Letby.

[Workingman]

A big worry for me is that at least three consultants took serious concerns about the unexplained deaths and Letby's involvement to three top managers of the Unit / Hospital and were esentially ignored - even made to apologise to Letby!

So, i am asking myself, if they suspected malfeasance (potential murder) why did they not override management and take their concerns directly to the police or at least threaten to do so unless management acted?

I thought that there was a whistle-blower's charter to protect people if they took such action.

[Kaz]

It truly beggars belief Frank

[Suff]

I come from a background where if something mission critical inexplicably fails it is taken offline, be it an aircraft or some tech. Suff is probably the same. The failure is investigated and only cleared kit is put back in use.

Two failures would would reallly make for urgent action. Three on the trot and it's a shutdown until all avenues have been investigated and cleared.

These murders are essentially no different. The process should be the same in checking shift rotas, staffing levels, drugs administered, who by and who authorised them, and so on.

I agree with Cromwell. Letby is not the only guilty party in this and the inquiry is no more than a paperwork exercise - lessons will be learnt is what we will hear.

Exactly WM. Something fails once and it is fixed. Continuing failures increases the scrutiny until you go second by second to find out why.

This is with technology which doesn't cost lives. If it costs lives, then scrutiny is very high the first time and then only increases dramatically.

[cromwell]

Exactly WM. Something fails once and it is fixed. Continuing failures increases the scrutiny until you go second by second to find out why.

This is with technology which doesn't cost lives.

Same in IT. If an application crashes, then crashes again, you want to know why.
Who produced the app? What steps were taken when it first failed? Why were these not sufficient? Why did initial testing not reveal the fault? Who was responsible for that testing?

A whole raft of questions which have to be answered, but somehow this person was allowed to carry on looking after babies when there were the strongest suspiscions against her.

Unbelievable.

[cruiser2]

When I was in the RAF in Germany in 1954 one of ouraircraft, anF86 Sabre crashed. It was quickly found that there was a major design fault which allowed
sparks to ignite combustible materialoutside the combustion chambers.
Had to work long hours to modify every aircraft so that it could not happen again.

Not had it in civilian life. But had a meaningful discussion witha new Personnel Manager-a woman. She wanted to shorten my first name. She didn't win
the argument as I threatened to take the problem to the chairman of the company.