What has Lucy Letby's trial heard about alleged attacks?  - BBC news

What has Lucy Letby’s trial heard about alleged assaults? – BBC information

  • By Daniel O’Donoghue
  • BBC information


Lucy Letby has denied murdering and trying to homicide infants on the Countess of Chester Hospital

Nurse Lucy Letby has been accused of murdering seven infants and trying to kill 10 others whereas working on the Countess of Chester Hospital.

Prosecutors at her trial at Manchester Crown Court docket have alleged that from June 2015 to June 2016 she focused 17 infants cared for within the hospital’s neonatal unit.

The 33-year-old has denied all fees.

The prosecution has now closed its case and the protection is because of start on Tuesday.

The courtroom has heard prosecution proof referring to 17 infants, a abstract of which follows.

It has ordered that the infants and their mother and father not be recognized, so every baby has been named by a letter in the course of the trial.

  • In case you are affected by the problems on this piece, you could find help from BBC Motion Line.

Little one A

Little one A was born prematurely by caesarean part at 31 weeks and died in early June 2015.

The courtroom heard he was “secure” and respiration with out help on June 8 however took a speedy flip for the more severe about an hour after Mrs Letby got here on obligation and was pronounced lifeless half an hour later.

A pathologist mentioned it will be affordable to conclude that air in his bloodstream was most certainly administered by way of one of many tubes linked to the infant, though the protection didn’t settle for an air embolism, or air bubble, was the reason for dying.

Little one B

Little one B, who required resuscitation at start however recovered rapidly, was the dual sister of Little one A and collapsed on 10 June 2015, 28 hours after her brother’s dying.

The courtroom heard her coronary heart charge immediately dropped and Mrs Letby joined different medical doctors to assist.

A nurse who handled her, who can’t be named, advised the courtroom she “appeared very similar to her brother did the evening earlier than”.

Little one B recovered and was ultimately discharged one month later.

Medical specialists for the prosecution agreed she had suffered “some type of sabotage” and will have been injected with air, however the protection advised the courtroom the skilled had been “influenced by the idea of damage”.

Little one C

Prosecutors mentioned Ms Letby, who was then appointed nurse for a kid in nursery three, was in his nursery on the time and induced his collapse by inserting air into his abdomen through a nasogastric tube.

He was pronounced lifeless on June 14.

A physician advised the courtroom that infants like Little one C “don’t go from being secure to a cardiorespiratory scenario inside minutes”, however the protection mentioned he was weak, significantly to an infection, and may have been in a specialist kids’s hospital.

Little one D

Child D’s mom mentioned her daughter appeared “lifeless” when she was born on June 20 and she or he had been frightened she might need an an infection, however antibiotics weren’t given.

The prosecution accepted that the failure to provide antibiotics was a “reputable goal of criticism” however Little one D had “responded effectively to remedy and was not anticipated to deteriorate”.

Medical specialists for the prosecution agreed that her deterioration and an uncommon rash have been attributable to an injection of air, whereas the protection argued that there was extra proof that an infection performed a task in her dying and that the hospital didn’t present sufficient care .

Little one E

Little one E was born prematurely on the finish of July 2015 and initially required respiration help however later stabilized.

The courtroom heard that on August 3 his mom heard him crying and located him with “blood popping out of his mouth”.

She advised the jury she remembered Ms Letby standing at a close-by workstation.

Little one E later deteriorated and died regardless of medical efforts afterward 4 August.

A medical skilled from the prosecution mentioned the blood loss he suffered might have been the results of an “inappropriate” use of a medical software and his dying was the results of inside bleeding and an injection of air.

The protection mentioned there was “no clear clarification” for what occurred.

Little one F

Little one F was the dual brother of Little one E, who, in response to the prosecution, had been injected with insulin by Mrs Letby.

Blood checks confirmed an “extraordinarily excessive” insulin degree and a really low C-peptide degree, which a medical skilled mentioned had “just one clarification”, which was that the kid was “receiving insulin from an exterior supply”.

Little one F ultimately made a full restoration.

The protection mentioned there was “nothing actually” to determine that Ms Letby was concerned.

Little one G

Child G, who was born in Could 2015, was probably the most untimely of all of the infants and had a sequence of “septic” or “suspected septic” episodes within the weeks following her start.

The courtroom heard that in mid-August she was transferred from Wirral’s Arrowe Park Hospital and was “clinically secure” till September 7, when she vomited at round 7pm. 02:00 BST.

Her oxygen ranges dropped and she or he stopped respiration a number of instances over the subsequent few hours earlier than responding to respiratory help.

Prosecutors mentioned Ms Letby overfed Little one G with milk by way of a nasogastric tube or injected air into the identical tube and made two additional makes an attempt to kill her on September 21.

Jurors heard the kid now has quadriplegic cerebral palsy and requires round the clock care.

The protection mentioned as an “extraordinarily untimely” child, she was “excessive danger” and Ms Letby did nothing to contribute to what occurred.

Barnet H

Little one H was born prematurely in September 2015 and had respiration difficulties.

The prosecution mentioned her case was “sophisticated” by “suboptimal remedy” as there was an “unacceptable delay” in serving to her and needles remained in her chest which can have punctured her lungs.

Medical specialists for the prosecution agreed there was “no apparent clarification” for her deterioration, whereas the protection mentioned what occurred had “nothing to do with Lucy Letby”.

Little one I

Little one I used to be born prematurely at Liverpool Girls’s Hospital and transferred to the Countess of Chester on 18 August 2015.

On September 30, she wanted emergency consideration after she vomited and her coronary heart charge dropped.

A prosecution medical skilled advised the courtroom she had been “subjected to an infusion of air” which prosecutors mentioned Mrs Letby had administered, whereas the protection mentioned her collapse and dying “could effectively have been inevitable given her excessive prematurity”.

Little one J

Little one J was born prematurely on the Countess of Chester in late October 2015 and transferred to Alder Hey Kids’s Hospital in Liverpool on November 1 when she had a bowel situation which required surgical procedure.

A medical skilled for the prosecution mentioned her collapse could possibly be “in step with some type of obstruction of her airway, reminiscent of strangulation”, though the protection mentioned the Chester unit was “effectively out of its depth” with Little one J and an assumption of knowingly hurt had occurred when an alternate clarification might have been insufficient care.

baby Okay

Regardless of being born at 25 weeks, Little one Okay was deemed to be in good situation, however as a precaution preparations have been made to switch her to Arrowe Park Hospital shortly after her start in February 2016.

A advisor advised the courtroom he felt uneasy about Mrs Letby being left with the kid because the crew have been conscious of “a lot of surprising and strange occasions and we have been conscious of a reference to Lucy Letby”.

He mentioned “no trigger and impact had been attributed” however he noticed Ms Letby standing by the incubator, seen the respiration tube had come free and noticed the nurse doing “nothing” to assist till he arrived.

The infant ultimately stabilized however died three days later.

The protection mentioned Little one Okay could have moved the tube inadvertently and her case was one other instance of “suboptimal care”.

A twin boy born in early April 2016, Little one L stabilized after remedy for gentle low blood sugar and was moved to nursery one.

The prosecution mentioned blood checks revealed a really excessive degree of insulin which they mentioned was attributable to the administration of artificial insulin in a “deliberate act of sabotage” by Ms Letby.

The protection mentioned there was “nothing actually” to determine that Ms Letby was concerned.

Barnet M

An attending advisor seen uncommon patches of discolouration on his pores and skin which he believed to be just like what he had seen within the circumstances of Little one A and B.

Child M ultimately stabilised, however medical doctors might discover no motive for his sudden collapse.

A medical skilled for the prosecution mentioned the possible trigger was an injection of air, however the protection mentioned there was “no apparent trigger” and Ms Letby was blamed as a result of there was “no apparent different”.

Little one N

Child N was born with a blood dysfunction which made him vulnerable to bleeding in early June 2016, however his situation was described as “glorious” by medical doctors.

The prosecution mentioned the dysfunction gave Ms Letby “cowl” to assault him and his three impairments in June 2016 have been in step with some type of “inflicted damage” or that he had acquired an air injection.

The protection mentioned he was one other child who acquired “suboptimal care” and may have been handled elsewhere in a specialist unit.

Little one O

Little one O was one of many triplet brothers and was born in good situation in June 2016.

An post-mortem discovered uncoagulated blood in his physique from a liver damage, main a medical expert to conclude his dying was of pure causes.

An unbiased pathologist, who later reviewed the case, mentioned the boy had suffered an “impression damage” in step with a highway visitors collision, whereas medical specialists for the prosecution mentioned he died from a mixture of that damage and air being injected into his bloodline. .

The protection mentioned there was no proof Ms Letby was harmed.

Little one P

Little one P was Little one O’s brother and was positioned underneath remark as a precaution after his sibling’s dying.

He collapsed a number of instances earlier than being pronounced lifeless at 4:00 p.m.

A medical skilled for the prosecution mentioned the collapses have been in step with an “extra quantity of air being given to this child”, whereas the protection mentioned there was no proof Mrs Letby suffered any hurt.

Little one Q

The prosecution mentioned Ms Letby injected air and liquid into the boy’s abdomen through a nasogastric tube.

A medical skilled for the prosecution mentioned that vomit discovered on Little one Q was proof that fluid had been given to him and that his respiration issues have been possible attributable to the fluid placing stress on his diaphragm and stopping him from respiration.

The protection mentioned there was no proof Ms Letby was harmed.

Author: ZeroToHero

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *