In the ongoing trial of former nurse Lucy Letby, unexpected details emerge that shed light on potential factors contributing to the tragic deaths of infants. Letby, who previously provided a comprehensive statement to the police, now faces scrutiny as some aspects of her testimony appear contradictory. Amid intense questioning from the prosecution, Letby maintains her innocence, denying any intentional falsehoods.
Plumbing Problems and Curious Claims
Letby faces scrutiny regarding a statement she made concerning the presence of blood in Child E’s nappy after the baby’s death. While Letby insists that she recorded this information in her nursing notes, the prosecution presents her with a copy to reevaluate her claims. A brief recess allows Letby to review her notes, adding a moment of suspense to the courtroom proceedings.
Debating Medical Possibilities
The prosecution challenges Letby on her belief that any baby could experience bleeding similar to Child E. Letby, clarifying the question, responds that medically speaking, such a situation is indeed possible. The court is then presented with a text message Letby sent to a colleague on the evening of Child E’s passing. In the message, Letby mentions a massive hemorrhage that could theoretically occur in any baby. The prosecution argues that Letby intentionally manipulated records, causing a delay in treatment when Child E began bleeding.
A Timeframe Debate
A critical point of contention arises regarding the timeline of events. Child E’s mother claims to have witnessed bleeding when she visited her son at 9pm, contradicting Letby’s assertion that she only noticed blood later and promptly alerted a senior doctor. The court examines a phone call made by Child E’s mother to her husband, potentially providing a timestamp for her visit. If the call indeed occurred at 9pm, it would mean the baby started bleeding an hour before Letby sought assistance. Letby insists that she does not recall the mother coming earlier and disputes the prosecution’s accusation that she is fabricating details about the incident.
Unveiling a Haunting Image
Child E’s mother vividly recalls seeing blood around the baby’s lip during her 9pm visit, claiming Letby was the sole person present at the time. To support her memory, an artist’s depiction of the event is presented in court, revealing blood around the mouth and chin of Child E. The mother firmly maintains that Letby caused the bleeding, while Letby adamantly denies any involvement and denies falling out with the mother.
A Tragic Turn of Events
As the trial progresses, Letby explains that she had never encountered blood like what was observed on Child E. She acknowledges that on August 3, 2015, the day before the baby’s tragic death, Child E showed signs of progress in his feeding. Letby recalls being the sole nurse assigned to nursery one, where the twins resided, while other babies were cared for by different staff members.
The Mystery of Breast Milk
The prosecution questions Letby about the mother bringing expressed breast milk to the unit. Letby admits to not remembering specific details, leading to the prosecution reading a transcript from Letby’s previous questioning by her defense lawyer. The transcript reveals Letby’s acknowledgment that the mother brought breast milk down but raises doubts about Letby’s recollection of the exact timing—an insinuation that the milk arrived at 9pm, coinciding with when Child E was bleeding and due for a feed. Letby contends that the mother came down later and recalls discussing omitting the 9pm feed with an on-call doctor, a conversation the prosecution disputes.
Shifts and Confrontations
Further insights into Letby’s experience on the night shift emerge. Letby complained to a friend via message about the quietness of the shift at 10:35 pm, clarifying in court that she was referring to it being calm. The prosecution inquires about Letby’s preferences regarding busyness, to which she admits enjoying a bustling environment when properly managed. Letby’s confidence in her clinical abilities becomes apparent as the prosecution reveals instances where she confronted medical staff over perceived errors.