Quizzes & Puzzles39 mins ago
Lucy Letby Guilty
https:/
Found guilty of murdering seven babies.
RIP little ones.
Found guilty of murdering seven babies.
RIP little ones.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by LadyCG. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Last night's Panorama is well worth a view. It should answer questions about the clinicians v the managers. elliemay asked if friends doubted Letby - no, they always stood by her. Letby is godmother to some of their children and her bff still cannot believe Letby is guilty.
For PP, I understand that there was no p.m. for the first baby who died. You are correct in highlighting the incidence of neonatal deaths in this unit. To have 66% of an annual figure in 2 days should have raised questions at all levels within this hospital. Instead, a senior clinician was instructed to apologise to Letby for any upset she had been caused. Jesus wept.
I cannot imagine how the jurors have coped with the horrendous details of the trial - the judge recently excused one member for personal reasons. The judge has told the jury that they will never have to act as jurors again. We owe those 12 people an unimaginable debt of gratitude.
Letby, despite her years of training and work was not as clever as she thought she was. When she injected the insulin she had no idea of the
damning absence of the C-Peptide in tests after death.
It is nigh impossible to understand how the bereaved parents of the babies killed by Letby now feel. On balance, I believe the parents whose babies' deaths could not be decided by the jury should be entitled to a re-trial, otherwise those short lives are deemed to be not worth a candle.
Yet again, we have seen the personification of true evilness in a serial killer. Letby has under-mined the greatness of the NHS in damaging the wonderful caring attitude and devotion of all the staff in whom we trust so much.
Judith Moritz has reported on this case for so long and presented a sensitive programme on Panorama, she too is to be congratulated along with the police officers in their eventual investigation and the CPS.
There are so many lessons to be learned from this terrible story and I pray that further investigations follow in all areas that have been shown to be wanting.
Now we await the sentence.
RIP little ones.
For PP, I understand that there was no p.m. for the first baby who died. You are correct in highlighting the incidence of neonatal deaths in this unit. To have 66% of an annual figure in 2 days should have raised questions at all levels within this hospital. Instead, a senior clinician was instructed to apologise to Letby for any upset she had been caused. Jesus wept.
I cannot imagine how the jurors have coped with the horrendous details of the trial - the judge recently excused one member for personal reasons. The judge has told the jury that they will never have to act as jurors again. We owe those 12 people an unimaginable debt of gratitude.
Letby, despite her years of training and work was not as clever as she thought she was. When she injected the insulin she had no idea of the
damning absence of the C-Peptide in tests after death.
It is nigh impossible to understand how the bereaved parents of the babies killed by Letby now feel. On balance, I believe the parents whose babies' deaths could not be decided by the jury should be entitled to a re-trial, otherwise those short lives are deemed to be not worth a candle.
Yet again, we have seen the personification of true evilness in a serial killer. Letby has under-mined the greatness of the NHS in damaging the wonderful caring attitude and devotion of all the staff in whom we trust so much.
Judith Moritz has reported on this case for so long and presented a sensitive programme on Panorama, she too is to be congratulated along with the police officers in their eventual investigation and the CPS.
There are so many lessons to be learned from this terrible story and I pray that further investigations follow in all areas that have been shown to be wanting.
Now we await the sentence.
RIP little ones.
Excellent post choux .
I’d hate to be working in a neonatal unit at present.
I’d also hate to be a parent visiting my baby in NICU .
Parents leave their very ill babies with staff who they expect to care for them. Never should you think the babies would be assaulted/ murdered .
It’s heartbreaking. RIP those wee babies .
I’d hate to be working in a neonatal unit at present.
I’d also hate to be a parent visiting my baby in NICU .
Parents leave their very ill babies with staff who they expect to care for them. Never should you think the babies would be assaulted/ murdered .
It’s heartbreaking. RIP those wee babies .
far too long Chowks, according to the current metric... (joke) - try to keep it short and more to the point - - another joke - just joking honest
1700 R4
sentiments I thought never wd be expressed
Speaker: Susan Gilby new MD of Chester
"I came in at the end of this and found a mainly nurse hospital mgt team who didnt like doctors and didnt like listening to unpleasant views about the nurses from the doctors, which they then ignored". oo-er nursey !
Francis again QC - erm looking for another job I perceive - the thing we need is an inquiry. Presumbaly with him bewigged at the head. From his point of view: he has done this before
some one now says, " from Bristol you should be looking at a time series at the time (in real time), ( PP says didnt I post about this: Poisson I recall)". Identifying a cluster we learn is difficult - rule of thumb reader: "wait for a run of three".
No one has mentioned Roy Meadow yet and HIS run of three - (Sally Clark case) and he got struck off ! - oo-er doctor !
and then fires in Canada
Chester, Gilby, Meadow, Clark Bristol - this salad is not too heady for the average AB reader is it? Lawks
1700 R4
sentiments I thought never wd be expressed
Speaker: Susan Gilby new MD of Chester
"I came in at the end of this and found a mainly nurse hospital mgt team who didnt like doctors and didnt like listening to unpleasant views about the nurses from the doctors, which they then ignored". oo-er nursey !
Francis again QC - erm looking for another job I perceive - the thing we need is an inquiry. Presumbaly with him bewigged at the head. From his point of view: he has done this before
some one now says, " from Bristol you should be looking at a time series at the time (in real time), ( PP says didnt I post about this: Poisson I recall)". Identifying a cluster we learn is difficult - rule of thumb reader: "wait for a run of three".
No one has mentioned Roy Meadow yet and HIS run of three - (Sally Clark case) and he got struck off ! - oo-er doctor !
and then fires in Canada
Chester, Gilby, Meadow, Clark Bristol - this salad is not too heady for the average AB reader is it? Lawks
Peter, Susan Gilby - formerly Medical Director:
https:/
I assume she replaced Tony Chambers after his resignation. I wish her well with her claim for unfair dismissal.
I noticed she said in the Panorama programme, that had she been in post at the time a request had been made to investigate the situation she would have called in the police within 24 hours.
Ref. my link - I do wonder who Mr Haythornthwaite thinks he is and if he still holds that position within the Trust.
https:/
I assume she replaced Tony Chambers after his resignation. I wish her well with her claim for unfair dismissal.
I noticed she said in the Panorama programme, that had she been in post at the time a request had been made to investigate the situation she would have called in the police within 24 hours.
Ref. my link - I do wonder who Mr Haythornthwaite thinks he is and if he still holds that position within the Trust.
thx choux
I thought she was blaarting a bit, to be current medical director, but hey everyone has a job to maintain !
the action is for constructive dismissal - basically you resign and then say - you made me do it....
very surprised that many thought the employer had to give permission to report to the police ( like really, wow, obviously untrue....under the children act, you are allowed to do whatever you like so long as it is in the interests of the child. preventing them from being murdered is OBVIOUSLY in that category)
"we dont know why your child died, but we dont want to do a post-mortem" - reported speech from a parent. - a coroner would have something to say about that ! If you cannot give a cause of death, then you should refuse to make one out, and refer....
I thought she was blaarting a bit, to be current medical director, but hey everyone has a job to maintain !
the action is for constructive dismissal - basically you resign and then say - you made me do it....
very surprised that many thought the employer had to give permission to report to the police ( like really, wow, obviously untrue....under the children act, you are allowed to do whatever you like so long as it is in the interests of the child. preventing them from being murdered is OBVIOUSLY in that category)
"we dont know why your child died, but we dont want to do a post-mortem" - reported speech from a parent. - a coroner would have something to say about that ! If you cannot give a cause of death, then you should refuse to make one out, and refer....
Cheers, Peter. I know you like to be well-read, have a look at this and see that even the CQC acknowledge quite a turnover of the board.
I have been pouring over last year's report for some time.
https:/
I have been pouring over last year's report for some time.
https:/
CQC - was set up as the medical royal colleges were throwing their weight around ( 2002) - Milburn who politely declines to take responsibility for the inpection mess.
I dont notice paeds in the report
"not rated" - does that mean so bad that we cant say?
CQC started off with self assessment - all the trusts rated themselves as "very good indeed" ( light touch regulation)
I dont notice paeds in the report
"not rated" - does that mean so bad that we cant say?
CQC started off with self assessment - all the trusts rated themselves as "very good indeed" ( light touch regulation)
Peter, we came to the same conclusion for "not rated". That seems such a cop-out when considering the CQC's references to "... to comply with legal obligations..." and "We told the trust that it must take action to bring services into line with legal requirements. This action related to all core services."
I find it hard to comprehend how the Countess of Chester Hospital can still be running when its Board seems not fit for purpose - see page 4 of the report.
I find it hard to comprehend how the Countess of Chester Hospital can still be running when its Board seems not fit for purpose - see page 4 of the report.
//There are calls for the hospital executives and managers to face corporate manslaughter charges.//
Just a point of explanation: individuals cannot face charges of corporate manslaughter. As the term suggests, such charges can only be levelled against organisations. A further point to consider is that if the organisation is convicted, the only penalty would be a fine (organisations cannot be sent to prison). Therefore the fine would be paid by the organisation - in this case an NHS Trust - and so would ultimately be borne by the taxpayer. So be careful what you wish for.
As well as that, corporate manslaughter (CM) is a notoriously difficult offence for which to secure a conviction. Since the introduction of the CM legislation in 2008 there have been just 40 prosecutions, resulting in around 30 convictions. Between 2018 and 2022 the only convictions secured were those following a guilty plea. There were no convictions following a trial during that time.
Just a point of explanation: individuals cannot face charges of corporate manslaughter. As the term suggests, such charges can only be levelled against organisations. A further point to consider is that if the organisation is convicted, the only penalty would be a fine (organisations cannot be sent to prison). Therefore the fine would be paid by the organisation - in this case an NHS Trust - and so would ultimately be borne by the taxpayer. So be careful what you wish for.
As well as that, corporate manslaughter (CM) is a notoriously difficult offence for which to secure a conviction. Since the introduction of the CM legislation in 2008 there have been just 40 prosecutions, resulting in around 30 convictions. Between 2018 and 2022 the only convictions secured were those following a guilty plea. There were no convictions following a trial during that time.
Thanks as always for your info NJ.
I am afraid that this issue speaks to the thread that runs through our society from top to bottom - the complete absence of accountability.
The individuals whose actions facilitated the continuing murders of babies have tefloned away with no sanction, apart from the unlikely outcome that they may loose a few moments sleep over their actions.
As a footnote, I am not a violent person, but if I were one of those parents, and any suit uttered the phrase 'Lessons will/have been learned ...' in my hearing, I would beat them into their own A & E unit.
I am afraid that this issue speaks to the thread that runs through our society from top to bottom - the complete absence of accountability.
The individuals whose actions facilitated the continuing murders of babies have tefloned away with no sanction, apart from the unlikely outcome that they may loose a few moments sleep over their actions.
As a footnote, I am not a violent person, but if I were one of those parents, and any suit uttered the phrase 'Lessons will/have been learned ...' in my hearing, I would beat them into their own A & E unit.
-- answer removed --
//I am afraid that this issue speaks to the thread that runs through our society from top to bottom - the complete absence of accountability.//
Indeed, Andy. Although I have not been following this story too closely, one thing struck me from the little that I have read. Apparently senior consultants at the hospital voiced their concerns that Ms Letby may have been harming - or even murdering - baby patients. They voiced these concerns to predominantly non-medical health executives, who apparently decided not to trouble the police with such trifles - presumably because it might have involved them in a bit of trouble. This indifference was such that one consultant was forced to write a letter of apology to Ms Letby, apologising for any stress she may have suffered whilst these suspicions were visited on her.
I have to say that if I was a consultant in such an establishment and I and my colleagues had such suspicions, I would not leave the decision whether or not to involve the police to a largely "here today, gone tomorrow" itinerant executive. I would have informed them myself and allowed the law to take its course.
Indeed, Andy. Although I have not been following this story too closely, one thing struck me from the little that I have read. Apparently senior consultants at the hospital voiced their concerns that Ms Letby may have been harming - or even murdering - baby patients. They voiced these concerns to predominantly non-medical health executives, who apparently decided not to trouble the police with such trifles - presumably because it might have involved them in a bit of trouble. This indifference was such that one consultant was forced to write a letter of apology to Ms Letby, apologising for any stress she may have suffered whilst these suspicions were visited on her.
I have to say that if I was a consultant in such an establishment and I and my colleagues had such suspicions, I would not leave the decision whether or not to involve the police to a largely "here today, gone tomorrow" itinerant executive. I would have informed them myself and allowed the law to take its course.
There appear few enough insights to Letby's character and thoughts but this article from the BBC interested me, including Letby's alleged relationship with one of the doctors which, when brought up in court, seems to have provoked some response from the defendant:
https:/
https:/
