LL's claim that Mel Taylor wanted to be assigned to Nursery 1 to 'overcome' Baby A's death
As with my last post on Letby's claim of being banned from contacting her friends on the NNU, I am interested in detailing the claims that Letby reasserts the most persistently over time, especially where these claims are in dispute with other witnesses/documents. Here I've gathered quotations from various transcripts on the subject of Letby's claim that Mel Taylor, like she herself did, requested to be right back in Nursery 1 after Baby A's death to get over that trauma.
SUMMARY: Letby claims that Melanie Taylor wanted and requested to be in Room 1 to ‘get back on the horse’ after Baby A’s death, just like Letby did. Letby asserts this both when reaching out to Jennifer Jones-Key over text messages for support in returning to Nursery 1, and under cross-exam to indicate that her desire to be back in N1 was not unusual.
In her text conversation with JJK, Letby complains of not being allowed in Nursery 1. She claims she and Mel, who were both present for the death of Child A, had both requested to return straight to Nursery 1 on the next shift (after Baby B’s collapse) to ‘overcome’ the trauma of Child A’s death. Letby consistently maintains this at trial, and under cross-examination brings up that Mel had also requested to be in Nursery 1 that shift three times within a few minutes. At Thirlwall, Mel Taylor contradicts this, explaining she would definitely not have requested to be in Nursery 1, would have preferred a break from ITU or from working at all, and has never heard of the practice of returning straight to ITU after a traumatic shift.
Thirlwall Day 20, page 19: https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Thirlwall-Inquiry-10-October-2024.pdf
Q: [regarding death of Baby A] Dr. Harkness I think took some time off he was so upset by it. How were you feeling about it?
MT: I—well, honestly I was devastated. I—it isn’t—will never be easy, no matter how many times you encounter death of a baby. You—all you want to do is care for and look after and get these babies home with their parents, and I took it very hard. I was—yeah, I was really upset. Really, really upset afterwards.
…
Q: What was the view about going back to the same [Nursery 1, where Baby A died] after that experience? Had anyone discussed that with you?
MT: I don’t remember anybody discussing that with me.
Q: Do you know what thoughts you would have had about that, about whether you would go back into the unit?
MT: Yes.
Q: What were your—what was your thinking having experienced that on that shift in Nursery 1?
MT: So my personal experience was I found it extremely traumatic and difficult. I found it difficult to go back into work. And I wouldn’t have wanted to voluntarily go back into Nursery 1. It would obviously depend on capacity and staffing, but I would have voiced my request not to go in there if possible.
Yeah, that was my personal opinion once—once a traumatic event happened in 1 I wanted, you know, possibly call it a break from more intense unwell babies and wanted to maybe look after some special care babies.
Q: And to resume later on or at another time going back to that nursery?
MT: Yeah.
…
Q: When did you—that can come down now, please—when did you first see that text exchange?
MT: I—I don’t know the exact time but it was around the trial…Yeah, the criminal trial.
Q: Can you comment on that for us, tell us what you make of all of that?
MT: Yeah, so as—the first time I saw it I knew the comments about me wanting to go into—back into Nursery 1 were not true, because I know my own feelings. The only thing I could take from it was that I had no choice in the fact with the skill mix and the fact that there was a more junior member of staff that needed supporting.
Q: And you were the Band 6?
MT: I was the Band 6. I wasn’t in charge, but I was the Band 6.
Q: So you had to go back in that next day?
MT: In theory, yes. And I think I probably agreed to go in there and say—and I—that’s—I can’t remember but this is—I—the only thing I can think, reading from these, was I agreed to go in there because that was the most reasonable choice with the staffing and the babies that were on the unit.
Q: But if you’d had your own way and that wasn’t required you’d clearly not—
MT: I wouldn’t have.
Q: Have done that?
MT: No. And sometimes -- you know, it can depend on the babies that are in there as well. Sometimes you can get babies that aren't intensive care in there, so that may not have been -- I mean, I think -- but, out of choice, no, I know I definitely wouldn't have expressed a want to go in there.
Q: And was that anything that Letby had discussed, the suggestion at Liverpool Women's Hospital, that she went straight back to the same cots? Was that ever discussed with you at the time or subsequently?
MT: I don't remember that being discussed.
Q: Have you ever heard of that as a way of getting over or dealing with trauma?
MT: No.
Q: If -- if -- I'm not suggesting that was the case, I'm just saying the assertion that that was the way of dealing with it?
MT: No, I've never heard --
Q: Have you heard of that since?
MT: No.
Letby’s text messages (INQ0000101, p6-8) https://thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0000101_01-02_06-08.pdf
LL: I just keep thinking about [Monday.] Feel like I need to be in 1 to overcome it but Nurse W said no x
JJK: I agree with her don’t think it will help. You need a break from full on ITU. You have to let it go or it will eat you up I know not easy and will take time x
LL: Not the vented baby necessarily. I just feel I need to be in 1 to get the image out of my head, Mel said the same and Nurse W let her go. Being in 3 is eating me up, all i can see is him in 1 X
LL: It probably sounds odd but it’s how i feel X
JJK: Well it’s up to you but don’t think it’s going to help. It sounds very odd and I would be complete opposite. Can understand Nurse W she trying to look after you all x
LL: Well that’s how I feel, from when I’ve experienced it at women’s I’ve needed to go straight back and have a sick baby otherwise the image of the one you lost never goes. Why send Mel in if she’s trying to look after us, she was in bits over it. X
LL: Don’t expect people to understand but I know how I feel and how I’ve dealt with it before, I’ve voiced that so can’t do anymore but people should respect that X
Letby’s cross-exam on Child C by Nicholas Johnson:
[Reading text messages between LL and JJK on LL’s wanting to be in Nursery 1]
NJ: “….why send Mel in if she’s trying to look after us, she was in bits over it.” That’s a reference to the fact that Melanie Taylor was looking after the vented baby in Nursery 1 [Child C] isn’t it?
LL: Yes.
NJ: “…I don’t expect people to understand but I know how I feel and how I’ve dealt with it before, I’ve voiced that so can’t do anymore but people should respect that.” You wanted to get your own way, didn’t you?
LL: No, I expressed the preference to go to Nursery 1, as did Mel.
NJ: “and people should respect that.” What does that mean in this context?
LL: People should respect what I’m asking, and saying that that’s how I potentially deal with something.
NJ: So you should get your own way?
LL: No, it’s not about having your own way, it’s about how you deal with things. Mel and I had both asked to go into Nursery 1.
…[quoted texts cont’d]...
LL: “women’s can be awful but I learnt the hard way you have to speak up to get support. I lost a baby one day and a few hours later was given another dying baby born in the same cot space. Girls there said it was important to overcome the image. It was awful, but by the end of the day I realized they were right. It’s just different here.”
NJ: And then, a minute later?
LL: “Anyway forget it. I can only talk about it properly with those who knew him and Mel not interested so I’ll overcome it myself, you get some sleep”
NJ: Were you upset?
LL: Yes.
NJ: Were you upset with Mel?
LL: No, I was upset just generally that I didn’t feel my feelings were being considered.
NJ: By who?
LL: By Nurse G and Mel.
NJ: And what did you expect Mel to do for you?
LL: That Mel and I had both been present with Child A, and that we could have supported one another with that.
NJ: So you wanted her to talk to you about Child A’s death, is that it?
LL: I wanted her to be there to support me, yes. And she had wanted to go in Nursery 1 for the same reason, and she had been put in there.
[So three separate claims here under cross, within a few pages of testimony, reasserting the claim that Mel had also requested to be in N1.]
[This is an interesting one to me because it seems so inconsequential, and so clearly untrue, and yet Letby reasserts it quite insistently. Throughout her entire cross-exam there are very few claims she volunteers herself--much more often it is 'yes,' 'no,' or 'I don't remember,' with little elaboration--and even fewer claims that she maintains in this way and repeatedly intentionally asserts into her version of events. Perhaps LL was just trying to normalize her own behavior, and provide some kind of 'proof' that her need to be in Nursery 1 was a common one? Maybe just an indication of her awareness that this desire was viewed as unusual by other staff, and an effort to evade NJ's argument that she wanted to be in N1 to commit more murders? But these are such minor points in the face of other claims on which she was evasive, or refused to elaborate on in her testimony to account for such a large difference in how she presents them. Interested in others' thoughts.]