This is a long one, y'all. Rachel brings us part 2 of the Lucy Letby case for episode 11. Kiki talks about missing 12-year-old Lori Analise Paige. We also talk (briefly) about what we've watched and read since episode 10.
Our next book is "Unmask Alice: LSD, Satanic Panic, and the Imposter Behind the World's Most Notorious Diaries" by Rick Emerson. We will also be reading Go Ask Alice (one of the "diaries" mentioned in the book). We'll discuss both in episode 12.
Sources:*
Lucy Letby
BBC News Sepsis: Some NHS Hospitals Missing Treatment Target.
Daniel Boffey New Evidence Claimed To Undermine Nurse’s Conviction For Killing Patients. The Guardian.
Hiya Boro, et al. Insulin Autoimmune Syndrome-A Case Series. Touch Endocrinology.
Kim Collins, et al. Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Injuries In Children. Forensic Pathology Of Infancy And Childhood.
Paddy Dinham Police Investigate The Deaths Of 15 Babies In A Single Year At The Countess Of Chester Hospital. The Daily Mail.
Mark Dowling Lucy Letby Accused Of Faking Medical Entries To Cover Tracks. The Chester Standard.
Holly Evans Lucy Letby Judge Says He Will Accept Majority Verdicts In Baby Murder Trials. The Independent.
Evidence Based Justice Lab. Miscarriages Of Justice: Women. Psychology, Data Science, and Law At The University Of Exeter Law School.
Ewan Gawne & PA Media Killer Nurse Lucy Letby Found Unfit To Practise And Struck Struck Off Register. BBC News.
Stephanie Gordy and Susan Rowell, Vascular Air Embolism. International Journal Of Critical Illness And Injury Science 3(1).
Josh Halliday, et al Timeline Of Lucy Letby’s Attacks On Babies And When Alarm Was Raised. The Guardian.
Liz Hull and Caroline Cheetham The Trial Of Lucy Letby. The Daily Mail.
Rose Kivi (Medically Reviewed ) Air Embolism. Healthline.
Lucy Letby Case Wiki Tattle Life.
Cathleen O’Grady Unlucky Numbers: Richard Gill Is Fighting The Shoddy Statistics That Put Nurses In Prison For Serial Murder. Science.
Nikki Peach Here’s Everything To Know About Lucy Letby’s Parents And Family Background. Grazia Daily.
I Pedal, et al Air Embolism Or Putrefaction? Gas Analysis Findings And Their Interpretations. Z Rechtsmed 99(3).
Rapid Risk Assessment Enterovirus Detections Associated With Severe Neurological Symptoms In Children And Adults In European Countries. European Centre For Disease Prevention And Control.
Staff Reporter Number Of Serious Mistakes Made By Staff At Countess Of Chester Hospital Increases. The Leader.
Julian W. Tang, et al. Cluster Of Human Parechovirus Infections As The Dominant Cause Of Sepsis In Neonates And Infants, Leicester, United Kingdom, 8 May To 2 August 2016. Eurosurveillance 21(34).
Senthil K. Venugopal, et al Biochemistry, C Peptide. National Library Of Medicine.
URLs available upon request.
Lori Analise Page
FBI Jacksonville
Call: Jacksonville Field Office (904) 248-7000 or Tallahassee Police Department (850) 891-4200
Socials:
Instagram: Details Are Sketchy - @details.are.sketchy
Facebook: Details Are Sketchy - @details.are.sketchy.2023
Instagram: Kiki - @kikileona84
Instagram: Rachel - @eeniemanimeenienailz
Email: details.are.sketchy.pod@gmail.com
This is a long one, y'all. Rachel brings us part 2 of the Lucy Letby case for episode 11. Kiki talks about missing 12-year-old Lori Analise Paige. We also talk (briefly) about what we've watched and read since episode 10.
Our next book is "Unmask Alice: LSD, Satanic Panic, and the Imposter Behind the World's Most Notorious Diaries" by Rick Emerson. We will also be reading Go Ask Alice (one of the "diaries" mentioned in the book). We'll discuss both in episode 12.
Sources:*
Lucy Letby
BBC News Sepsis: Some NHS Hospitals Missing Treatment Target.
Daniel Boffey New Evidence Claimed To Undermine Nurse’s Conviction For Killing Patients. The Guardian.
Hiya Boro, et al. Insulin Autoimmune Syndrome-A Case Series. Touch Endocrinology.
Kim Collins, et al. Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Injuries In Children. Forensic Pathology Of Infancy And Childhood.
Paddy Dinham Police Investigate The Deaths Of 15 Babies In A Single Year At The Countess Of Chester Hospital. The Daily Mail.
Mark Dowling Lucy Letby Accused Of Faking Medical Entries To Cover Tracks. The Chester Standard.
Holly Evans Lucy Letby Judge Says He Will Accept Majority Verdicts In Baby Murder Trials. The Independent.
Evidence Based Justice Lab. Miscarriages Of Justice: Women. Psychology, Data Science, and Law At The University Of Exeter Law School.
Ewan Gawne & PA Media Killer Nurse Lucy Letby Found Unfit To Practise And Struck Struck Off Register. BBC News.
Stephanie Gordy and Susan Rowell, Vascular Air Embolism. International Journal Of Critical Illness And Injury Science 3(1).
Josh Halliday, et al Timeline Of Lucy Letby’s Attacks On Babies And When Alarm Was Raised. The Guardian.
Liz Hull and Caroline Cheetham The Trial Of Lucy Letby. The Daily Mail.
Rose Kivi (Medically Reviewed ) Air Embolism. Healthline.
Lucy Letby Case Wiki Tattle Life.
Cathleen O’Grady Unlucky Numbers: Richard Gill Is Fighting The Shoddy Statistics That Put Nurses In Prison For Serial Murder. Science.
Nikki Peach Here’s Everything To Know About Lucy Letby’s Parents And Family Background. Grazia Daily.
I Pedal, et al Air Embolism Or Putrefaction? Gas Analysis Findings And Their Interpretations. Z Rechtsmed 99(3).
Rapid Risk Assessment Enterovirus Detections Associated With Severe Neurological Symptoms In Children And Adults In European Countries. European Centre For Disease Prevention And Control.
Staff Reporter Number Of Serious Mistakes Made By Staff At Countess Of Chester Hospital Increases. The Leader.
Julian W. Tang, et al. Cluster Of Human Parechovirus Infections As The Dominant Cause Of Sepsis In Neonates And Infants, Leicester, United Kingdom, 8 May To 2 August 2016. Eurosurveillance 21(34).
Senthil K. Venugopal, et al Biochemistry, C Peptide. National Library Of Medicine.
URLs available upon request.
Lori Analise Page
FBI Jacksonville
Call: Jacksonville Field Office (904) 248-7000 or Tallahassee Police Department (850) 891-4200
Socials:
Instagram: Details Are Sketchy - @details.are.sketchy
Facebook: Details Are Sketchy - @details.are.sketchy.2023
Instagram: Kiki - @kikileona84
Instagram: Rachel - @eeniemanimeenienailz
Email: details.are.sketchy.pod@gmail.com
I'm Kiki and I'm Rachel, and this is Details Are Sketchy A Turcrime podcast. And we are on the second part of Lucy. Let Be.
Speaker 2:Episode 11. Right, and we haven't recorded in a really long time.
Speaker 1:So we're a little rusty.
Speaker 2:I apologize because it's been a really long time since I recorded part one and so I'm not 100% sure what I covered in that part one. So I think I'm starting from the part where I left off and but I am not going to be covering the babies that Lucy Let Be was charged but not convicted of today. So I know that that some of those charges that she may be retried on and so maybe at some point in the future we'll discuss those in a future podcast, if I have this one for that.
Speaker 1:Okay, but before we get to that, I have a missing person. Yes, yes, a missing young girl. Her name is Laurie Annalise Page. She was born April 14, 2011. So she was 12 years old at the time of her disappearance. Her hair is black, her eyes brown. She's about five feet tall, weighs around 120 pounds, she is female and she is black, and she went missing from Tallahassee, florida, and we'll talk a little bit more later.
Speaker 2:Yeah, okay, sounds good. Thank you for letting us know about our missing person case of the week and sorry about episode 10.
Speaker 1:Was it? Yeah, I don't remember Maybe nine that you did Nine or 10 that. I would have been nine because 10 was the main case.
Speaker 2:Yes, Okay. So episode nine I started my missing person case and apparently I forgot to finish it.
Speaker 1:We got distracted, we started talking about that. That's the 80s dream for you.
Speaker 2:So sorry, guys, now I feel like I seem callous about that.
Speaker 1:Oh, you're fine, it was an accident. People will understand and the information's in the show notes anyway.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it is in the show notes. So I'm really sorry to my missing person that I forgot about you and was having too much fun while you're missing. So sorry, I feel like a piece of shit about that.
Speaker 1:Well, I don't even think it was fun. That made you forget. I cut out like a half hour of not fun discussion regarding not fun discussion then. Yeah, whatever it was that distracted us.
Speaker 2:Well, if you like, not fun discussion?
Speaker 1:you're gonna really like this episode.
Speaker 2:All right. So, yeah, I guess disclaimer, we're gonna be talking about dead babies. So that's really fucking depressing and, yeah, I don't know that there's really not much to soften the blow on that one. Plus, you're gonna be really pissed off, maybe not, maybe not, but you're gonna be really possibly really pissed off because I'm not 100% convinced of Lucy. Let be, let bees guilt. However, it's not to like take a shit on dead babies, which I take very seriously. I don't think anybody would think that. Maybe they do. Lots of people think things.
Speaker 1:Well, I know they think maybe that's ridiculous.
Speaker 2:Maybe people would think that, but no, you.
Speaker 1:I mean, if people continue to listen, then they will see that you have reasons for thinking she didn't do it. And there are questions. I mean, not many people are interested in hearing those questions. But potential miscarriages of justice is very unsettling and even if she did do it, she had a shitty defense.
Speaker 2:Yes, she did have a really shitty defense, so and that no matter maybe who you are.
Speaker 1:No matter what type of person you are, you still deserve a good defense. Maybe that's the basis of both our justice system and the British justice system.
Speaker 2:And my point which I'm probably going to repeat, because I tend to do that is that if she's guilty, no amount of reexamining the evidence is ever going to exonerate her.
Speaker 1:No.
Speaker 2:But if there are questions that it certainly doesn't hurt to reexamine that evidence.
Speaker 1:Yeah, there's that old adage it's better to let one guilty person go free than to let an innocent person know.
Speaker 2:Right, and I do kind of feel that way. I mean, it's hard to say that, because dead little babies is a big fucking deal, but yeah and it's. And it definitely also feels like, if she is guilty, that there should be more people. If she's guilty or she's not guilty, more people should be held culpable in some way, because there was certainly more such a level of negligence going on at that hospital and that those conditions like if she was a really negligent nurse or if she was a serial killer that it was only those really bad conditions that allowed those events to take place, which I'm going to talk about. That hospital was really really bad, right, and so that's another thing that I'm going to talk about.
Speaker 2:So having said all of that, we're going to lay it out and then we'll discuss, or or yeah, whatever we're going to discuss it, and so I think that I covered babies A through E in the first part. So if I'm wrong, then I will go back and rerecord whoever I missed, because I don't want to miss any cases. But I believe I'm going to be starting with baby I and going through baby P. I'm not going to cover baby Q. Like I said, I'm only going to be covering babies that convictions were made on.
Speaker 1:Yeah, we had to make some cuts.
Speaker 2:It's a long story, it's going to be really fucking long and it took me a really long time to do it, and it took me even longer because I spent so much time like thinking about it and just like ruminating on the whole situation.
Speaker 1:So Rachel is a researcher and a thinker. I am.
Speaker 2:Maybe my thoughts are not that great of thoughts you can be the judge of that but I did think about some things and yeah, yeah, definitely ruminate, thinking about it over and over again, like, you know, those circular, repetitive thoughts that you can't get out of your head. Yeah, so fun for me and really stressful, you know, really stressful because I don't like dead babies. I don't like, yeah, I don't like the any who likes that? Who likes that, any of that situation. So it's a let's get into it, I guess. So, just to recap, these events took place between June and 2015 and June July 2016.
Speaker 2:Okay so, baby I was a very premature baby girl, born at 20, 27 weeks of gestation when her mother's water broke baby eyes, mom checked into the accountants of Chester hospital, but because of the high risk nature of the pregnancy and the early stage of the pregnancy that she was in, she was transferred to the more advanced hospital of the Liverpool's women's hospital to give birth. So, baby I was born naturally that's such a weird word. She was born vaginally, but she was a tiny baby weighing two pounds two ounces, but was considered in good condition for her stage of prematurity. She was intubated and ventilated and then support. Her breathing was supported by a CPAP machine and she was being fed via a NISO gastric tube. So when they say stuff like these babies are in good condition, they're not, like you know, like a squalling robust full term baby.
Speaker 1:They are pre term babies, exactly so they they are all, and some of them are more high risk than others. Exactly.
Speaker 2:High risk, but basically they, she was in good condition for where she was.
Speaker 2:Exactly Her circumstances Exactly so. During her first few weeks of life she was reported to have quote a few problems which were unnamed by the prosecution. I couldn't find what those issues were, but all were reported to have been resolved. Doctors warn her parents that she would be in the hospital for a while but by September her unnamed issues had been resolved or diminished to the point that she was breathing on her own and at around six weeks of age the doctors decided that she was healthy enough to transfer to the countess of Chester hospital which, if you've been listening to the first one, the first episode, you'll know is a bad sign to be closer to her family. But according to the prosecution, over the next three weeks Lucy Levy attacked her three times and finally succeeded in murdering her on October 23. Lucy Levy's alleged fourth attempt. The prosecution argued that Lucy Levy sabotaged baby ice care intermittently by overfeeding her and by injecting her with air into her bloodstream. The prosecution argued that the first attack occurred on September 30.
Speaker 2:During a day shift worked by Lucy Levy as baby eyes designated nurse. So, as we recall, there's like four nurseries and the nurseries are like one, two, three, four. They're group by severity. Right Nursery one has the sickest, most delicate babies. It can hold up to like three babies, if I am remembering correctly, and it's supposed to be one on one care, one nurse, one sick baby. Nursery two has slightly healthier babies but still pretty sick, and I think it's one to two care level and it can hold like four babies. And then the nurseries three and four are for the slightly more healthier babies, right, and that was like four to four babies per nurse?
Speaker 1:I believe yes.
Speaker 2:So Lucy Levy was assigned to baby eye and to other babies in nursery three. So that tells you that she was well enough to be in that nursery One of the two nurseries available in the Countess of Chester. I'm going to note this for less intensive care, Niku babies. Baby eyes parents had other children as well, so they had to divide their time between their other children at home and their work. Baby eyes mother would drop her other children off at school and then she would spend the rest of the day with her baby at the hospital before having to go pick up her kids from school In the evening after baby eyes father got off of work. He would take over by baby eyes caught side On that day. Let me made a record in her medical notes that babies eyes mother had indicated concerns about baby eyes abdomen. But baby eyes mother said that it was levy who raised these concerns with her, not the other way around.
Speaker 2:Around 3pm on September 30th baby I was examined and observations were made that baby eye had a distended abdomen with a modeled skin appearance. Feeding charts indicated baby eye had been given 35 milliliters of express breast milk via an NGT, a nasal gastric tube. At 4.30pm baby eye had to be. Emergency crash called when she vomited and her heart rate and oxygen levels dropped. Her airway was cleared and she was moved to nursery one the nursery for the most intensive needs babies for more intensive care and breathing support In.
Speaker 2:X-ray given at or I'm not sure if it was given or if the results were had at 5.39pm, revealed that large amounts of gas were in her stomach, her bowels and that her lungs were squashed and the nasal gastric tube was aspirated and produced air and 2 milliliters of milk, after which child I improved. The prosecution's claim was that levy introduced air into the nasal gastric tube while feeding the milk. An X-ray showing that a child is full of gas after pumping gasp into her via respiratory support may not clearly indicate what the cause of that air would be, because it can be introduced via the resuscitation process, which is probably why it wasn't flagged at the time.
Speaker 1:Wait. So just for clarification. So the report says she's full of gas, but the question is whether or not that gas was introduced via the lusilepia or via the respiratory effort to revive her.
Speaker 2:So there are lots of things that can introduce gas to. It can be introduced, yeah, but in this case.
Speaker 2:Accidentally as well. But yeah, resuscitation, which I will talk about a little bit more later because I read a I was going to say a nice article, but it's not a nice article A scientific article about some of the potential injuries or side effects that can be caused by, like CPR, resuscitation attempts on children and introduction of air or air. Like air embolism was one of the most or more common side effects that can be caused, particularly on preterm infants. Yeah, because I guess because they're so little and delicate, right? So, yeah, it's, we'll talk about it more later. But so there's air. Where the air came from can't be established, which is a big and baby I for now.
Speaker 2:So anyway, oh yeah. So I made a note that the feeding schedule seemed really shitty to me, Just like nothing. Obviously, I'm not an expert on how to feed like preterm infants, but in most cases of like baby feeding in general, you want to feed them like every two hours or so, right, and that she, the baby, was fed at three and then again at four seemed like too soon, yeah, and so then the baby like vomit in and had like milk. It seems like it's too soon to feed more, yeah, milk. So I wondered why, like is there was that supposed to be happening? Like, is there not a note?
Speaker 1:I wanted more information about that, whether that was supposed to be because it because it could have been like somebody just miswrote. Yeah, times down, yeah.
Speaker 2:Was it a misread times? Was it the schedule that was supposed to be occurring? Because, like, it seems like the baby needs more time to digest that milk. Yeah, so after this incident, baby, I did not have any more incidents until October 12. On that night a different nurse was baby eyes designated nurse, and some instances they said which nurse was the designated nurse. But I pretty much didn't write down any of the other nurses names, right, because I didn't think it's relevant.
Speaker 1:No.
Speaker 2:Just whether or not Lucy leppy was the nurse or not. Right and baby. I was apparently on a feeding schedule that night of 55 milliliters of bottle fed breast milk every four hours, which again I thought that is, how many ounces is that?
Speaker 1:for those of us who don't know our measurements, let me look it up.
Speaker 2:I hear I can look it up, I think. I think it's a little bit more than isn't 30 mils an ounce. Don't ask me. That's why I'm asking you so like one and a half.
Speaker 1:You said 55 ml, two ounces, 1.86 US fluid ounces.
Speaker 2:Okay, so like two, a little less than two. So Well, that's not much at all. No, but it is. It's actually a lot for for an infant.
Speaker 2:Yeah, but what? What bothered me about that is we've gone now from feeding the baby every hour, a little bit every hour, to feeding the baby a lot every four hours, which is a big difference. Of course they didn't say I couldn't find whether in some of these instances they're feeding the baby by bottle and by nasal gas or two Right, and I couldn't find whether or not they were doing that in this instance. But if they weren't, it seemed to me that's also a bad feeding schedule. Because, again with and they and they made a specific note that well, for any preemie baby, that's too infrequent. Or for any baby, even if they're not preemie, for any baby that's like a newborn, that's too infrequent. But especially because they're saying it's a breastfed baby with like, because with with formula like, the volume increases of the milk but the frequency decreases, like that like you spread out the times.
Speaker 2:But with breast milk the volume stays relatively stagnant, as does the frequency for a while, because the breast milk composition changes as the baby grows, it gets denser, more calorie dense, and so you don't have to change the volume and the frequency as much, because the composition of the breast milk is changing. And so that struck me as weird, not only that four hours seems way too long for a baby that age, but also that they made such a big change in the feeding schedule in such a short period of time, anyway. So I noted that down, but again, maybe I don't have all the information. Maybe they're also giving nasogastric feeds that were not mentioned because they weren't relevant to the testimony.
Speaker 2:So, that being said, I'm moving on, but these are some of the thoughts that are bouncing around my head. Whether or not you think they're important or interesting or not, these are some of the thoughts that I had. So at 1 30 am, baby eyes designated nurse gave baby eye a feeding, like we mentioned the 55 mils of breast milk via bottle. And at 3am the designated nurse temporarily left the nursery temporarily and asked another nursing colleague they don't remember if it was Lucy Leppy or another colleague to keep an ear out for baby eye. And that's another thing that I probably mentioned the other episode, but it seemed to happen a lot that at the countess of Chester.
Speaker 2:That bothered me is that of course, nurses need breaks and they have to go on breaks, but it bothered me that they're going on breaks and that babies are being left all alone in these nurseries Because, like at schools or whatever daycares, like with young children, you have to maintain, like you know, how we're saying earlier, like the level one to one or two. If you don't have that level of adult to baby or adult to young child in the room, like it's illegal. Like you have to have, like a professional or an adult in the room supervising that infant or that toddler all the time, to the point where often daycare workers and stuff can even take a bathroom break, right.
Speaker 1:But is that the same in the UK and also, is it the same at a?
Speaker 2:hospital. I don't know, but it seems like if they can't even leave the room in a daycare, how can you leave the room for when it's a room with sick babies?
Speaker 1:Probably because they're hooked up to machines and stuff, so any nurse out there would know if something was going on.
Speaker 2:I guess, but that's something that bothered me.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I don't think that's that uncommon in hospitals. I think maybe nurseries and things like that are a bit different.
Speaker 2:So anyway. So that's what happened. The nurse left and there's no no being the nursery with the sick babies. I'm not sure they didn't mention if there's any more babies in that nursery that day other than baby I. So when the designated nurse returned they found Lucy Lebe standing at the door to nursery. To looking into the nursery door, let me comment it to the designated nurse Durs Nervous that baby I looked pale. And when the designated nurse switch on the lights they found that baby I was, in their words quote, at the point of death. And quote they noted the child was breathing shallowly every 20 seconds. Lucy Lepe's nurse notes made at the end of her shift at 810am noted, quote Child I noted to be pale in caught by myself at three past 20 hours. Apnea alarm in situ had not sounded. On examination, child I centrally white, minimal shallow breaths followed by gasping, observed. The registrar that's like the doctor on call was called at 323am. On arrival he saw both nurses giving CPR to baby I. His doctor notes indicate he had to reposition the endotracheal tube. A consultant doctor gave baby I adrenaline, intubated and ventilated her. An X-ray showed gaseous dissension in the bowel and signs of chronic lung disease of prematurity CLD, both nursing and medical staff commented on a bruising, like discoloration on the sternum.
Speaker 2:They assumed this was the result of chest compressions. I couldn't initially figure out what was the method of the attack that they were trying to say, and then I found that they weren't clear themselves. They said that it was either a physical attack or an attack of like air injection. But they themselves were not sure. And I noted in my notes that Lucy let me hadn't fed the baby and the baby was no longer being fed through the nasal gastric tube. But then I realized that maybe that wasn't true, maybe that she was being fed through the nasal gastric tube and there just wasn't specific notes about the nasal gastric tube. So that may not have been the case, but there wasn't an administration of medicine or anything like that. So the third attack is supposed to take have taken place the following day after that, on October 13,.
Speaker 2:Both Lucy let me and a doctor on staff noted that baby I had abdominal distension, discoloration on the right side and the sensitivity to touch between 5 am and 5 55 am, and I want information about whether or not that discoloration that was noted was the same discoloration that had been mentioned in the notes the previous day but there wasn't information about that. So at 7 am, baby I had a significant desaturation and required CPR. At 7 10, more CPR was given and baby eyes, oxygen levels and heart rate continued to be unstable until 7, 58 am. Lucy let these notes at 8 43 am state. At 500 hours, abdomen noted to be more distended and firmer in appearance with area of discoloration spreading on right hand side veins more prominent, gradually requiring 100% oxygen. Blood gases pour as charted. Nil obtained from ng tube throughout continued to decline. Re-intubated at approximately 7 o'clock. Initially responded well.
Speaker 2:Resuscitation commenced as documented in medical notes, night and day staff members present end quote baby I was then transferred to aero park hospital, which is a more specialist hospital about 40 miles away from countless of Chester hospital, where she had another episode of Brady Brady Cardia and de saturation and she was resuscitated for that. After this she improved and was transferred back to the Countess of Chester hospital on October 17th. On the night of October 22nd another nurse was baby eyes. Designated nurse Lucy leppy was on the night shift but only made records for babies under her charge in room three.
Speaker 2:Just before midnight baby I became quote unsettled. I wasn't sure what that meant at first, but it seemed that she had a collapse. So I wish that they're one of the things I wish that there had been is more consistent language about when the babies are having like life-threatening collapses, because sometimes they're like they were little bothered and then the next thing I think I know somebody's giving the baby CPR, which is what happened, because they're saying the baby is unsettled and now they're giving the baby CPR. So that's a little bit more than unsettled in my book but, right British people.
Speaker 2:Okay, her designated nurse and Lucy leppy attended to her. However, baby eye collapsed and required CPR. The on-call registrar noted that baby eye had a blue modeling on her trunk and periphery. After five minutes of CPR, baby eyes oxygen saturation rates returned to 100% and she showed signs of rooting, which is hunger signs. She's like looking around for a tit and finding the ventilator trying to breathe independently. The endotracheal tube was removed at 1245 am. At 106 am baby eyes nurse had left the nursery returning when baby eyes alarm went off. When she arrived, lucy leppy was caught side. Child eye was distressed and the designated nurse wanted to intervene. But Lucy leppy believed they could settle the baby and was reported to say don't worry, we'll sort it out. Wait, who wanted to intervene? I'm sorry, the designated nurse? Oh, I don't guess.
Speaker 1:By intervene they mean like call the registrar maybe, or just take over from her, since she's not the, the nurse that's supposed to be taking care of the baby, right, well, she was. She was just standing at the cot side, I know, but I mean intervene, I mean the, the other nurse would take over for Lucy leppy what I thought they meant by intervene was like a medical intervention but yeah, it could be as well.
Speaker 2:And what I thought they meant by settle the baby, but was we can get her calm down with non-medical interventions like soothing pacifiers and things of that nature.
Speaker 1:I, yeah, that could be, but I would take it as, like you know, I'm here, I'm doing this. We can get her settled like she can. Sometimes we talk in the we yeah, that could be as well.
Speaker 2:Shortly after this statement, baby eye collapsed. The on-call doctor was called again and they attempted to resuscitate baby eye. It was noted her skin had purple and white modeling. This time, however, all resuscitation attempts were unsuccessful and the efforts were halted at 2 10 am. Baby eye passed away at 2 30 am. I did write the cause of death given by the coroner. Good for me what was it hypo hypoxic, is shamik.
Speaker 2:Damage of brain and chronic lung due to prematurity, extreme prematurity, loops of bow showing significantly dilated lumen due to increased air content. No sign of necrotizing encephalitis, bowel necrosis or any bowel problem the prosecution.
Speaker 1:So basically, what they're saying is it died. The baby died because the baby was premature.
Speaker 2:Yes, okay the prosecution says there were signs of earlier hypoxic ishamic damage. In other words this is the words of the court records the earlier attempts to kill her had caused brain damage resulting from a shortage of oxygen. I don't like that wording because it's regardless of the cause. A shortage of oxygen is what is causing the brain damage. So whether it's an active attempt to kill her, whether her lungs collapsed due to prematurity, it's lack of oxygen that's causing brain damage. Is what they're saying. So in the immediate aftermath, child eyes, parents were taken to a private room as the mom bathed. Obviously I copied as the mom. As the mom bathed, her recently deceased child, lucy leb, became into the room and, in the words of the mom, was smiling and kept going on about how she had been present at the child's first bath and how much the child had loved it, which the mother felt was inappropriate, of course, given that she had just lost her baby.
Speaker 2:In June 2019, lucy leppy was interviewed by police and was asked about a sympathy card she had sent to the child's parents. She was asked if that was a normal thing that she did and she said no, it was not normal to do so, and this was the only time that she had done so because of the length that child eye had been in the ward, that her and the other nurses had gotten to know the child and the parents and had sympathized with them, and they wrote she accepted having an image of that card on her phone, which I think is weird wording. She had taken a picture of the card that she sent them on her phone. Oh, so I don't know why they wrote she accepted having an image of the card on her phone because I think that's a weird wording, but it is weird wording they.
Speaker 2:They asked her why she took a picture of the card, which is a legitimate question, and she said that she always took pictures of cards and stuff that she sent yeah, I wouldn't think that's that weird. I know I wouldn't think that that is that weird either, although it wasn't. They didn't say which I think is important information to know whether or not there were any other pictures of any other cards or anything that she sent.
Speaker 1:Right, because that kind of right, because if she doesn't, then she's a liar right.
Speaker 2:But if she did, then it's, it's, and I couldn't find any information about whether or not there was any anything that supported or disprove what she was saying about taking pictures of other cards and things that she sent yeah, is that?
Speaker 1:was that something like the police asked her, or was that something that she's asked at trial?
Speaker 2:yeah the no. The police asked her. But I believe she was also asked about it in trial, like why she yeah, because she was asked about. Portions of the interviews were played at trial and she was asked about them, she was uh, she did go up on the witness stand and and she was yeah right don't ever do that yeah.
Speaker 1:I don't know you're not gonna, it's never gonna end. Well, I don't know why she did that.
Speaker 2:I don't, and I don't know why the her defense let her, do that because the defense doesn't it.
Speaker 1:Ultimately it's the defendant's choice about their defense. So if they want, to yeah even against their attorney's. Uh, you know say no, don't do that, they can still do that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it seems like. If that's what she's doing then, which makes sense, because I feel like she made, like I said, poor choices and other and other things, but I also feel like her defense made poor choices and other things too so yeah, I mean they.
Speaker 1:It certainly wasn't great. But also, um, the, the defendant has say in everything. So she her choice to get up there. That was probably her job. I don't think any defense attorney ever in the history of anything would ever say, yeah, let's go on the stand and I, I could see.
Speaker 2:I could see why one would want to like oh yeah, like I'm gonna get up on this stand and I'm gonna exonerate myself.
Speaker 1:Yeah, you want, you want to explain things, except that that opens you up to white questions from the prosecutor.
Speaker 2:Prosecutors are brutal.
Speaker 1:They are think that people understand defense attorneys yeah.
Speaker 2:Well, not this fucking defense attorney, but but yeah, like she got torn apart, I think, and and in some like it. Anyway, whether or not she was guilty or not, yeah, I think it was bad, yeah.
Speaker 1:I think, whether or not she's guilty, I think we can definitely say she is poor decision-making skills, yes, very poor so, and not very great interpersonal skills either.
Speaker 2:Yeah, well, you know, and that's not that uncommon for people in the medical field, you know there's a lot of people in the medical field that have bad, yeah, people skills. Yeah, so that was something that I also thought about. There's a lot of people in the medical field that are cold, that are Do have really bad personal skills. Yeah, I mean it's.
Speaker 1:Well, they're there when you're who are not a great, but then they're doing things like talking about Smiling after babies died, talking about how much the baby lived bathing or whatever that's well, the Bathing baby with the Moses basket, that that mom wasn't sure.
Speaker 2:If it was Lucy, let be your nudge.
Speaker 1:The one we're just talking about.
Speaker 2:I know this one, actually this one, was it this?
Speaker 1:one when? Because you just, you just said that she did that and the nurse thought it was no.
Speaker 2:It was one of the babies where she. No, it wasn't this one, actually this one. The mother was sure it was Lucy. Let be, yeah. The other one thought it yeah, the other one who wasn't sure, though it was the one who, where she had asked to bring the baby away or something before the baby died. That was the one where she wasn't sure if it was Lucy let be or not. Okay, and these people are. This is like seven years, I know, I know.
Speaker 1:So yeah is it hot in?
Speaker 2:here I'm gonna open the window. No, she doesn't say she, yeah, she, she was smiling, was smiling. I kept going on about how she was present at the child's first bath and how much the child had loved it, and she said, I think in her testimony you know that she that that was a fond memory for her of the baby that she wanted to share with the parents or whatever. But it's definitely not. It's definitely not the appropriate time or moment To do so yeah, that's what I mean.
Speaker 1:Is that she, you know, she may not have had malicious intent in doing that, but she certainly didn't have Good feelers.
Speaker 2:Yeah, when it comes to sympathy sometimes Definitely, and all of those things make it.
Speaker 1:But I mean that could also be. It doesn't mean she's a killer or anything, it just means she could have just something. You know, Her brain just may not be the quote-unquote normal right she I hate terms like that, but I don't know what else to say like just there are people who just don't. There's nothing wrong with them, they just can't read the same right, you know yeah, no, very true.
Speaker 2:And and and and. There are many cases where you can look at this situation and then look at a Situation you know that is being reported on her and you can see it like two sides of it. You can see where I'll you know if she did this. This can be really, really sinister. Yeah but if she didn't do it, then you can see oh, this could be really nothing.
Speaker 1:Yeah this could be just Awkwardness yeah just just so being a millennial, I feel like a lot of the things that they say is weird. I'm like that's just right, that's my generation, that's our generation.
Speaker 2:We are just weird and awkward and we don't know the right thing to do 99% of the time, and what makes this is one of the things that makes this case, in addition to the the lack of really concrete evidence that really like Thing is that all of there is Like there, you know the things that, yeah, they're saying about Like her behavior and her actions and stuff. There isn't really that thing that is like oh, that's Really fucked up you know, right, you can't really find the really fucked up thing that is like, oh, yeah, yeah it's just awkwardness or weird?
Speaker 1:Yeah, I'm not.
Speaker 2:Not in that stuff and not in like her past, like nothing in her past, like, like you see, with other people, like she had like kitty cats that she Took good care of and didn't abuse, and like stuff like that is not things that you expect, which is not to say that it couldn't happen. Yeah, it's just, but it's not something that we've seen.
Speaker 1:As far as you know, yeah, I mean it would be interesting to see, like I mean cuz, generally speaking, serial killers do have a history of harming, yeah, animals, but it would be interesting to see if the baby nurse killers do yeah cuz she's not the only one.
Speaker 2:We'll see. That's why I wanted to do the deep dive into the other Serial killers, because I know that there are other other ones that I didn't do the deep dive, but yeah that other ones have had a had a history of having some kinds of troublesome behaviors, like yeah, one of them had a history of like Drug abuse and like violence or but what I don't know if it was necessary like animal abuse right.
Speaker 2:But there were like some things, like some kinds of signs there yeah, unlike with Lucy, let be when like maybe there's something that there is no record of like that's the only thing, then what do? You think is that maybe there's something that. Happened, but nobody saw it or it wasn't Recorded or, and that also nobody came forward and and was like yeah, like nobody said anything but Lucy, let me did this to me, or I saw what.
Speaker 2:Lucy let me, didn't? She was really fucked up. Yeah, I think Something like that would make me feel a little bit better about yeah you know, and it's not.
Speaker 2:People like, oh, it's because she's why, and she, I don't give a fuck about that, like I know why bitches be right like you know, like it's the, it's the lack of super concrete evidence and and the, and I just it's not quite enough and and and and that every that, these little holes that I keep finding, that I'm like I just want a little bit more solid Solidity on it.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and then, and a lot of in these. In some of these cases I think you were mentioning before a lot of the things that the babies died of it could have been caused by any number of things. Yeah, Well, yeah, exactly, and that's that's, that's the thing that, and then you've also got I you haven't really talked about it too much, but you will the the fact that the hospital was Not doing the things that it was supposed to do. It was underperforming and in many ways. Yes, I was in doing the correct.
Speaker 2:Protocols. I guess you could say oh really not, yeah, yeah, so we should move on.
Speaker 1:Okay, yes.
Speaker 2:I've got a lot more babies to talk about, okay, so yeah, so yeah, baby, I is One that, definitely, with the bath, the card and like she had expressed that she had wanted to go to the funeral and that she wasn't able to go because she was working, and so that's why she sent the card. That was another thing that, okay, so, baby L and a baby I was also, I believe, one of the babies that she did a Facebook search on. So she did a Facebook search on a number of the babies, although not all of the babies, and she did also did it Facebook search it not, I mean the, the parents of the babies, not the babies.
Speaker 2:No, right, yeah, yeah but Not all of the babies, and she also did a bunch of face like searches on other Parents of other babies that weren't involved in the case, but that was another thing that she did.
Speaker 1:do a bunch of Facebook, yeah, I could see how that could be both Sinister and innocent. Yeah, cuz that feels like You're hunting your prey but it could also just be it a cross millennial curiosity. That's what we do. We search Facebook.
Speaker 2:We also like. I hope that those parents are doing okay right right.
Speaker 2:So, yeah, it could definitely be both ways All right. So baby L, Baby L's mother was admitted to the hospital early when ultrasound showed that baby L Wasn't growing appropriately. So baby L is one of twins and these twins were born via C section at 33 weeks, both weighing around three pounds. Baby L was born on April 8th 2016. He was the twin brother of baby M. At birth, he was assessed as requiring special care. The doctors told the twin parents that the babies were healthy, but they were taken immediately in place in the neonatal care In nursery one, so know that they had a high need. The nursery was designated For the most delicate or sickly babies.
Speaker 2:It is the prosecution's case that Lucy leppy poisoned baby L with insulin While also attacking his twin brother, baby M, mm-hmm.
Speaker 2:At birth, baby L's blood sugar levels were low and he was treated with the dextrose solution, a drip which was also administered by Lucy leppy.
Speaker 2:His condition improved and he was considered in stable condition at the time of the April 9 shift and I didn't make a note of it, but Lucy leppy and another nurse were present at his birth. Because they Knew that the babies would probably have to go to the neonatal unit, lucy leppy came on shift on April 9th at 7 30 am. It was her day off, but the neonatal unit was understaffed and they had 15 babies on the unit that day, so the hospital needed nurses to pick up shifts and Lucy leppy often volunteered and she volunteered that day, stating that she had recently moved into a new home. She just said she had recently moved into a new home. Yeah, her parents had helped put her, put a down payment on it and she had texted a Fellow co-worker that she could use the extra pennies. So that was her like fourth day working in a row, which I think is a lot for a nurse, because they work pretty long shifts.
Speaker 1:I think they actually do that, though they work like four on and two off.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and Other instances she worked for like up to nine days, I think, in a row.
Speaker 2:So yeah but I'm just mentioning it because In that a child, lucy leppy podcast, they mentioned that it was her fourth day working in a row. Yeah, lucy leppy was not baby else designated nurse on this shift. Another nurse was caring for him and his twin brother. Lucy leppy was the designated nurse for two other babies in nursery one. So, if we recall from previous information, nursery one was overcrowded because it was only supposed to have three babies maximum and it had four babies, and also remember that it was supposed to have one-to-one care, so the nurses were also Over. They had one. Each had one more baby than they were supposed to care for.
Speaker 1:Okay. So hey, I found, I found the answer. They don't have it much better than we do as first nurses go, lovely. The most common shift pattern for nurses in the UK is eight hour, ten hour or twelve hour shifts. Some hospitals will have a standard twelve hour shift pattern, working three days per week on rotation. However the you can work, you cannot be forced to work over 48 hours a week over a standard reference period of 17 weeks. Hours are normally averaged over this reference period by taking actual hours worked divided by the number of weeks.
Speaker 2:Okay, so it's not that abnormal.
Speaker 1:No.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 1:So I would assume it just depends on how long her shift was right. So if it was it, if it's only an eight or ten hour shift, she could have worked four days in a row. Yeah she did often work, More she yes and also it sounded like, if I remember correctly, it's been a while since I looked at it, but Somewhere one of the podcasts or something I'd listen to, it seemed like she would often take additional hours.
Speaker 2:Yes, she did she. She took a lot of additional hours and there's a lot of like Speculation about that. But she was one of the younger nurses, she was single, she just bought a house, so she was highly motivated for right.
Speaker 1:She seemed to like her job. I mean, whether that's a she liked it because she wanted to kill or she liked it because she's genuinely wanted to help.
Speaker 2:People seem to like her job, yeah, yeah. So yeah, take, take, take from that what you will. Yeah, but yeah, so she was not baby else does me nurse? But yeah, like I said, that nursery one was over crowded by one baby and the nurses were Over. I don't know what, what is the word, but the ratio was off because they were only supposed to have one baby each right, and so there are two nurses in nursery one, and the other nurse had both of the twins designated to them and Lucy Levy had two other babies designated to her in nursery one.
Speaker 1:So so, and that right, that's the one, one nursery one is the one.
Speaker 2:Yes, it's supposed to be one, one, yep, okay, gotcha so there's that.
Speaker 2:So a few hours later Baby Al's glucose level worth started to fall to dangerous levels. So additional levels of Dextrose solution were given to him, but they failed to correct the problem. So it's the prosecution's argument that Lucy Levy added insulin to baby Al's Dextrose bag, which was running from noon that day. The prosecution argued that Lucy Levy was Present for the birth of baby Al and had cared for him on his first day, so she was aware of his hypoglycemia and took advantage of it.
Speaker 2:They took some blood tests, but they didn't come back until Several days later, on April 14th. So when they did come back, they showed that baby Al's blood work was grossly abnormal and that their reading For insulin levels was at the top of the scale that the equipment could measure. The court heard, however, there was no correspondingly high level of C-peptide enzyme which has, like a different half-life, slower half-life than insulin. It was within the normal range. So the prosecution argues that the only explanation for that anomaly is that what was being measured was Synthetic insulin which had not been prescribed to child Al but was stored and readily available in the neonatal unit. However, lower levels of C-peptide in comparison to insulin levels Could also be markers of an insulin autoimmune disorder, such as herrata disease, a disorder in which Hypoglycemia can be present with elevated insulin levels and normal C-peptide levels.
Speaker 2:Type 1 and type 2 diabetes can also show higher insulin and lower C-peptide levels, and they didn't. At the time, I think that the the conclusion was just hypoglycemia. So it wasn't until later that the doctor what's his name? Doctor? What's his name, the, the defense's main medical expert, said this is probably synthetic insulin. The, whatever like synthetic insulin, wasn't actually tested for. They're just going by the Markers of the insulin levels on the C-peptide levels. Okay so, although there is a high likelihood that that is a cause, there's also other possibilities that could cause it. Okay so, in police interviews, lucy, let me, said that she was aware that child's L's low blood sugar, of child L's low blood sugar levels, and Knew that the insulin was kept in a lock fridge with a variety of other drugs. The keys were passed around to the nursing staff and there was no record of who held the keys at any time. The keys were supposed to be held, I think, by, like, the head of the nursing department, but they were kind of Again right, they didn't necessarily adhere to the protocols.
Speaker 2:She agreed that the insulin could not could not have been administered accidentally, but denied being responsible. Her explanation was that it must have been in one of the bags already received For a child, like it was already in the bag. Is what she's saying right? For a child F and child L, the children allegedly poisoned with insulin, the defense cannot say what happened. It is difficult to say if you don't know. Mr Meyer said so. Much has been said about these. These are not simple allegations which can automatically lead to a conviction. This is where I'm like this defense lawyer can suck it. The defense say child ease, tpn bag was put up by leppy on August 2015 and hours later there were blood sugar problems. That bag was replaced in the absence of leppy, but the problems continued. That's a good point. The defense is saying that. So there was a glucose bag or a dexterous bag, whatever some some type of sugar.
Speaker 2:Right was put up by Lucy leppy but that the bag was since changed right and by other people, right, but the problems persisted, right? The sample Taken came from the second bag not put up by Lucy leppy. At the defense say an expert witness professor had given three possible explanations, none of which identified Lucy leppy as a culprit for child L. There were issues with the documentation provided, so those were challenged. The defense say and they also said there is nothing to say let me was directly involved in the acts, which is kind of a week. But again, baby M which, who is a baby else? Twin Baby M was born in what the prosecution called good condition by requiring, again, special care. He had a life-threatening respiratory event on April 9th at 4 pm and, according to the prosecution, came close to death, but within four hours he was able to breathe without respiratory aids and these. This was a time when, I believe, lucy leppy was not even there, so just to note that he was a slightly larger of the two babies, the Apgar score, which records the conditions of the baby shortly after birth, recorded 10 out of 10 scores for both twins at 10 minutes after birth, which I call absolute bullshit on, because no fucking way can like. These preemie babies who are having Blood sugar crashes Breathing crashes are getting 10 on that Apgar score. My babies didn't receive 10 on an Apgar score. Apgar score they received nine and they were healthy, fat, full-term babies that didn't have any of these issues, right. So I call bullshit on the count as a Chester hospital for that one. Yeah, so anyway, child M had a low oxygen saturation rate but he had that rectified with breathing support.
Speaker 2:On the day of April 9th, baby M was initially considered stable, while the main focus was on his twin brothers deteriorating blood sugar. At 11 am Baby M vomited. At 3 pm His designated nurse aspirated some undigested milk from babyM which appeared to be stained bile stained, sorry and his abdomen appeared slightly swollen. A Decision was made to stop his milk feeds for the time and just give him like when they're stopping the milk feeds they're not giving them nothing, they're giving them like IVs and stuff. At 3 30 pm A glucose fluid bag was attached to childM. Lucy LeBian, baby M's designated nurse, both co-signed on the IV but is unclear which nurse administered. It is the prosecution's case that because the designated nurse was signed into the computer at the time that it was Lucy LeBian who administered it, but I'm sure I don't need to point out that someone can be signed into a computer and not standing in front of it. The prosecution argues that while Lucy LeBian ministered the IV of glucose, she introduced air into the line in an attempt to murder baby M.
Speaker 2:At 345 pm, baby M's alarm sounded While baby M and L's designated nurse and Lucy LeBian were setting up a glucose drip for baby L. The Designated nurse immediately called for help and the two nurses administered CPR. At 404 a crash call was sent out for Dr Ravi Jrem, the consultant doctor on duty to come urgently to the neonatal unit. At 405, baby M was given a shot of adrenaline to try and restart his heart. Whenever they're giving shots of adrenaline, you know it's not good, mm-hmm. He was given two more shots of adrenaline and intubated. A few minutes later dr Jrem arrived at the nursery. So the it's the registrar nurse or registrar nurse and registered doctor that's giving the Shots of adrenaline and intubating, and then Dr Ravi Jrem is the consultant doctor. I really am not sure exactly what is the difference between the consultant doctors and the registrar doctors. I Think the consultant doctors are maybe more specialist.
Speaker 2:So anyway, at this point baby M was still in cardio respiratory arrest. He wasn't breathing, his heart wasn't beating. He was given three more doses of adrenaline and the team was about to give up. When baby M began to improve around 435 His heart rate began to climb and he began to gasp for breath. Dr Jrem reported noticing a red modeled rash While resuscitating baby M, which disappeared after baby M recovered. However, no such notation appears in his doctor's notes of the incident. The following night shift, baby M was reported to have a speedy recovery by the prosecution, but did it experience additional desaturation events? He agreed with mr Myers he had also failed. That is dr Jrem. He had also failed to mention the skin discoloration in his clinical notes on child a or in his subsequent statements to the coroner For baby M.
Speaker 2:The defense say there is no obvious cause of collapse in this case, but it is not established that the obvious one is an air embolus Quote. We are back in the territory of blaming Lucy Levy because there is no other cause, and quote said Ben Myers, kc, lucy Levy's defense attorney. The mere fact she is there has been used as an explanation. So those are the twins Allen M.
Speaker 2:Baby N, a boy, was born in June of 2016?. He was six weeks premature and was delivered by a planned C-section Because the doctors were concerned he wasn't growing enough in the womb. His mother was a carrier of hemophilia and baby N had it as well. He was born at three pounds 12 ounces at birth and was severely jaundiced. According to testimony by his mother, he was admitted to nursery one in the neonatal unit. His clinical condition was labeled as excellent. According to the prosecution, however, he received assistance with breathing, antibiotics for suspected infection and treatment for jaundice. The prosecution says there are three separate occasions in which Lucy Levy tried to kill him. A Child N did have hemophilia. Subsequent investigations found him to have a mild version of the disease and children of his age Do not bleed for no reason, particularly in the throat, the prosecution say. The prosecution said Lucy Levy used child N's hemophilia as a cover to attack him.
Speaker 2:On the night of June 2nd Let me was on shift and not the designated nurse for child N. She had earlier to earlier texted friends and sent a message to a colleague saying we've got a baby with hemophilia. She sent a further text saying everyone is a bit panicked but Seems as though the baby appears fine. At 8 o 4 pm she sent a text saying she was going to Google hemophilia. Seven minutes later Let me text her colleague complex condition yeah, 5050 chance antinatally. The designated nurse said child N was stable and left for a break about 1 am. He would have asked for a colleague to look after child N but he could not recall which. One. Levy had a two baby secure for in room 4. At 105 Am Child N's oxygen saturation levels fell from 99% to 40%, unusually for a baby. He was described as crying and screaming. I don't know why that's unusual for a baby.
Speaker 1:Maybe the Premies don't cry as much.
Speaker 2:That's true, then I wish it was an usually for a preemie, but I guess that's nitpicky a little bit.
Speaker 2:Baby ends skin was reported as appearing modeled or dusky. Child N recovered quickly while the doctor was called, then called to another emergency. It is the prosecution's case that Lucy let me had attacked baby and either with some type of physical attack or by injecting air into his bloodstream they're not sure. 12 days later there are two separate incidents. On June 15th for child N, levy had been the designated nurse for the previous day. Overnight he was a nursery 3. At the beginning of the night shift Child N was very unsettled that's the word that I'm not sure what it means. Again, over night baby N had been doing unwell While Lucy let me was not on shift. He was being screened for an infection, had experienced several dips in his oxygen level, his skin was mulled in appearance and he had been taken off milk feeds. Let me was to be the designated nurse for June 15. The use of her phone appeared to show she was awake by 5, 10 pm and on her shift at 7 12 am. She had texted a colleague that she had escaped nursery one and was back in three. A Colleague said Lucy levy came into the room right off to say hello and check on baby N. But when the nurses back was turned, levy told her child N had Dissaturated. Before assisting with the breathing, the nurse reported I remember Lucy looking over because he had gone a bit pale and the monitor went off and we started neopuffing.
Speaker 2:Doctors were called and an attempt was made to intubate child N. Dr A said he could not be sure but he thought he saw blood and baby ends Throat. I wrote thought, but clearly throat. The first time he tried to intubate him he was, quote Surprised by his anatomy more than anything else. I could not visualize parts of the back of his throat because of swelling and quote. The doctor saw, quote fresh blood and quote in child ends throat which the prosecution say Was the same scene in child's C E NG. The doctor was unable to get the breathing tube down the throat of Child N as he was unable to visualize the child's tracheal inlet. He attempted to intubate child N on three occasions With the Lucy levy's assistance. Before giving up, baby N was moved to nursery one and placed on a monitor and Given oxygen via a mask. An intensive care chart is Is presented to the court, which are met Recourse, the amount of dexterous going into child N.
Speaker 2:The bleeding record of 10 am 1 milliliter of flesh fresh blood Recording aspirates from the NG tube. Said bleeding, the prosecution say, is not recorded anywhere in the medical notes. It was more than two hours after the attempts to intubate. At 1129 am Lucy levy sent a Facebook message to the doctor telling him small amounts of blood for mouth and 1 milliliter from Nasogastric looks like pulmonary bleeding on x-ray Given factor 8. Wait and see. Other than that phone message, there is no evidence that Lucy levy brought the bleeding to the attention of any on the medical staff. The prosecution said this is surprising given the problems child N had suffered. In an update Recorded on the computer notes by Lucy levy at 1.53 pm she wrote Child N was stiff and handling like standing upper limbs back arching, settling in between episodes. The prosecution say this is similar to that found in other cases heard so far.
Speaker 2:At 3 pm there is a further entry and levy's writing of 3 milliliters of blood, initial not by levy, and coincides with a second collapse that day. Child N collapsed just before 3 pm and the consultant was called at 259 pm. While waiting a consultant, a juror. While awaiting a consultant, a junior doctor Looked into the airway of child and saw a large swelling at the end of his epiglottis he could only just see the bottom of the vocal cords. He had never seen anything like this before in a newborn baby. The doctors, junior doctors notes Maine at 4 30 pm, recorded De-saturation this afternoon at 2 50 pm With blood in the aura fairings plus blood in the ng2 improved with bagging, elective intubation plan following question mark, question mark. Question mark Unsuccessful attempts with two registrars and two consultants cords difficult to visualize. Let me record at 6 30 pm, approximately 14 50, infant became apneic with de-saturation to 44 percent heart rate, 90 beats per minute, fresh blood noted from mouth and 3 milliliters blood aspirated from a zogastric tube.
Speaker 2:Doctors crash called the prosecution, said the child N was so unwell that attempts were made to reintubate him. But the doctor could not see down child N's throat as the V was obscured by fresh blood. A More specialist team was called to carry out the intubation. All told, seven different doctors from the Countess of Chester Hospital tried to intubate baby N, unsuccessfully Over a number of hours numerous attempts were made. Each attempt is physically and mentally stressful and what they're doing is literally jabbing a tube down the baby's throat. But I found it interesting that the attack that Lucy Leppy is accused of making is the same mechanism shoving a tube too hard down baby N's throat.
Speaker 2:Child N continued to be in well on June 15 and difficulties with his ventilation persisted. A nearby hospital I'm not sure if it was the Liverpool or the Alderhey hospital agreed to send over some of their doctors, including ear, nose and throat surgeon with pediatric experience. The doctor from the new hospital intubated baby N on the first attempt, although baby N needed additional doses of a journaling and more CPR. The successful intubation really turned the corner for baby N. The father of baby N recalled Lucy Leppy comforting his wife, assuring her it would be alright. Eventually baby N was transferred to Alderhey. I guess that must be the hospital then where the prosecution say. He recovered quickly, although he did experience subsequent desaturation events requiring additional resuscitation efforts. Once home, the parents noticed Child N had twitches and then later spasms, and at one point he did stop breathing and was taken back to the Countess of Chester Hospital and then transferred back again to Alderhey where he stayed for an additional one to two weeks.
Speaker 2:Professor Sally Kinsey describes the collapse on June 3 as dramatic with no recognized medical cause. It should include excluded the possibility of a pulmonary hemorrhage, in other words bleeding in the lungs causing the collapse on June 15, and her opinion such bleeding would not have occurred spontaneously in a child with N's degree of hemophilia, it follows. The prosecution say the bleeding was caused by trauma. Professor Kinsey rolled out heavy handed intubation as the cause. However, the accused method of attack the prosecution argues Lucy Leppy thrusting a nasogastric tube into the back of the throat as a mechanism used to inflict injury, is functionally not different than injury caused by thrusting an intubation tube into the back of the throat.
Speaker 2:The mechanism is actually pretty much identical. A tubing showed too hard into the throat, so I'm not sure how one can be ruled out without ruling out another. If one is a possibility, isn't the other one also a possibility, unless you have like an autopsy and then you can possibly examine like there is like a whatever mark and the mark is this size and this is the tube that made the mark. But baby N survived. So we can't obviously great, but like they can't do that, all they can say is there was a tube that was shoved into the throat and it caused the injury. So I'm not sure how intubation can be ruled out anyway.
Speaker 2:An additional thing that I want to point out is that baby N had incidents prior to the rifle of Lucy Leppy on shift and then continued to have incidents while out of her care at a completely different hospital, at Alderhey Hospital, and the injuries on the baby are consistent with that of a hemophiliac baby. So I thought it was interesting. They're like, oh, the baby has hemophilia but it's not that severe of hemophilia, that's anyway. And I also want to point out that I found it really troubling that seven different doctors couldn't intubate baby N from the Countess of Chester Hospital but that it took one doctor from a different hospital who was able to intubate the baby on the first try. So yeah, alright.
Speaker 2:So moving on from that, ben Myers, casey Defending, is now questioning Dr Mayberry. He asked in his professional opinion what could be the cause of blood. He says he told Cheshire Police it could have been the result of gastric irritation or necrotizing enterocolitis and EC. He says it also could have been the result of child N's blood disorder which resulted in deficiency in essential blood clotting protein. Mr Myers is now questioning the medic.
Speaker 2:He asked whether or not repeated attempts to intubate could cause stress to the baby. He says it could cause stress to the person trying to intubate, which is kind of avoiding the question. He said failure makes the second attempt more difficult and the third attempt even more difficult. He added that, rather than making repeated attempts, that they should be limited and someone with more experience should be called to help more quickly, rather than a doctor attempting to do it over and over again. Okay, so that is the testimony on baby N, and reading about listening, reading and listening about that testimony, listening about it on the trial, that was one of the most stressful ones. Hearing about them trying to intubate the baby over and over again, that was so stressful and it reminded me of when my son was in the hospital and how they kept trying to like do procedures on him over and over again, like prick his heel, take his blood, shit like that over and over again, and how fucking stressful it was for him and my son was a year old when that happened.
Speaker 2:He wasn't a little tiny, pretty baby. So that was one of the more stressful ones to hear about and at one point I had like practically yelled the medical staff like you need to stop testing my son and let him fucking sleep because, like he just at one point he just started screaming and screaming and he wouldn't stop because he was just over way, way past the point of stress and to this day he is highly traumatized by any kind of medical procedures. So, yeah so baby oh, child oh and child P were two of three triplet brothers. The court hears child oh weighed 2.02 kilograms. I don't know why I put the other babies weighing pounds in this baby. I put in kilograms, which is good for a premature triplet. He was in good condition and he made good progress. He was stable up to June 23rd when he suffered what Dr Evans said was a remarkable deterioration and died.
Speaker 2:In June 15 and June 23rd Lucy Letby had been on holiday in Ibiza. Child oh's body was examined after his death and an injury to his liver was found. Lucy Letby was working the day shift on June 23rd and was the designated nurse for child oh and P in room two with another child. The prosecution say. This gave her an opportunity to sabotage the babies. The third triplet was in room one. The doctors believed he was the most needy of the triplets. Letby also had the responsibility for supervising a student nurse that day. The designated nurse recorded no nursing concern. Observations normal for child oh. The designated nurse recorded no nursing concerns. There were no nursing concerns. There were three records of feeds by Letby at 8 30 am, at 10 30 am and at 12 30 pm. The earliest was signed by the student nurse and the latter two were signed by Lucy Letby.
Speaker 2:A note made by examining the examining doctor at 1 15 pm said that there was one mil of vomit post feed and that child oh's abdomen was distended. Child oh was put on an IV fluid as a precaution. His heart rate was 160 to 170. His blood oxygen level was low and he had an elevated CO2 level. The doctor recorded the results as not normal for a child breathing on their own and treated for suspected necrotizing encephalitis. It was thought down to child oh's swallowing air or passing of a stool earlier that day. An x-ray taken at the time showed a moderate amount of gas in the bowel loops throughout the abdomen. Lucy Letby noted at 8 35 pm that reviewing by the registrar.
Speaker 2:At 8 15 pm baby oh had vomited undigested milk, was tachycardic, with abdomen distended, ng2 placed in on free drainage, 10 ml per kilogram of saline bolus given as prescribed along with antibiotics placed near my mouth and abdominal times ray performed. Observations returned to normal. Prior to child oh's collapse a colleague said of child oh, he doesn't look as well now as he did earlier. Do you think we should move him back to nursery one Letby did not agree. The prosecution say this echoes the final fatal collapse of child oh.
Speaker 2:Letby had taken child oh's observations at 2 30 pm as 100% oxygen saturation and normal breathing rates From her phone. She was on Facebook Messenger at the time and at 2 39 pm the door entry system recorded her coming into the neo-nail unit. Within a few minutes of that baby oh suffered his first collapse. Lucy Letby called for help, having been alone with baby oh in room 2. At the time Baby oh's heart rate and saturation had dropped to dangerously low levels. A breathing tube was inserted by the medical staff and he was successfully resuscitated. He was kept on a ventilator. At 3 49 pm baby oh desaturated again. Doctors removed the ET endotracheal tube boom and replaced it as a precaution. Letby's written notes suggest she was the one who called for help.
Speaker 2:Baby oh suffered a further collapse at 4 15 pm which required CPR. Those efforts were unsuccessful and baby oh died soon after treatment was withdrawn. At 5 47 pm A consultant doctor noted that baby oh had an aerial discolored skin on the right side of his chest wall which was perpuric. He noted a rash at 4 30 pm which was gone by 5 15 pm and did not consider a perpura but unsure what it was or what had caused it. The doctor was particularly concerned about child oh's death as he had been clinically stable prior to these events and his class was sudden and he did not respond to resuscitation as had been expected. After the shift letby sent a series of messages to the doctor on Facebook and to her colleague, see she suggested baby oh had a big tummy overnight but had just ballooned after lunch and went from there.
Speaker 2:A post mortem examination found free, unclotted blood in the perinatal abdominal space from a liver injury. There is damage in multiple locations on and in the liver. There is blood found in the peronitoneal cavity. He certified death on the basis of natural causes and intraabdominal bleeding. He observed that the cause of this bleeding could have been asphyxia, trauma or vigorous resuscitation. The prosecution say no one would have thought a nurse would have assaulted child in the neonatal unit.
Speaker 2:Dr Dewey Evans concluded child oh's death was the result of a combination of intravenous air embolus and trauma. The liver injury was not, in his view, consistent with vigorous CPR. His view was that liver damage would have occurred before the collapse and contributed to it and was probably the reason for his symptoms throughout the morning. As for the air in the bowel loops, dr Evans concluded that was consistent with excessive air going down via the nasogaster tube. However, in looking at the symptoms of air embolism, liver damage is not a listed symptom.
Speaker 2:An article I found, a scientific article entitled Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Injuries in Children stated that quote cardiopulmonary resuscitation CPR is an emergency intervention to maintain circulation and breathing in an unresponsive individual suffering from cardiopulmonary arrest. However, cpr is not without its own risks. Injuries secondary to compression ventilation are well documented in the medical and scientific literature. Most of those injuries are minor, but some can result in significant morbidity and even death. It is important to identify those injuries that could be secondary to CPR versus inflicted traumatic injuries of child maltreatment. The article goes on to describe some of the possible injuries inflicted by excessive or aggressive CPR. Among the many injuries listed in this section, this stands out, although extremely rare.
Speaker 2:Compressions in children may result in pancreatic hemorrhage, hepatic slash, splenic contusion or laceration, retroperitoneal hemorrhage and gastric perforation. A hepatic contusion is bruising slash. Damage to liver, such as what Dr Ewe's concluded could not be consistent with CPR. Actually, this article about CPR injuries in children was very enlightening because it not only enlists trachea damage, such as that shown by baby N, as a possibility of intubation injury, but it also indicates that air embolism can be a side effect of CPR in children, and it specifically mentions that air embolism is a specifically high risk factor for premature infants who receive CPR. So let me give you that exact quote Barotrauma various forms of CPR related Barotrauma have been described in children column in 2001.
Speaker 2:These include time-panicked membrane injury, pneumothorax, pneumaperinotam, peritoneum pneumoscrotum and air embolism, especially in the premature newborn Bush et al 1996. So not only are some of these issues seemingly high risk factors associated with poor CPR practice, such as liver bruising, trachea damage, but the primary motorist operandi that Lucy Levy has been accused of employing as a murder weapon is also potentially a side effect of the resuscitation process that all of these infants underwent. So even in a case like baby L, where Lucy Levy clearly did have the opportunity to cause harm, in my mind the defense and their doctors are harming their own credibility by trying to force the blame for all of their problems and damage onto her, even when it allegedly has obviously been done by another party, even if it was in pursuit of saving the baby's life. The liver bruising is what I'm talking about. Like since liver damage isn't a symptom of air embolism and is a potential symptom of vigorous CPR, it isn't super hard to figure out what allegedly caused the liver damage. If Lucy Levy is baby O's killer, doesn't it damage your credibility to lie about this, because it makes your entire testimony seem less credible At least, I guess not for some people, since there was a conviction here, but to me it seems really shady. And the fact that air embolism is a whole side effect of CPR, particularly on premature babies, which is the entire victim set, it just is bothersome. And I'm not saying that Lucy Levy is not the murderer, I'm just saying that these are the kinds of questions that I think need to be addressed definitively and more in a more unquestionable way. And the fact. It really bothers me the fact that the defense lawyer, ben Myers Casey, didn't bring bring this up, didn't mention that in his defense. So what the fuck were you doing, ben Myers Casey? And I thought you were supposed to be one of the premier defense barrisers in the UK.
Speaker 2:Dr Andreas Marnerides, the reviewing pathologist, thought that the liver injuries were most likely the result of an impact type trauma and not the result of CPR. And my question to that is what is the functional difference between an impact trauma and a CPR trauma? Because doesn't CPR cause an impact on the body of an infant and therefore isn't a CPR trauma the exact same as an impact trauma? So anyway, that's where I'm at with that. Dr Marnerides went on to say that he thought the excess air introduced via the nasal gastric tube was likely to have led to a simulation of the vagal nerve which has an effect on heart rate, which could have compromised child O's breathing. He did not say whether it was either those factors in isolation or in combination which caused child O's death, and he certified the cause of death to be inflicted traumatic injury to the liver and profound gastric and intestinal distention following acute excessive injection or infusion of air via nasal, gastric tube and air embolus.
Speaker 2:In a police interview, lucy Leppie said she had responded to child O's alarm. At 1.15 pm I found he had vomited. She responded first at 2.40 pm and discovered modeling all over with purple blotches and a red rash. She suggested that his abdomen had just kept swelling and suggested that sometimes babies can gulp air when they are receiving assistance from Optiflow. As child O was. A year later, on the anniversary of child O's death, lucy Leppie carried out a search on Facebook on the surname of the child. Okay, that's all I have on baby O.
Speaker 1:So I wonder if the CPR trauma versus the impact trauma means manual versus machine.
Speaker 2:I don't know because they don't clarify.
Speaker 1:I know they don't clarify. It was just a question I had in my head?
Speaker 2:Yeah, that could be, but that's one of the questions that I would like some of you to answer right. The prosecution alleged that baby P was murdered the following day from his brother, baby O. Lucy Leppie was the designated nurse for baby P. Lucy Leppie fed baby P donor expressed breast milk at 8 am, at 10 am, at noon, at 2 pm and at 6 pm. The final feed, if accurately recorded, was about 13 minutes after before I'm assuming baby O had died. Strike that, obviously I miswrote that. The final feed, if accurately recorded, was about 13 minutes before baby O had died. The court hears because baby O had died in unusual circumstances, baby P and his brother were examined by Dr Gibbs at 6 pm shortly after baby O's death. The abdomen was full and mildly distended. There was no tenderness and he had active bowel sounds, good signs. He was given blood work screen for infection, given x-rays and given a preventative round of antibiotics. A feeding chart is presented to the court and all of the feeds from 8 am to 4 pm are signed by a student nurse and co-signed by Lucy Leppie. The 6 pm feed is signed only by Lucy Leppie, who fed baby P via his nasogastric tube and administered some intravenous fluids. The court hears that on the day shift feeds there is nothing more than a trace aspirate, checking if there is anything in the stomach before the baby is fed, apart from a small amount of vomit at noon. Around 7.30 pm Lucy Leppie signed baby P's care over to the next designated nurse on duty assigned to care for him. However, she remained on the unit for some time completing her nurse notes about baby O. The 8 pm feed, first after Lucy Leppie's shift and administered by baby P's designated nurse on duty, produced 14 mils of milk acidic aspirate. The court hears that the x-ray ordered by Dr John Gibbs given shortly after 8 pm showed some gas in baby P's gut. The prosecution argues that sometime between 7.30 and 8 pm Lucy Leppie deliberately injected air into baby P's feeding tube. An expert medical witness for the prosecution testified that such gas could be caused by an infection or by necrotizing encephalitis, a common digestive problem seen in premature babies, but he agreed that it could plausibly be caused by air injected into baby P's feeding tube.
Speaker 2:Over the night shift baby P had a few episodes where his blood oxygen levels fell and his heart rate dropped, but he was able to continue to breathe on his own. His designated nurse had been giving him milk feeds every two hours via his nasal gastric tube, but he was struggling to digest his milk so it was decided to temporarily stop his feeds and keep him hydrated via an IV and closely monitor him. At around 6 am, baby P's designated nurse aspirated some air from his stomach and reported at that time that his stomach was still soft and his breathing and heart rate were within normal limits. At 7.30 am Lucy Leppie came back on shift. She was assigned as baby P's designated nurse in nursery 2 and another nurse was designated to the third triplet in the same nursery. The shift leader testified that she put the two nurses together in this same nursery to give Lucy Leppie extra support because of what happened to baby O the day before. Baby P was Lucy Leppie's only designated baby on that shift.
Speaker 2:At around 9.30 am the registrar on duty reviewed baby P and noted that his abdomen was swollen and his skin appeared modeled, but that his heart rate and oxygen levels were stable. However, around 10 minutes later, baby P suffered a serious event, with his heart rate and oxygen levels dropping to dangerous levels, and a call went out for a resuscitation team. The prosecution argued that in the 10 minutes between the registrar doctors examination and baby P's collapse, lucy Leppie had injected air into his feeding tube, causing his stomach to swell and restrict his lungs, leading to a cardiac arrest. Although my question was that, since the doctor observed a swollen abdomen on his examination, when it had made more sense that the attack had taken place before the examination, you would think but that's what the prosecution is saying that it took place after, that. It took place after, in between the time that the doctor examined the baby and like the 10 minutes between the time he left the baby and the baby's collapse. So anyway, let me find my place.
Speaker 2:The doctor quickly returned to baby P's cot side and he recalled during the resuscitation efforts, one of the nurses asked if Dr A, the doctor Lucy Leppie, was allegedly fucking. My words would be coming. However, the registrar did not remember which nurse asked after Dr A. Surprisingly to me, they did call Dr A, which made me feel like the request for Dr A wasn't out of left field, and so I wondered if Dr A was like the next doctor in line to be called or like. Was that a typical request or wasn't an usual request? I wish they would have said that, because the implication is, if it's Lucy Leppie, then they're trying to say Lucy Leppie wants Dr A there because like she's fucking Dr A and she wants his attention or whatever. But since they don't remember whether it's Lucy Leppie, like I wanted to go into more detail about whether or not that would be a weird request to make.
Speaker 1:Otherwise, Wait, hold on. If you hear a whirring sound in the background, I believe my grandmother is vacuuming. That's what that is. Okay, I don't know if it caught on the microphone or not, but I Be very clean.
Speaker 2:They already looked clean, now they will be extra clean.
Speaker 1:Yeah, she's the kind of person where clean is dirty.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you know. I mean, I guess that makes sense, because then things stay clean, whereas at my place dirty is probably clean yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah, mine is messy. I don't know that I'm necessarily, I'm just messy. Yeah, I'm busy, so I leave things lying around and then when I'm not busy, I clean it up.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Okay, anyway, back to baby. What are we on?
Speaker 2:Pete yeah, I was talking about baby Pete and I was talking about whether or not it would be a weird thing to call Dr A Dr A. That's my, that was my speculation about that.
Speaker 1:Wait again. Who's Dr A? He's the one that did the exam.
Speaker 2:So the one who did the exam I didn't write down his name, okay, but it's a different doctor. Okay, so that is the registrar doctor. Okay, so they have their registrar doctors who are like, I guess, the doctors that are whatever right there on call, but then they have their next doctors in line, like their consultant doctors, and I'm like was Dr A the consultant doctor? Because they called Dr A for baby O as well, and they called him for some other babies as well, and so I think he was one of the consultant doctors.
Speaker 1:That's what that sounds like. Like maybe he knows a little bit about babies or something.
Speaker 2:Like Dr Rafi Jayram. That's another one of the consultant doctors. He was the one who tried to intubate baby N like three times, Dr A Anyway, but he's, incidentally, also the one who is having an affair with Lucy Leppie.
Speaker 1:Allegedly yeah, allegedly yeah, they were but they both claim that they were not. Yes, yeah.
Speaker 2:So yes, you're right, I forgot the words was to say allegedly, so we don't get sued, but yeah. So then the insinuation is like did Lucy let be harm baby P to get Dr A's attention, which doesn't make sense to me as a motive, because I'm like if she's a serial killer, killing and harming babies is her motive, right? Yeah, and she already has Dr A's attention because she's allegedly having an affair with him, so why would getting his attention be her motive if she already has his attention? But that part of the that seemed like as part of the infantilization angle with a childish.
Speaker 1:Have we talked about that? No, we haven't talked about it yet. We'll talk about it, so we'll talk about that more. Rachel and I both have thoughts.
Speaker 2:We'll talk about that more upcoming, but but yeah, I don't think that, that I don't think that getting the attention of a man is the motive for a serial killer, even if the serial killer is a woman. Yeah, so that's my thoughts on that.
Speaker 1:Especially since she's already having an affair. Yeah, they're already allegedly having an affair, unless she, unless he's like, broke it off or is dallying with somebody else.
Speaker 2:At this point their relationship seems to be in good standing and continues to be in good standing for some time after she's even off the ward and all that stuff. Okay.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah, so they like go on vacation together, but they're not.
Speaker 1:But they're not having an affair.
Speaker 2:Right Like okay.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I don't think I would go on vacation with a guy unless I was sleeping with him. With a married man, yeah, unless the wife was also there and I was just like the third wheel or whatever.
Speaker 2:No.
Speaker 1:Yeah, oh, these two, okay, okay. So mainly that's what I wanted to know was Dr A the one with the affair. Okay.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 1:So or alleged affair.
Speaker 2:Let's move on from that part, okay. So some nurse suggests let's call Dr A. Okay, and Dr A is the consulting doctor, right? So obviously they need more help. He shows up and he starts to assist. And his assistance is helpful for what it's worth, because let me get to the point, because I put a bunch of my thoughts about that. So once Dr A arrived, he decided to intubate baby P so that he could be put on a ventilator to help him breathe. So it seems like the consultant doctors do more stuff than the registrar doctors, like maybe, like you said, they're more specialized. Like they intubate the babies, they do more, yeah.
Speaker 1:You know what Well you're doing that. I'll look it up. Let's see if there's any info on the interwebs.
Speaker 2:So he could be put on a ventilator to help him breathe. So it seems like having his second set of eyes and expertise did lead to more assistance provided to baby P. But unfortunately it didn't do anything because baby P didn't respond to the ventilator. So around 955 am a CPR was started on him and he was given his first shot of adrenaline to kickstart his heart, quickly followed by several more doses. Liverpool Women's Hospital was also called and a request was put out for them to get ready to take baby P. So baby P did start to recover for a time but around 1130, he suffered another desaturation. A nursing note written by Lucy, let me noted that baby P circulation was poor, his coloration was modeled and his tummy appeared full. Cpr was started again and another dose of adrenaline was given. After six minutes of resuscitation his circulation returned and he was stabilized. He was put on a drip of adrenaline to try and improve his blood pressure. He seemed to recover somewhat and fight the ventilator. So they gave him some medication to sedate him.
Speaker 2:A doctor testifying for the defense reported that her and her colleagues breathe a sigh of relief because baby P was in the best condition that he had been all day and there was a team on the way to transfer him to Liverpool Women's Hospital. However, dr B that's the other another doctor, not the registrar's doctor. I think Dr B is another consulting doctor who at some point arrived on the scene. He remembers being shocked to hear Lucy Letby voice the opinion that baby P would not be leaving the Countess of Chester Hospital alive. Quote staff nurse Letby said he's not leaving here alive, is he? Which I found absolutely shocking. At the time I turned around and said don't say that. All these years on, seven years on, that memory is very much alive in my mind. We see these babies who are very, very sick and are very, very unwell, even when we know that their chances of survival are very poor. Personally, for me, that's not something I would ever let myself think. It's that hope that makes you keep trying. End quote.
Speaker 2:Because baby P had stabilized, dr A and Dr B went to the break room to grab a cup of tea, but before the kettle had even boiled they were called back again because baby P crashed again. When they were returned, lucy Letby was in the room with baby P and Dr B reported that she did not recall whether anyone else was in the nursery. She said that it appeared that baby P's breathing tube was dislodged but that he should have been paralyzed by the previous sedative medication. Dr A reintubated baby P and CPR was started for a third time. This time baby P had to be given five doses in adrenaline in 16, sorry minutes. And that was in addition to the adrenaline drip that he was constantly receiving, which was also doubled. And I have no idea about these things, but I was like God damn, that's a lot of adrenaline, yeah. And the blood pressure medication was also increased. After 22 minutes baby peas stabilized again.
Speaker 2:At around 1250 pm Dr A testified to the court that they could not identify a cause for baby peas continual crashes and that the medical team was only managing the symptoms as they arose. At this time a small puncture was found in baby peas right lung and a needle was inserted to try and remove some of the air that was causing his lung to collapse. At 3 pm Dr A inserted a chest drain to try and resolve the issues caused by the puncture. I have questions about the puncture. Where did it come from? Could have caused any of these issues? And where did it come from? And shortly after the Liverpool transfer team arrived, but before he could be transferred, baby pea collapsed again at 3.14 pm and required CPR for the fourth time. During this resuscitation attempt he was given seven more doses of adrenaline over the course of 39 minutes, including a high dose injection at 3.35 pm, but this time he did not respond to any of the resuscitation efforts and died around 4 pm.
Speaker 2:Baby peas parents were on the unit while all of this was happening. They had been there basically since baby O had passed away. Baby peas mother described the situation like deja vu and as chaotic. She recalled that the same doctors who had helped with baby O one day before and Lucy Letby were there again. She recalled waving outside the hall for long stretches of time while the medical staff worked on her baby. She recalled seeing a younger female doctor at a computer googling what she perceived to be a simple procedure of how to insert a line into the patient's chest. They needed to perform this procedure on baby pea because his lungs were collapsing and were just learning how to do it as they went. That would make me lose my fucking mind.
Speaker 2:Baby peas mother recall feeling alarmed by this. I bet I don't know how it would feel if I saw doctors googling how to do a procedure on my dying baby. She recalled that the doctor reading instructions to the other doctor performing the procedure. She remembered him telling her that they would transfer baby pea to Liverpool women's hospital and how he kept collapsing despite repeated attempts to resuscitate him. She recalled that when the consultant from the other hospital arrived he completely took over baby peas care and all the other doctors deferred to him. She said she felt reassured by his arrival because he seemed calm and confident while the counties of Chester hospital staff seemed panicked. Eventually, she recalls, he ordered the resuscitation to end. They brought baby pea to his mother and were very apologetic. Baby peas parents begged the consultant doctor to take their remaining son away with him to Liverpool women's hospital and he agreed.
Speaker 2:Baby peas mother recalled that Lucy Leppie was extremely upset and emotional over baby peas death and she brought baby O and baby pea down to them in a moses basket before they left for Liverpool and dressed them and took pictures of them for their parents. Baby peas mother recalled quote, recall she was in quote floods of tears. Baby peas father remembered the unit being in pandemonium. He remembered saying, quote there is no way he, their surviving son, is staying at this hospital if we have to take him ourselves. End quote. But they agreed to take him over Baby peas.
Speaker 2:Father recalls fairly certainly that it was Lucy Leppie who brought baby O and pea down so their parents could see them one last time. He recalls she said how sorry she was and that she was tearful and upset. He recalls she went out of her way to find them an SD card so they would have enough pictures of their babies. But Dr B recalled Lucy Leppie acting inappropriately, animated and even seeming excited when she asked the parents if they wanted her to make a memory box for baby pea. I just the only thing that I put was that I thought it was odd that baby the triplets parents recollection of Lucy Leppie's behavior seeming contradiction to Dr B's recollection behavior.
Speaker 2:And then here we have a quick timeline of the hospital investigations. So in June 2015, dr Breary conducted informal review of child D's death. Dr Breary told the court. A meeting followed with director nursing Allison Kelly in late June or early July 2015. And he said I think my comment at the time during this meeting was it can't be Lucy, not nice Lucy. End quote In February of 2016, near a zero review of the collapses by a neonatologist from Liverpool women's hospital, taken from Chester's standard. Oh sorry, that's just the source. I didn't need to say that, I was just reading Dr. Dr Breary said he sent a report of these findings to the director of nursing in the hospital's medical director. As he asked for another meeting, on the 23rd of June 2016, baby L passed away and on the 24th of June 2016, baby P passed away.
Speaker 2:Dr Stephen Breary contacted Karen Reese, the senior management, I believe, for the nursing staff, but I doesn't say sorry, so quote. So following the staff debrief, I found the duty executive on call, karen Reese, senior nurse in the urgent care division. She was familiar with our concerns already. I explained what happened and that I didn't want, nurse, let me to come back to work the following day or until this was all investigated properly. Karen Reese said no to that and there is no evidence. I put it to her and she was happy to take responsibility for this decision. In view of the fact that myself and my consultant colleagues all wouldn't be happy with nurse, let be going to work the following day. She was responding that she was happy to take the responsibility. We had further conversations with the executives the following week and action was taken and quote that was Dr Stephen Breary's testimony on June 25, 2016, baby Q collapsed. We didn't cover baby Q because there wasn't any charges in association with that baby.
Speaker 2:27th of June 2016. Let me message a doctor colleague at 541 PM. Allegedly Dr A Arian Lloyd Pal, neo-nail unit manager, has just phoned telling me not to come in tonight and to do days instead. I asked if there is a problem and she said no, just trying to protect me a bit and we can have a chat about tomorrow, but now I'm worried. Let me also message a nursing colleague at the same time. He just phoned telling me to do days this week and not going tonight as trying to protect me, but I worried, I'm in trouble or something. The nurse colleague replied don't worry, how can you be in trouble if you haven't done anything wrong, just very unfortunate. Let me, I know, but worried in case they think I missed something or whatever, why leave it till now to ring?
Speaker 2:The nursing colleague replied it is very late. I agree, maybe she's getting pressure from elsewhere. Let me. She said it's busy, so more support for me on days and I can look at paper, paper work bits etc. She was nice enough.
Speaker 2:I just worry this job messes with your head. Let me later message the doctor. I can't do this job if it's going to be like this. My head is a mess. Why is she ringing at this time? There must be a problem. The doctor replied Lucy, you did nothing wrong at all. It is an odd time to ring, but you've had a rough few days and a good manager would realize that. After the doctor message with further reassurance, let me respond in. I can't talk about this now, sorry, I just need a bit of time. Sorry, that was rude. Felt completely overwhelmed and panicked for a minute. We all worked tirelessly and did everything possible. I don't see how anyone can question that. He has always been very supportive. I am having a meltdown, plus, plus, but I think that's what I need to do 28 through the 30th June 2016. Let me work long day shifts from June 28 through the 30th.
Speaker 2:At the neonatal unit her last days there, 29th of June 2016, a daydix form is filed in which child oh, suddenly and unexpectedly collapsed. Not clear who filled out the form. A meeting of consultants was held. Dr J Ram reported quote after a number of further unusual, unexplained and unexplicable events in the neonatal unit. The whole consultant body sat down and said we really need to work out what is going on here. He said that no one that came up in our discussion. One thing that came up in our discussion was air embolism, when gas bubbles enter a vein or artery and could block blood supply. Dr J Ram said it prompted him that evening to conduct a literature search in which he found the research paper which described the effects of air embolism. I'm pausing because elsewhere I've read that it was the consultant doctor, doctor, what's?
Speaker 2:his name Debbie Ewan's, who came up with the air embolism theory, and so now I'm wondering which one is correct. Was it Dr J Ram or Dr Ewan's? Ewan's? Is that anyway, he said I remember sitting on my sofa at home with the iPad and reading that description and the physical chill that went down my spine because it fitted with what we were seeing. Dr J Ram emailed colleagues a leak to the research paper the next day, and that's the research paper he's talking about, the one that talks about the rash being assigned or a possible symptom of air embolism On June 30th 2016. Let be files of data reform on June 30th, in which it was recorded that equipment required for a procedure during resuscitation was not available on the unit. On the 6th of July 2016. The unnamed doctor message Lucy, let me say quote you need to keep this to yourself.
Speaker 2:The meeting this afternoon looked at everything with baby O and baby P from birth onwards. We reviewed everything room, meds, medical reviews and actions. We looked at all documentation med and nur. If you've any doubt about how good you are at your job, stop now. The documentation was perfect. Everybody commented about the appropriateness of your request for a review of baby O. Fault link, vomit. Name of baby O redacted. Your documentation of the resuscitation intubation drugs was faultless.
Speaker 2:There is absolutely nothing for you to worry about. Please don't. There are going to be some recommendations based on staffing slash kit. There is no criticism of either resuscitation. This is staying quiet until it has been to execs. We are looking at third triplet care on Thursday. He had nothing but good things to say about you. Let me reply. Okay, I really appreciate you telling me it won't go any further. I was one member of a huge team effort, but you know, I've been carrying the worry of the what if it wasn't enough. It's reassuring to hear that it doesn't appear that anything could have been done differently or that I didn't act on or do something I should have. Thank you. Let me send an email made by Countess Dr Stephen Breary advising that the deaths of child O and child P were likely the result in an inquest, as the cause of both deaths was unexplained. Let me ask it is a bit of a worry if it's going that far. Do you think I'll be involved? Let me be reassured, probably not. The doctor added. I know you won't say anything. This email has to stay between us, is that okay?
Speaker 2:On the 15th of July 2016, neonatal manager Arian Lloyd Powell messages nursing staff, advising them in preparation for an external review. All members of staff need to undertake a period of clinical supervision acknowledging there are staffing issues. Lucy Lippey is recorded as agreeing to undergo the supervision commencing from July 18th. The email adds I appreciate that this process may be an added stress factor in an already emotive environment, but we need to ensure that we can assure a safe environment in addition to safeguarding not only our babies but our staff. This is not meant to blame or competence, and not meant to be a blame or competency issue, but a way forward to ensure that our practice is safe. The same day, lippey messages her nursing colleague I've done timelines of this year. The colleague responds fab, and now quite a few babies weren't compatible with life anyway. I wonder if midwives get this with the amount of stillbirths. Lippey, yans. Some went off within hours, slash on handover or were already uncutely unwell when I took over and put that when baby Q went off, no other staff able to care for him, etc. Name of baby Q redacted. The colleague responds not like all, behaving fantastically till right into shift, lippey, hoping to get together as much info as possible. If they have nothing or minimal on me, they'll look silly not me.
Speaker 2:19th of July 2016. Lippey began to work on the patient experience team. On the 8th of August 2016, lippey messages her nursing colleague quote Tony Phoned he's going to speak to Karen and insist on the review being no later than the first week of September, but said he definitely wouldn't advise pushing it back to the unit until it's in place. I should keep head down and write out and can take take further once over. Feel like I'm being shoved into a corner and forgotten about by the trust. It's my life and career. He's not been given any information about the evidence he asked for, which is good. He's not sure what the external people are going to look at in relation to me, but we are in the process now, so we have to write it out. The colleague responds okay, we'll just have to take his advice then.
Speaker 2:I suppose Lippey still can't believe this has happened. It's making me feel like I should hide away by saying not speak to anyone and going on for months. I haven't done anything wrong. The colleague responds me neither. I know. It's so ridiculous, lippey, I can't see where it will all end. The colleague responds I am sure this time, after Xmas, it will all be a distant memory. After Lippey received an email announcing she had been second to the risk and patient safety office for three months, she messaged the nursing colleague saying bloody hell fuming. I'm an email and makes it sound like my choice. On September 1st, the timeline records Lippey met with a review panel. On September 7th 2016, lucy Lippey registered a grievance procedure.
Speaker 2:Lucy Lippey was arrested on three occasions. The first was at 6 am on July 3rd 2018 at Lucy Lippey's home address. Then she was re-arrested at her parents home on June 10th 2019 and again on November 11th 2020. A greed on facts or evidence has been agreed on by both the defense and the prosecution. Cheshire police officer DC Collin Johnson was called to give evidence as exhibits officer in the Lucy Lippey investigation. He was confirmed that his role and duties were as an exhibits officer in the process of gathering exhibits. The prosecution asked about the home searches on July 2018 and a considerable number of exhibits being recovered. The crime scene investigators took photos and recorded what they saw. A chronology of this part of the investigation took place firstly with Lippey's home search in Chester. It says like the road, but I don't think that is relevant. The search ended on July 6th. A diagram of Lippey's home was displayed to the court. Photos of Lippey's home interior are shown to the court.
Speaker 2:In her bedroom, the prosecutor points out our two handbags near a standalone mirror. Inside the handbag, three handwritten notes were recovered. The three handwritten notes were shown to the court. One was a blue post in a handwriting featuring the Lippey's thoughts. The other two featured the name of a doctor several times, one saying name of doctor I loved you, and name of doctor my best friend. Other messages on the notes, which have been densely packed and messages among swirls of writing read I can't do this anymore. Help me. We tried our best and it wasn't enough. I want someone to help me, but they can't. One message in thicker handwriting, overlaid on the yellow note, has the message help in all caps. Another photo of Lucy Lippey's bedroom was shown with a wall slogan leave sparkles wherever you go. The message was repeated on a small tabletop decoration.
Speaker 2:A page from Lippey's 2016 diary. It was shown to the court with a note on April 8th LD Long Day Twins. The following is LD Twins Recess, and it is followed in a different color pen by Salsa Buckley. A page of June 20th through 26th from Lippey's diary has for June 23rd, long Day Name of Child O's initial. June 24th, long Day Name of Child P's initial, a plus E. June 25th, long Day Name of Child Q's initial. The diary also shows June 25th, salsa, mold, and for June 26th, los Iguanas, 1800.
Speaker 2:The post in note found inside the diary is one which was shown in the first week of the trial. It has the message I am evil, I did this. At its end, hang on. I have a picture somewhere where I have all of the things that says on that note. Let me find where I saved those so I can read that. This is everything that it says on the confession. Quote unquote note Not good enough.
Speaker 2:There are no words. I can't breathe, I can't focus. Overwhelming fear, I panic. I haven't done anything wrong. Police investigation, slander, discrimination, victimization all getting too much taking over my life. I feel very alone, plus scared. What does the future hold? How can I get through it? How will things ever be like they used? They won't. I don't deserve to live. I kill them on purpose because I am not good enough to care for them. Plus, I am a horrible, evil person. World is better without me. I am evil.
Speaker 2:I did this. I am an awful person. I pay every day for that night. Now I'll never have children or Mary, I will never know what is like to have a family. Hate myself so much for what this has. Blank question mark. I don't deserve. Mom plus, dad plus I think those were the name of her stepbrothers no hope, desperate, panic, fear, lost. Why me hate? I did this?
Speaker 2:Another densely packed, handwritten notice showed in the court in let me use handwriting. The broken sentences feature medical terms in the words debriefing sterility, foreign objects, workforce, hemorrhage, nonavailability, cellulite, aggravating factors, confidentiality I don't know if I want to do this. Inadequate diagnosis implicating administration. Several of the words are written multiple times. The first names of county staff are also written. Occasionally. A section which is scribbled and crossed out reads I don't know if I killed them. Maybe I did, maybe this is all down to me. A photo of an abita but emblazoned bag for life is shown to the court, recovered from let me's room. The contents of the bag feature a number of documents on Lucy, let me's NHS name bag name badge. Registered children's nurse neonatal unit nursing.
Speaker 2:Handover sheets for June 23rd and June 24th 2016 are shown to the court. The names of babies are not in the indictment have been blacked out for the court. They do include the names of child oh and child P. Handwritten documents of medical information on observations for babies, including for child oh and child P, are shown to the court. A nursing handover sheet for June 25th is also shown with child Q named. On the back of the sheet are handwritten notes and observations for child Q and for another baby, a handover sheet for June 28th, 2016, is shown which the court hears is outside the indictment period. So no names of babies are shown to the court on this document. The court hears there is handwriting on the rear of this note which mentions child oh and again this document features medical observations and notes. A more since back for life was recovered from leppy's home which included a blood gas printout and paper towel with handwritten resuscitation notes for child L. Also in the more since back were a number of nursing hand handover neonatal unit notes, 31 in total. Most of the notes referred to babies which did not feature in the indictment and included 17 of the notes. There are multiple references to 13 of the 17 babies in the indictment period.
Speaker 2:The court was shown photos of other rooms in leppy's home. In one room which has a cartoon, painted tree and wood and walls. On the wall there is a black paper shredder in the corner. Shredder paper was identified. Police investigators identified the documents as bank statements. A floor plan of leppy's parents home was shown to the court. A photo of lucy leppy's bedroom at the harriff heard address was shown for the to the court. A photo was shown inside lucy levy's wardrobe and mr asbury asked about the a, c, a five sheet strip cut paper shredder. There's no sharder in the box but inside were five nursing handover sheets. None of them related to the indictment. Handwriting on the box says keep leppy's work. Address was also searched.
Speaker 2:Between 1015 and 1150 am on july 3rd 2018, a blue folder of papers was recovered from the desk containing various items of paperwork. One sheet, an annual leave request, has a lot of handwriting by leppy and both sides of the paper this includes hearts, tigger plus smudge the names of her cats. I believe I loved you, but it wasn't enough. Please help me. Name of doctor. Love. Please help me. Name of doctor. You were my best friend. Name of doctor. I just want to be as it was. I want to be happy in the job I loved. Really don't belong anywhere. I am a problem to those who know me. It would be just much easier for everyone if I just went away.
Speaker 2:The names of a few counted staff are named repeatedly, as are the words malnutrition and assessment. A photo of let be's westburn road home garage is shown. Inside the garage is a black bin liner trash bag and inside was a further note seized by the police. The note contains densely packed handwriting. The notes include appropriate workforce consultant countess of Chester hospital equality and diversity.
Speaker 2:No one will ever know what happened and why. I am a failure. I can't recover from this. Keep this between ourselves. I don't think I can ever go back. Too much has happened. Slash changed insulin, diabetes killing me softly.
Speaker 2:Lyrics feature at least twice the words management and ombudsman. Ombudsman features about a dozen times on the sheet of paper. Cheshire place names also feature. Benjamin Myers, casey for Lucy levy's defense says a total of 500 or sorry, 257 handover sheets were recovered in the police search. Of those, 21 related to babies in the indictment for them were found in the abeath a bag and 17 were found in the Morrison's bag. Dc Johnson agrees. Mr Myers says that means 236 handover sheets were not in relation to the indictment DC Colin Johnson confirms, for the babies in relation to the indictment do not feature in any of the handover notes recovered at levy's address.
Speaker 2:Levy was interviewed in police custody in Blake and Chester over a series of 13 interviews on July 3rd through 5th of 2018 and further interviews a total of 14 were held from June 10th through the 12th of 2019. A further three interviews were held in November 10th through the 11th 2020. The interview were interviews were fully recorded, with levy having a legal representation throughout the interview. Transcripts from the three times Lucy levy was arrested will be read out to the court. I'm not going to read them out, so the case is occurred between June 2015 June 2016.
Speaker 2:The police investigation began in the spring of 2017. Lucy levy was arrested in July 2018. Second arrest in June 2019. In November 2020 she was arrested and charged. The trial took place between October 22 and August 2023. According to the police, during the investigation, cheshire detectives gathered 32,000 pages of evidence and ran through medical records thousands of pages long. The force estimated estimates and interviewed around 2000 people, including staff who worked with Lucy levy in around 250 people who are identified as witnesses for the prosecution.
Speaker 2:When Lucy levy was brought to court, the police in prosecution had five years to conduct their investigation and prepare their case for trial, along with the required resources and funding for an extensive operation. It has now been reported the police are investigating another 4000 babies basically like every fucking baby that Lucy levy ever came in contact with right to look for other possible attacks. So available resources continue to be high. Lucy levy was charged in November 2020 with eight counts of murder and 10 counts of attempted murder. Lucy levy was sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life order. Lucy levy pleaded not guilty at her trial and told a subsequent nursing and midwifery council disciplinary panel that she is innocent. An application to appeal her conviction was renewed on February 2024, unrelated to any appeal. She faced a retrial in June 2024 on one charge of. The jury were unable to reach a verdict in the original trial wait, hold on, can you go back?
Speaker 1:what it so? The panel with the nurses and the midwifery.
Speaker 2:They declared she was innocent no, no, she told them she was innocent, told them that was a panel of basically to take away her nursing license oh yeah, I just I didn't hear that she said she was innocent.
Speaker 2:I heard that they said she's no, it's basically just saying that she maintained her innocence. Gotcha, yeah, unrelated to any appeal, she faces a retrial, already said that part. I think it's baby K, but I'm not. I think it's baby K that she's gonna be retried.
Speaker 2:For nurse Lucy levy, who was charged with murder and attempted murder of 17 babies. She pleaded not guilty to all the charges. She was charged had 22 charges brought against her in total 17 murder, 15 attempted murder. She pleaded not guilty to all of the charges. A summary of the verdict she was found guilty of murder seven times. In the case of child a, with a majority jury verdict 10 to 1. Child C 10 to 1. Child E 10 to 1. Child I 10 to 1. Child O unanimous. Child P 10 to 1. She was found guilty of attempted murder at time. 6. Child B 10 to 1. Child F unanimous. Child G 10 to 1. Plus two charges plus one charge not guilty. Child L unanimous. Child M majority 10 to 1. Child N 10 to 1. Plus two charges with no verdict. No verdict times for child H plus one charge not guilty. Child J child K. Child Q not guilty of attempted murder. Child G child H okay, so yeah, that's the meat of this, the matter that is a lot.
Speaker 1:Okay, wait, I looked at two things, so yeah, um, so we'll probably talk about the fact that she should appeal, and she is. She did one with one judge. The judge denied it. Now she's gonna go up against three. That's her last appeal. If they say no, she won't get it. But what was the thing I saw? Yes, so that will be heard in April. And as for the doctors, so the registrar is a junior doctor, consultants are senior doctors that makes sense.
Speaker 2:Why then the the consultant doctor is the one. So and that would also make sense why they would call doctor a. Yeah, if the registrar is the only one working on the baby right, need the more senior doctor right who? Can do this stuff. Yeah, so that makes sense. Yeah, so then why is the registrar? Why do they call like the I don't want to say inferior doctor, but why if there's a baby emergency, you would think it's doctor, baby emergency, like well, it would depend on the emergency.
Speaker 1:You know like they're probably there to assess it.
Speaker 2:If they can't take care of it, then call the consultant doctor yeah, I guess it just seemed like like a little tiny premature baby should always have the most. Like the best doctor, you would think. But you know apparently not.
Speaker 1:I wonder why the wonder said not guilty for some of those babies, and what were? What was the evidence that convinced that one to make it unanimous in the other ones with the with the yeah, yeah yeah, I would love to know that information as well, yeah, and, yeah, one juror.
Speaker 2:So there were 12 jurors. One of them had to.
Speaker 1:There was only 11 there was.
Speaker 2:There was 12, but then one of them had to step out. Oh, got you before, got you where. It was dismissed for like personal reasons or something. There's a kind of personal reasons that they had to be dismissed before the verdict so then there was 11.
Speaker 2:Yeah there, and then there was 11 and the judge made a special special. The ruling that the that the jury did not have to be unanimous, right, it did have to have like at least 10, yeah. So, yeah, I wonder I wonder if the judge knew that there was a juror that was going to cause trouble in in some of those verdicts and that's why he made that decision, because I thought that was interesting and interesting decision to make well, it's not unheard of.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and we just that before I think like maybe yeah, podcast, but like we discussed that before, like just yeah, chatting yeah, but I think it's interesting that he made that decision and that happened.
Speaker 1:You know it didn't happen for all of them, though no, but for a lot of them it did. I don't know, maybe I don't know you'd have.
Speaker 2:I don't know, maybe they had like a suspicion that it would happen and they might, or they just simply that's how things go.
Speaker 1:I mean, I think it's Louisiana, you only.
Speaker 2:You don't have to have a unanimous verdict you just have to have the what 11 out of the 12 or whatever it is so yeah, and they definitely have like more of like a, like a European based like system because of the French influence yeah, you've been Louisiana. Yes, yes, I mean Louisiana, yeah, but yeah, that was something that wasn't the Lucy let me trial or it was. It wasn't something that that I read or talked about. There are so many sources that I read that I didn't actually include in the thing, right, because I was like that's interesting. But I'm not gonna put this in because right it's you know yeah superfluous.
Speaker 2:Yeah, exactly, but uh, yeah. So I have some stuff to talk about. The stuff I want to talk about, I wrote a little thing. I don't know if it sounds good or not. No, I think it sounds stupid, but whatever.
Speaker 2:Yeah, why I didn't find some of this Ellen evidence, I can't talk why I didn't find some of this evidence as compelling as I had hoped and, like I had said probably like a million times when I had gone into this, I had no doubt about her guilt. You know lots of little things that I was like oof, I don't like that right. So, aside from the fact that it's all based on circumstantial evidence and there are cases based solely on circumstantial evidence there are ones that I find convincing and wholly compelling. But this is not one of them, and I there was a lot of times where I felt literally physically sick going over this information because some of it feels unconvincing. And I wanted to be convincing, because I want to feel like, you know, we've got the bad guy and everything is fixed. I mean, obviously it's not fixed right, because these babies are dead still right, but there's justice has been had exactly exactly, um, but some things were not strong enough, like some of the medical stuff exactly.
Speaker 1:And the defense? I don't think.
Speaker 2:I think we've said that before the defense was with sub par with sub par.
Speaker 1:I mean, yeah, because there's so many things like you just did basic google searches and you found, and I other things, that those medical issues could have been exactly and I found things that could.
Speaker 2:I found studies that could contradict what, what was said, the claims that were made, as, as expert medical experts, you know what I'm saying. Yeah, and it bothered me that why didn't the defense call any medical experts? Because I'm like here in the US, even if it's obvious that, like somebody is fucking guilty, yeah, they still have medical experts that will refute even really obvious stuff. Yeah, and I'm like this stuff is not that obvious and like you couldn't find medical experts that are gonna be like, hey, actually this liver bruise could be caused by vigorous resuscitation, which was the initial finding of the coroner yeah, I wonder what their rules are about experts.
Speaker 1:That's a good question, cuz I, cuz I think they actually go by state by state here too. Right, I'm not 100% on that, don't quote me. Yeah, I know it's in. I know they're like there's stuff in the state statutes here in New Mexico. Yeah, I wonder if that would be. I should look that up yeah, anyway.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it would be interesting to see, because I'm like, I'm like some of this stuff it is refutable and it's like why didn't you do that or why couldn't you refute it? Yeah, when I can find evidence to refute it Right with a Google search.
Speaker 1:Exactly, yeah, and yeah, yeah. I have a question, because, back to that infantilism thing, yeah, did that doctor, was he part of the trial or was that just on the documentary?
Speaker 2:He was part of the trial. He's a douchebag, yes, and that was a thing that they talk about. When he went in to testify, she got really upset and she started crying and tried to get up and leave the court and had to have basically every lawyer, including the prosecution, try and talk to her and calm her down so that she would sit down, even though he was behind a screen. But obviously she knew it was him Because he had told her he supported her the whole time and then he testified against her.
Speaker 2:Yeah, he's a fucking douche. That's why I was like why did she protect him? Why did she not admit that she was having an affair?
Speaker 1:Wait, I think we're talking about two different doctors. Dr A, I'm talking about the psychiatrist. Oh, the infantilism thing. Oh, I thought you were talking about Dr A. No, although he also appears to be a douchebag.
Speaker 2:Because Dr A was one of. That was one of her affair, or alleged affair, or infatuation with Dr A is one of the main things that they were using as the reasoning rationale behind the infantilism.
Speaker 1:But was the psychiatrist part of the trial or was that just in that documentary and I think that they did have the psychiatrist testify.
Speaker 2:I think I saw a little bit about that, but I kind of skimmed over it because I was like this is stupid.
Speaker 1:Yeah, Well, because I just wanted to know, because the infantilism thing I saw in the documentary.
Speaker 2:So I'm just no, that was something that I believe that they tried to argue.
Speaker 1:In court.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that's also fucking stupid. That was one of the things why they wanted to bring attention to the fact that one of the nurses requested Dr A to come and they were trying to say that maybe it was Lucy Leppie, even though the registrar Dr D actually.
Speaker 1:I think we're talking about two different things. To get, you're still on Dr A.
Speaker 2:I'm talking about this, no, but Dr A was part of the infantilism.
Speaker 1:Oh, I see Okay.
Speaker 2:So her relationship with Dr A was a big part of the infantilism argument. Yes, because they were trying to say that part of her motivation for killing the babies was to get Dr A to repeatedly come back to the neonatal unit.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah totally an old dude said that.
Speaker 2:Yes, he was an old dude, yeah.
Speaker 1:Any old dudes that may be out there. I hate to break it to you, but you are not that important to us, no matter how much we care about you.
Speaker 2:And she had lots of his attention. He was texting her.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:They went on a vacation together. He was texting her at 1 am. They had lunch together. He gave her a right come on. Yeah, and have you seen that in the motivation of any other female serial killer, that she was like I did this for you, boy, so that you could come look at this dead baby I made for you, or a dead person? Have you seen that?
Speaker 1:Because I don't know Well, in serial killers. I don't know, but there are certainly. That is a motivation for some female killers, but it's also a motivation for male killers, for serial killers. I just said I don't know about serial killers.
Speaker 2:Yeah, this is what because I'm thinking about. Like they lure men in and kill them. Sometimes we've heard about female serial killers killing things that stand in their way between them and a man.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I don't know, but still.
Speaker 2:And also there were so many times that her alleged victims where Dr A wasn't there at all, right, so then, what's her motivation then?
Speaker 1:Yeah, Although they don't really have to prove motive. I don't think.
Speaker 2:No well, I'm not saying that, that's their argument.
Speaker 1:I know.
Speaker 2:I know, I know. So it's an inconsistent argument.
Speaker 1:Yes, which is?
Speaker 2:annoying, but Even if it was Lucy Leppie who asked for Dr A to come, it wouldn't have been a weird request because Dr A was the more experienced doctor that they needed to come for the baby emergency.
Speaker 1:I wonder how many doctors, consultant doctors, were on staff at that point. I think At those days you know what I mean. Yeah, so like, how many? Right, so like. Could she have asked for Dr A?
Speaker 2:or whatever. Yeah, I think Dr B was a consultant doctor too.
Speaker 1:Okay, well, I was just making something up. I just meant like an additional. Yeah, good question.
Speaker 2:I think that her and Dr B did not have a good relationship.
Speaker 1:Well, that would be another reason she called Dr A.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah, so that infantilism, in case you're wondering because we were talking about it, they said partly her that thing with Dr A, but also the way her bedroom was set up.
Speaker 2:With the fairy lights and the fairy lights and the teddy bear and whatever that that makes her infantile.
Speaker 1:But Rachel and I both rolled our eyes at that because we're millennials, we're both elder millennials. Those are our bedrooms. Yep, rachel is married with two kids and she still has a stuffed toy. I do Right, yeah, toy.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:And I had twinkle lights in my room when I was married. I don't have them anymore, but that's not because I don't want them, I just don't have them, right? I?
Speaker 2:mean I have, I have funko pop toys, yeah.
Speaker 1:I've got, I still have. I'm looking right now at my teddy bear from when I got, when I was 10 years old Pizza bear. Yeah, it's right up there and you know, I've got a little dragon, that's there, I've got. You know, like it's? It's a millennials bedroom, a millennial woman's bedroom. Maybe we're all infantile because we've had a shit adulthood and we long for our childhood, but that doesn't make us infantile. It's just it's the aesthetic that we in our generation go for.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I think, if there isn't infantilism, it's a generational.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's what I was saying, yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, exactly yeah.
Speaker 1:So anyway, the I mean maybe there were more reasons that psychiatrist said that, but that's the thing that he said in his, in the documentary.
Speaker 2:I mean that sparkles wherever you go sign make me roll my eyes, but I don't think that's a sign of a serial killer. Every.
Speaker 1:I mean, that's the thing you buy in the store.
Speaker 2:It's like a generic white woman.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, it is, it is. It's those affirmations that we all, for some reason, decide to dabble in or enjoy or whatever. Um, yeah, I don't know that guy. I mean, he, just he, he just came off in that documentary as the type of man that all women are completely irritated by at this point in time. Yeah, you know, the kind of guy who thinks that women are silly, that women are incompetent, that women are just so crazy over that D and it's, you know, and we're not.
Speaker 1:I hate to break it to you but we like it a hell of a lot less than you all like yours.
Speaker 2:Two different stories too, because it's like, oh, she's so infantile, she's so silly, such a silly, stupid woman, but she's also a calculating, vicious, cold blooded, genius, serial killer who slipped by all of these murders unnoticed, under the nose of all of her colleagues. Yeah, and it's like that's two different people you're describing.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, and what was the other thing we've been talking about?
Speaker 2:So I have some. I do have some points to go over. So the Countess of Chester Hospital had been seeking an explanation for why they had so many infant mortalities that year, which, according to the Daily Mail, was 15 infant deaths between June for 2015 and June 2016. I believe their average amount is like three, so is a lot. That is a huge increase. Yeah, lucy Letby was charged with eight counts of murder and one of them was thrown out by the judge because there wasn't enough evidence and convicted of the murder of seven babies. So that that's still another eight babies that she wasn't convicted of and seven of them she wasn't even charged with. So to me, that creates a couple of biggie problems, and the first one is the problem of how many dead babies the Countess of Chester Hospital had in the timeframe, because they were struggling to find answer for their ridiculously high infant mortality rate, as they should have been, and the answer that they found was that they had a serial killer, lucy Letby, on staff.
Speaker 1:But if Lucy Letby killed eight of those babies, there's still an account on account of that, exactly, and there's seven, eight babies, although I wonder if she's suspected of them and they just didn't have any evidence, so they didn't attempt to charge her with it, perhaps some of these are so loose and they didn't. I mean, I don't think they really had evidence for any of them.
Speaker 2:What I would want to see as part of what I'm going for is part of their big evidence, or part of their big thing, was their statistical analysis of how she had been on shift for all of these babies collapses. I want to see was she on shift for any of these other babies too? And if not, like how do you explain that? So, even so, if she didn't have anything to do with those, then they have. Not only do they have a serial killer on their staff, but they have some other big problem or problems with dead babies, excluding that, and that's a big statistical and probability.
Speaker 2:Not that it's impossible, right, and it could also go hand in hand. So that's the thing too, it could go hand in hand. They're so incompetent that they don't even fucking notice that they have a serial killer, because they're so incompetent.
Speaker 1:So yeah, didn't the hospital have some issues like they were highly understaffed, lots?
Speaker 2:of issues and all of that stuff. So that's a thing. So in May of 2017, the Daily Mail UK reported that the police were investigating the deaths of 15 infants of the County of Chester hospitals neonatal unit, as well as six other non fatal collapses of babies who required life saving treatment. The article notes that just two babies had died in the hospital in 2013 and three in 2014, but that number had jumped to eight by 2015. The article also notes how the increase in deaths caused the hospital to downgrade its NICU unit to no longer accept patients born before 32 weeks of age, and it closed its most intensive care units in nurseries in July. Around the same time, lucy Levy was removed from the ward. So that's another thing I wanted to point out. A lot of documentaries about Lucy Levy talk about how she was removed from the ward and how magically the number of baby deaths dropped, but they also, at the same time, downgraded their unit to not accept the most premature babies and non ex, and they're they close their nurseries one and two.
Speaker 2:So they don't stop accepting the most sick and the most premature babies at the same time. So not saying that that isn't a cause, but it's also a factor in the reduction of baby young.
Speaker 2:A mother of one of the deceased infant patients reported for the article that her premature infant son had died in the hospital after they made quote a catalog of blunders and quote including not assessing the results of her son's tests and x-rays for hours due to being short staffed. The child's, the child's mother I just forgot to write mother the child's mother reported there was not a single doctor on duty for both the the there. Oh, there was only, sorry, a single doctor on duty for both of the neonatal unit and the regular children's unit, and that doctor was floating between the two pediatric units.
Speaker 2:That's ridiculous. The baby's mother reported the fact that her son's condition worsened on a Saturday night in Sunday morning when there was less senior staff on duty in the nearest specialist hospital or the nearest specialist doctor was 40 miles away at Alderhay hospital was a factor in quote.
Speaker 1:What?
Speaker 2:so I wonder if she thinks Lucy Letby did it then, because it sounds like she's well at this point, lucy Letby's name wasn't out there to the public and it sounds like she's.
Speaker 1:Oh, in the article there's no Lucy Letby. It's not about her.
Speaker 2:No, the police are investigating, but Lucy Letby isn't a public name, okay, but she seems to think none of these parents suspected that Lucy Letby was a problem until the police came knocking, knocking, knocking on their door and say hey, I'm sorry that you just got over the death of your baby, but, by the way, they may have been killed by a serial killer, nurse, right. So, yeah, that's another thing that I have a lot of feelings about. Obviously, justice has to be served if that's the case. If they were wrong, though, that's a devastating thing to put parents through, yeah, again after they lost their baby, right, but anyway, yeah. So at this point, lucy Letby's name has not been made public, okay, okay.
Speaker 2:So the inquiries follow a damning report this year from the Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, rac-pch, which found that staffing at the hospital's baby unit was inadequate. The RAC-PCH report found nurses had expressed concerns about the capabilities of one low cum doctor and, despite seeking reassurances that he would not be re-employed, he was allowed to return. While consultants visited the neo-neo unit daily, there was a reluctance to seek their advice. The report found, it added that consultants should have had a greater presence on the ward which was capable of looking after 20 babies at a time. It also found post-mortem examinations of babies who died on the unit had not included systematic tests for toxicology, electrolytes or blood sugar.
Speaker 2:So the part about the doctor bothers me because I'm like who's the doctor Right? And I'm also like why didn't they talk about again, you have discussed, things are maybe not admissible in evidence, but it bothers me that they don't talk about this report, that the defense didn't bring up this report and they didn't talk about this doctor that nurses expressed concern about. Because the consultant doctors are like we expressed concerns about Lucy Leppie, but the nurses are saying we expressed concerns about a doctor who's?
Speaker 1:the doctor.
Speaker 2:That's what I want to know. The report made 24 recommendations, including that the unit's death and near miss review procedures are strengthened, and said the area's death child death overview panel should consider whether it could have detected the cluster of deaths more swiftly. After the July 2016 deaths, the RCPCH conducted the the Countess of Chester Neonatal Unit review on November 2017 and the final report was issued on the 8th of February 2017. So Lucy Leppie was not present at that point Nope.
Speaker 1:I hate this defense attorney more and more.
Speaker 2:So then I just put some of the notes straight from the review, but I think we've pretty much gone over all of the salient points of it. Yeah, so, and it wasn't only the neonatal unit that the Countess of Chester Hospital had been making some serious errors with. The leader newspaper discovered that there were at least 68 serious untoward incidents reported in 2015 and 2016 and 79 the year before, compared to 46 in 2013, 2014, 38 in 2012 and 2013, and 56 in 2011 and 2012. Information released under the Freedom of Information Act reveals that there have been eight quote never ever incidents serious incidents that were avoidable and should never happen in the last five years. These include four instances of wrong site surgery, where a procedure has been carried out on the wrong part of the body oh my God.
Speaker 2:Reports handed to this newspaper by the Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust show that, since 2011, there have been two incidents of surgical swabs left inside the body, one of the wrong cataract lens being fitted, two of the wrong teeth being extracted, one of an aneogram test being performed on the wrong patient, one of unspecified wrong site surgery by a vascular surgeon and one unspecified incident of wrong site surgery. Furthermore, a national investigation found the Countess of Chester Hospital to be the fifth worst performing hospital in the NHS when it came to treating sepsis in a timely manner. The investigation found that only 33%, which is only one-third of patients who needed treatment for sepsis were given antibiotics within the appropriate time frame. Jesus, so yeah, this hospital is not good. No, no.
Speaker 1:That makes me wonder if there's like a maybe a cover up or something. So I mean the police would have to still okay, like think that she was guilty. Yeah, I wonder if there's evidence that's been presented that we're just not aware of or given.
Speaker 2:Well, I mean, listen like she doesn't sound like she was that. Ma Well, I don't know if I want to say that I was going to say it doesn't sound like she was that great of a nurse. But some, like the senior staffing nurses, did say that she was a good nurse. But in some things like taking home all those fucking reports, that's a big fucking no-no.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and it seemed like she just took every fucking report home, like she had the report from her first day like framed or something like like you're not supposed to take those reports home. No, no, while I have read various people say that, while it's not unusual for nurses to have like one or two reports that they accidentally took home, right, having like 260 reports that you took home, yeah, like that's not a good thing to do. No, no, that's a no-no, that was a big no-no, for sure.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and then yeah.
Speaker 2:But yeah, she definitely has made mistakes, been at least negligent in some areas. If, even if you account, even if she was completely innocent of things, then she definitely fucked some shit up. And on the other side of things, even if she's completely guilty, the countess of Chester Hospital is certainly culpable in some things as well. Yeah, for sure, and so that's where I'm at.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:With that.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:So I already talked about the grids or the grid, the statistical grid, so I'll just cover what I said, since the trial had so much coverage about the statistic grid, about how she was on duty for all 25 deaths and collapses that she was charged for, while other nurses had lower times of duty. However, because it shows a 100% correlation with the deaths and collapses that she was specifically charged for, and so it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, and a better statistical analysis would show all 15 deaths and all collapses that occurred over the year, not just the ones that she was prosecuted for, so that this could be interpreted. It would have a more accurate interpretation. Right About the air injections from the Daily Mail Dewi Evans Evans I think I was saying Ewan's earlier. It's Dewi Evans, I think I was saying Devi Ewan's or something and Dr Sandy Bowen. Those were the two.
Speaker 2:Like medical experts suggested they had been injected with air either into their blood or down feeding tubes in their stomachs. Air could not have been injected accidentally, experts said, because nurses knew the dangers of air is getting into lines and cannulas drilled into them during their training. Lucy Leppy herself had to pass a training course allowing her to administer medicine via special cannulas, during which the dangers of air embolus was highlighted. However, we know from stuff we've talked about that's not true. Air embolus can happen accidentally and, like we talked about, it can happen via resuscitation. On the Sunday Times describing the moment she realized the babies had been intentionally harmed.
Speaker 2:Bowen, who lives in Guernsey, and I was sitting on my dining room table in the winter and it was dark outside and I was looking at the babies X-ray, thinking this baby has had an air embolism. That's what I was thinking of when I thought Dr J Ram claimed that he was the discoverer. Dr Bowen is also claiming to be the discoverer of the air embolism theory. This baby had an air embolism. That I thought it can't be. I've never seen anything like that in my career, but nothing else explained it.
Speaker 2:The X-ray is showing the babies vessels and that's what I thought. No, it has to be deliberate. The prosecution therefore argued there cannot be any other explanation for the presence of air in the babies blood diaphragms and other parts of their body than via injection and, as let be was the only nurse on duty, it must have been carried out deliberately by her. However, the argument that air could not be injected accidentally due to training does not stand up, as many people make mistakes despite training. Another explanation has been suggested that air embolisms and blood and diaphragm can be caused by resuscitation after the babies' colombs. It is unknown whether police and their experts identified any other possible causes.
Speaker 1:When you had started in on that. It couldn't have been accidental, because nurses are trained, blah, blah, blah. I was like that is a stupid thing to say. It is a stupid thing. It's a stupid thing. It doesn't matter how many times you're trained, you can still make a mistake. It is.
Speaker 2:See, here's the thing. I feel like doctors and hospital staff are kind of primed to say the thing that avoids medical malpractice lawsuits and that is whatever the thing is that avoids them being culpable in something like when my son was hospitalized they had what's the thing? The they stick up your peen.
Speaker 1:Okay, yeah, that thing, let's just call it that thing To pee. Oh, the catheter, the catheter.
Speaker 2:Thank you, yeah, yeah, they had tried to catheterize him. It took several attempts, several attempts, for them to do so and he previously. Before that, everything good. After that he had a UTI and they were trying to tell me that he had had the UTI when he went into the fucking hospital. No, he didn't. Right, like y'all gave him the UTI, and that happens all the time. But of course they're not going to accept responsibility for that. No, because you consume, yeah, but that happens all the time it does. They're full of bacteria because they're full of sick people.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I know.
Speaker 2:Anyway. So the Lucia de Berk case. Attention has also been drawn to the case of Lucia de Berk in the Netherlands, who was initially charged with 13 deaths between 1997 and 2001,. Convicted of seven murders in 2004. Two of the deaths were identified as by experts as being due to poisoning and she was convicted for the others because her shifts coincided with the deaths. No other cause could be established. She was cleared in 2010 after an appeal ruled the deaths were natural causes and the poisoning theory was dismissed from an independent report. Her sentencing was unusually heavy by dust standards, in part because de Berk continued to deny wrongdoing and had shown no remorse During her initial trial. Judges accepted as evidence entry into de Berk's diaries, in which she wrote about a strange compulsion and a secret that she would take with her to her grave. On November 27, 1999, the day an elderly woman died in her care, she wrote she had given in to her compulsion. There are similarities to Levy's case, so the Levy investigators and prosecution could have made similar errors.
Speaker 2:I also found some interesting information about women and miscarriages of justice and the differences between miscarriages of justice between women and men. The most common cause of miscarriages of justice with men are false or misleading witness evidence from non-compliant and false or misleading confessions. But the most common cause of miscarriages of justice with women are inadequate disclosure and false or misleading forensic science. One striking feature of miscarriages of justice in women is that approximately 25% of the identified cases involve women who have been wrongfully convicted of harming a child in their care. A similar theme can be seen in the United States National Registry of Exonerations. A 2014 report of the registry noted 40% of female exonerees were exoneries of crimes of child victims. In England and Wales, a majority of miscarriages of justice involving women in cases of this type involve false or misleading forensic evidence. In many cases, this evidence came from a now discredited pediatric pathologist, dr Roy Meadow. There were also some bacterial viruses going around the UK at the time that could have also accounted for some issues.
Speaker 1:Are we going back to the women who are going around at the the flu or not the flu, the whatever's going around at the same time? Are you referring to Lucy Letby or are you referring to the women who have been exonerated?
Speaker 2:No, I'm referring to sorry around the time 2016, 2015, 2016. Okay, yeah, Sorry, I kind of went straight into that.
Speaker 1:I'm just talking about other things it could be little chinks.
Speaker 2:Yeah, all the little chinks yeah In the the prosecutions argument At the time of the collapse, and deaths of the infants in teravirus and pericovirus have been reporting in other hospitals in the UK. There's a history of these outbreaks in neonatal wards and hospitals around the world. They are especially harmful to preterm infants who do not yet have a functioning immune system. It is reported that many parents of the infants were concerned if their ward had a virus and Dr Gibbs denied that that was the case, but today we have seen no evidence to show if they did any viral testing and, if they did, what the results were. And I did find an article about an outbreak of pericovirus, particularly in babies, in the spring and summer of 2016 in the UK. The article stated that human pericovirus PCR testing in CSF was a routine part of the septic workout for any neonator infant admitted to the hospital presenting with combination of fever, lethargy, drowsiness, rash, poor feeding, tachycardia and irritability.
Speaker 1:So do we know if the hospital did those tests?
Speaker 2:No, we don't know if they did those tests Interesting. Yeah, that's part of the thing that they mentioned, that there is no evidence if they did any testing for those things. And if they did, what were the results? Right, okay, and that just about wraps it up. I've only talked for a million fucking years.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's okay. This will be a long one, it's fine. What was I going to say? I don't know, so anyway. In short, both Rachel and I have questions about the guilt of Lucy Letby, at least in some of the cases. You're certainly questioning the prosecution and the defense of it.
Speaker 2:And it doesn't mean that I don't take the deaths of babies very seriously.
Speaker 1:I hope nobody thinks that I don't think anybody would think that If they do, then they're being ridiculous. They are being ridiculous. You're just bringing up things that should have been brought up in the trial right, and I think anybody who did any type of Google research would figure it out. And you're not the only one who thinks that. There are people on the internet who do think that, and they seem like decent human beings there are, yeah like.
Speaker 2:I found things like defense lawyers who are like ooh, that defense was not right. I think there's a book. I think there's a book that recently came out in the UK claiming that she's innocent. I didn't get a chance to read it, but yeah, I saw that there was one.
Speaker 1:So anyway, I was watching some clips or something like news clips following the trial right.
Speaker 1:Like every day of the trial, the news would give a summary or whatever. And one of these news things were interviewing I think he was a defense attorney and the defense attorney, I think, was talking about a number of nurses who had been convicted of killing babies and then they've been overturned and basically the news person was like we're not going to talk about that. It was essentially like this person is guilty and we're not going to make any waves and make any suggestion that she's not. It felt like during her trial and leading up to it it was very much like there can't be any dissent, because if there's dissent people will be angry.
Speaker 2:You know what I mean? Yeah, definitely. No, there are other cases besides Lucia de Berk. I thought about going into it. I think I mentioned.
Speaker 1:But I was like we're going to be so long.
Speaker 2:It's already so long.
Speaker 1:Yeah, no, it's good that you didn't, but yeah, it happens. Like you said, when it comes to women and dead babies, people are more inclined, for whatever reason, to believe that they did it. Even though every time you see something like that on TV, like where a mom killed her babies or whatever they're like, no one can fathom that a mom would kill her babies and yet they are more than happy to prosecute women with little evidence, absolutely. Yeah it's.
Speaker 2:I don't understand that kind of like dual thinking Because, as women, it's our job, and so to take care, nurture babies, children, and so if there is a problem with a baby or a child and it must have been us that did it something wrong. I think that's the mentality.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and it's ridiculous. It's ridiculous. There's too much put on women, put on mothers, and there needs to be a lot more put on fathers. I'm not saying fathers should be accused necessarily of killing but there needs to be more of a quality of nurturing and expect.
Speaker 2:An expectation. Well, and it's, it's. It's so limiting to men as well, because they don't get to express nurturing or compassion or you know all those worn fuzzy things. Is hard for them to express those kinds of things in in our like you know, society, where we expect people to exhibit this rigid binary construct of gender, yeah, and gender roles, and if, if people, when people step outside those roles, but especially men, because them fem coated things roles, emotions, jobs, clothes, anything that's fem coated is hierarch, as hierarch is inferior right.
Speaker 2:That's how the patriarchy works.
Speaker 1:It's a hierarchy.
Speaker 2:These are coded, and the things that are coded as fem or feminine are the inferior things, and so men particularly get chastised when they exhibit perceived effeminate traits or roles, because it's like how dare you right? I know what I mean whereas when women do get chastised for doing mask roles or mass things, but much less so because it's kind of seems good for you, like you're doing the superior thing because masculine things are superior, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah, okay, we could go, and that's a whole other podcast.
Speaker 2:Oh, it, sure is.
Speaker 1:Okay, so let me do the rest of my missing person, let me. Okay, so we're looking at Lori Annalise Page. There really wasn't a lot of information on what was happening when she went missing or whatever. Actually, why can I not find the information? So the only place that had any possible information about what was happening that day was that it's from a Reddit, so I don't know how accurate it is. But essentially she was at home. Her father works nights. She stayed home with trusted adults nearby if she needed any help. The day she went missing, her father went to work, but when he came home Lori was gone. So that's what happened. And let me go back to the FBI page.
Speaker 1:The FBI is offering a reward of up to 15,000 for information leading to the recovery of Lori Page. She has ties to, or may visit Tallahassee, florida, tampa, florida, thomasville, georgia and Nashville, tennessee. The FBI Jacksonville Field Office and the Tallahassee Police Department are seeking information regarding the disappearance of Lori. Let's see. If you need any information, contact the Jackson Field Office or the Tallahassee Police Department. You can also contact your local FBI office or the nearest American Embassy or consulate. I will put the phone numbers in the show page. Okay, awesome. Oh, and I should mention I don't know if I mentioned before, but she went missing from Tallahassee, florida, on June 3rd 2023. Okay, okay, so do we have any short things to talk?
Speaker 2:about Short, short shows. We watch.
Speaker 1:Yeah, indeed, Stuff, you finished your your in the shadows or whatever it is.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I finished what we do in the shadows. I finished the series to date and now I'm waiting for the next season. Yeah, basically. So, yeah, I think that some things, yeah, I kind of expected to go how they went. Some things I some things I wish had gone a little differently, but I don't know. I don't want to give spoilers, but all in all, it's a great show, still fucking hilarious. And if you like documentary style shows and if you like horror comedy and if you like vampires, then highly recommend and yeah, it's very hilarious and yeah. So now I'm like well, j has to finish it and then maybe I'll get them to go back to Picard.
Speaker 1:And you've just been reading our, our book, club book which we'll talk about in the next episode yes, yes.
Speaker 2:I finished the prior of the orange tree.
Speaker 1:Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, you mentioned that.
Speaker 2:I enjoyed and I'm not sure if I I did really like it. I rated it five stars. For a long book. It kept me very captivated and, yeah, I liked I think I mentioned to you like when we were not podcasting I really liked how the ending closed it out to where you can go on and move, move on to the next book in the series or you can stop there, and I liked that.
Speaker 1:So I think it didn't end on a cliffhanger. No, it tidied up the plot of the book Exactly.
Speaker 2:Gotcha, which which I find nice, because then I don't feel obligated to continue if I don't want to. Right, and I think I do want to, but probably not right away.
Speaker 1:Right. So yeah, that was a lot. That was a big book. I saw it in the store and at the library. It's a, it's a chonker, it is a big fucking book, yeah. So so let's see what did I do. It's hard for us to say anything because we've. We just finished recording the last episode a few days ago.
Speaker 2:It was a really short time for us.
Speaker 1:What have I done? I don't remember if I mentioned last time I watched America's Sweethearts. I found that on Hulu, I think.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:I've been on it since since this first time since came out, followed by Serendipity. Also John Kisek, with Kate Beckinsell and John Corbett, who I love to pieces because he is the Corbett Center is named after him.
Speaker 2:Is it really? Yes, why he's like donating money or something. Really yeah, that's what I've heard.
Speaker 1:Oh my goodness, yeah. Well, thank you John. Yeah, okay, so, if you don't know, the Corbett Center is like the student union at our local university, but anyway, he has a small partner and he's hilarious without being hilarious, right, because his character for those of you that haven't seen it is like this new agey musician, like big white dude new agey musician playing or doing like things that are obviously meant or that are appropriated from Asian cultures, right, which was very much your description is already making me laugh because I haven't seen that movie for a while but, I vaguely remember it.
Speaker 1:It was a very popular thing at the time that movie was made Like everybody was doing it. I think that was maybe only a few years after people stopped white people stopped putting the little gem between their eyes like they're fucking Hindu or something.
Speaker 2:Anyway, Fellow white people. Why are we so fucking cringe?
Speaker 1:I know. But anyway, john Corbett right Like he's, the character's serious and John Corbett was really good at being serious but also not being serious. Yeah, you know it was just great he was. He's always a blast to watch, yeah, and you can kind of tell he thinks kind of all of that Hollywood stuff and all of that is just kind of silly, but he still takes it serious at the same time. I don't know if I'm describing it correctly but yeah, no, no.
Speaker 2:yeah, I think you're describing it correctly, but I've seen the film, so but anyway, it's a fun little.
Speaker 1:It's a fun little film. Oh, it also has a from the SNL from when we were young Molly Shannon. Molly Shannon, one of my favorites yeah, she's in there as well. Superstar, yeah, and Jeremy Piven it's also. It's always fun to see. I know Jeremy Piven's been canceled, but it's always fun to see John Cusack and Jeremy Piven, who have been lifelong friends, on screen together, playing friends, because they, they just have a natural chemistry. You can. You can tell that they genuinely have affection for each other.
Speaker 2:He was accused.
Speaker 1:He was accused of assault.
Speaker 2:God damn it.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:Stop assaulting people, yeah.
Speaker 1:Um, but anyway. Well, I mean, I don't know if he was canceled.
Speaker 2:I assumed he was because the show was canceled and I haven't heard or seen anything from him. People who assault people should be canceled.
Speaker 1:Yeah, um, what else? So I watched that and, oh, I listened to. I haven't been able to get through an audio book, so I've been listening to podcasts, and one of our mutual favorites, as we've mentioned before, is True Crime and Cocktails, and I listened to their most recent one, which will kind of lead us into the next episode, which we're going to record as soon as we're done with this one, which is that she talks about the fact that word has decided that their new default font is something else, and it's very. Yeah, it's, um, it's not Times New Roman. No, it hasn't been Times New Roman for a long time. Oh, it's not, it was Calibre.
Speaker 2:Well, I don't know, but now it's like.
Speaker 1:it's like alphabos or aspos or aptos or something along those lines, but it is to me it feels like we're getting closer and closer to Comic Sans. Oh Jesus, you know, I mean, it's not quite there. It's still a lot closer to Calibre, but it's, I don't know. I don't know, I don't know how to describe it, but it was very irritating. I kept it because I was too lazy to change it when I was writing out my notes, but it's annoying, um so anyway, I thought that was.
Speaker 2:That's an episode of the office like a later episode, where a character, nelly, she's like a British character who comes in like the later season, she like writes out her plan in a silly font. She's like she's like nobody believes you have a plan if you use a ridiculous font. And then it shows Dwight and he's like he's like ridiculous font, you don't have a plan, and like it affected British accent because she's British, right, so she gets one over on him because he didn't take her memo seriously, right.
Speaker 1:Um, but anyway, when I was listening to his before I started taking my notes and I was like this seems ridiculous to be that upset over a font, and then I started doing it, I was like I can see why they were upset. I can see why they took 10 minutes to talk about this, right? Uh, I guess it's the things you get uh irritated about when you start to get older. You know you're not as you're not as laid back. In some ways You're more laid back than you used to be, but in other ways you're not nearly as laid back.
Speaker 2:Well, here's my dumb ass, thinking that the font was times new Roman. So how ancient am I, I guess? Or?
Speaker 1:mentality. It should be. I like times new Roman, but I guess it's cause I've my entire school life was times new Roman. They wouldn't accept anything else. Yeah, um, even today, like I know, I have a times new Roman rule in my essays, right, just because it's easier for me to read. None of my students put it in times. I have not had a single student put it in times new Roman, not one. And I'm like. I also say please write this double spaced because I'm getting old and I can't read as well as I used to, so please double space. They never double space either. It's very.
Speaker 2:Why won't you double space? Cause it's easier for you to yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 1:My God, it's the directions thing. Don't get me started. I have, I'm very. It is one of my biggest pet peeves is the fact that students don't read directions, but anyway, okay, so that's it. Yeah, okay, yes.
Speaker 2:So that about wraps it up for Lucy Levy and we can say goodbye to this stuff, right, and maybe we'll do like an update, like yeah, we could totally do that on any of the cases that still have appeals and stuff.
Speaker 1:We can absolutely do updates when things happen at a late, one of the ones that happened in April after her appeal, or whatever.
Speaker 2:So if I end up being right, somebody give me money.
Speaker 1:Right, okay, so like, subscribe, download, send us an email. Send us an email. We're on Instagram, both for the podcast and our individual ones. All of that information is in our show notes and we really would enjoy hearing from y'all Absolutely.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that would be fantastic. I mean, even if you're like you are a disgrace, then go ahead and let us know Right, at least we'll have an email.
Speaker 1:It won't be crickets, it's true, it won't be crickets, it's true. Okay, we will see you next time. Bye, bye.