently unknown to me, but I know that I have keep it in my mind that it’s possible she had her reasons.
I’m currently unsure if that quote meant that Brearey was on shift with her at all, but it seems like it if he’s said that.
Child O was found to have an injury to his liver and air injected into his bloodstream.
“The following day Child O’s brother, Child P, another of the triplets died under Lucy Letby’s care, it prompted Dr Brearey to say that he wasn’t happy with Lucy working on the unit. “
Having yet to hear all of the court transcripts, I’d very much be interested to hear exactly what were Brearey’s concerns at the time. I guess the problem I have is that it’s simply far too easy to take someone on their word without consider the toxic side of workplace dynamics, and that sometimes people have their own ideas of why don’t want people around. Of course, as an observer I could never speak solidly for that, but as I’ve said before, I’m well aware of what it’s like to get thrown under the bus.
Brearey was told at the time that there was no evidence against her and that she would continue nursing.
The report goes on –
“But Letby’s suspicious colleagues were right, she’d been attacking babies here for the past twelve months.”
“Over the next few months the hospital carried out a review as to what was happening inside of the neonatal unit. Lucy Letby was then moved to an administrative role.”
“In November 2016, an external report found no definitive explanation for the high number of deaths. But in May the following year the hospital called in the police.”
My own personal thoughts straight away on this was “Is this the hospital covering their own backsides here?”
The Sky News report then goes back to a clip of the detective from Cheshire police who begins talking again.
“The initial focus was around the hypothesis of what could of occurred. So a generic hypothesis of it could have being natural occurring deaths, it could be natural occurring collapses, it could be an organic reason, it could be a virus. And then one of the hypothesis was obviously that it could be inflicted harm.”
I agree with the statement in general by the detective there, but again, the one thing I’ve noticed in this case is that so few in the media ever even go near the possibility of it being a framing by people that might want to cover their own incompetence?
The report goes on to say that on the 3rd July, Lucy Letby was arrested.
The detective goes on…..
“What was clear at that point was that Lucy Letby was the consistent in all of this. She was the thread running through them all, and therefor in evidential terms the biggest source of evidence.”
For me, analysing that statement there’s a bit to unpack. Again, what if Lucy Letby really was being set up by a small group of colleagues to make it appear that she was responsible for the deaths. This feeling for some reason just isn’t leaving me yet!
In regards to the latter part of the detectives statement, I already know for sure that what I’ve seen already on video clips, and what is about to come up is going to frustrate me a little, but frustrate me enough to keep writing.
If I can keep writing all of this somehow, or do videos about it, then it will save me seeming like a nutcase ranting to myself in my room about it!
Anyway………
The news report then details how police had searched Letby’s house in Chester, as well as her parent house in Hereford to find what the news report says are ‘patient records and handwritten notes.’
I’ve watched quite a few videos on this now including other versions of some of the court transcripts and haven’t personally yet heard of anything other than handover sheets being found. But I may likely be proved wrong on this soon. Either way, I already know these notes coming up are going to total wind my up seeing, because I can see how so many have decided to pick and choose what they want from it, instead of seeing it what I personally believe it is, which I’ll go into soon.
The report then shows a copy of the yellow note, which doesn’t show for long at all on the screen, not long enough to get any proper context.
Instead, just like the gossiper, or the trouble-making narcissist revelling in the drama, the report quickly flashes the note in front of you, fast enough to let you see only the words it wants you to see whilst the reporter quotes how Letby wrote “I’m evil” and “I did this” but to me seem to be completely taken out of context in what is a larger letter of confusion.
I’ll be writing about the note in the next part of this Lucy Letby trial analysis. For now, I’m going to continue on for a few minutes looking into the sky news report.
The reporter goes on – “In her bedroon, stuffed into these shopping bags (displays two pictures of bags) were hospital handover sheets. In total, 257 were found. Many included details of the babies that Letby allegedly harmed”
17 minutes and 58 seconds into the Sky News report, this seems to be the very first time I’ve seen the word allegedly. Took them a while I think.
I think it was in the last part of this analysis that I decided to the do the maths, maybe go and look for yourself, but my own personal conclusion is despite 257 sounding quite a lot when beamed across the media, that actually when it comes to the day to day realities of nurses, especially when busy, this is actually a minute figure of what could potentially be taken home by somebody by mistake. After doing the maths I had concluded that even if Letby had taken half of her total workload of handover sheets back home with her, then she would have easily accumulated that in less than a year.
The report then explains how Letby had sent a sympathy card to the parents of one of the deceased babies on the day of the funeral, and explains that she had an image of the card on her phone.
I want to talk about this though, because from what I’ve seen this had been portrayed as being some sort of sick and dark fantasy, and I’m here thinking like, this actually sounds like a person is connects with their work here, and actually cared?
Perhaps it wasn’t what people were expecting because they themselves wouldn’t have gone out of their way to do that? Again, there are many moments in this story where I wonder if she was a bit ADHD or something, a little misunderstood perhaps. The kindest are never truly understood.
The report then details the chart which shows that Letby was the only member of staff on every single shift when the incidents took place.
It would be at that point that I could understand people saying “of course she did it. Are you dumb?” I’m certainly still questioning all of this myself.
But lets just say a gang of two or three were messing her up, deeming her the easy target because she was appearing vulnerable to them, giving her the tasks they didn’t want to do themselves, or if two or three of them had the type of sinister tendencies that Lucy Letby is herself being accused of, then of course it would appear like Letby was the only one on shift if they wanted to pin it on her.
On the 11th November 2020, over two years after she was arrested Lucy Letby was charged with murder, and attempted murder.
We’re still only 18:51 minutes into the Sky News report, but I’ve left it a little late in the day today so I’m going to take a break, but we’ll get back to this soon in the next part.
Until the next time.
Peace out.
You can support me and my writing at
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/benwestwood
https://paypal.me/benwestwooduk
KEY NOTE: I’m currently