She refutes what a colleague previously said - the colleague said people "can't see anything" from that doorway. "Which could have been covered by that tent-like structure," Mr Johnson says, "Just her hands and face," Letby replies. "There is almost nothing to see," Mr Johnson says. The cot has a tent-like structure over it - Letby says this is to "minimise bright light" to the baby.
Nick Johnson, the prosecution barrister, asks if this is an accurate representation of what it was like on 12/13 October, when Letby is alleged to have attacked Child I. The court is being shown an image of nursery two in a state of almost total darkness. She was also accused of making up a "fictional medical examination".Ĭhild I's stomach was so swollen her diaphragm had splintered. Letby admits she knew the routine of Child I's family "very well". Letby spent time on Facebook the night Child H collapsed - with the prosecution accusing her of being "bored" by her time in lower dependency nurseries. But text messages show she was "still involved". Letby has previously claimed she had little to do with Child H during the second night shift she collapsed on, as she was caring for other babies in a different room.
The prosecution claims Letby has falsified the medical notes for Child H after the fact, making it appear as if she was deteriorating before she collapsed in the early hours. Letby was repeatedly accused of 'misrepresenting' her medical notes. The court was shown a Facebook message Letby sent to a colleague on 24 September 2015 in which she complained about the unit being unsafe.
Two cases were discussed, that of Child H and Child I. Today, prosecution barrister Nick Johnson spent most of the day picking apart Lucy Letby's versions of events.
0 kommentar(er)
