I don't think you have to look very far tbh. She makes everything about her, at best she is a distasteful person.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I agree, I also don’t think you can say she was a great nurse when she was leaving other sick babies so she could do what SHE wanted. Nursing is about other people.
The last two days has made a lot of us see what kind of person she is and she is far from the sweet innocent nurse others have said she is …
Agree to disagree - I'd hate for you to see my/my colleagues texts
You aren't on trial for mass baby murder though. It's context.Agree to disagree - I'd hate for you to see my/my colleagues texts
No, thankfully not. What I mean is, it's only one side of 'context' - not the full picture. I don't get anything screaming out at me from these texts. I think I would if I had a particular bias in my mind though.
My texts are awful too to be fair!Agree to disagree - I'd hate for you to see my/my colleagues texts
You just seem to think anyone who sees evidence as adding to the picture of guilt is automatically biased. Is it not the same bias to automatically assume she's innocent and we simply must be missing something?
It’s things like this text
She is a nurse she knew before she trained what to expect from the job . She knows that in her job role she will have patients sadly pass away . I know the texts look innocent but she is definitely attention seeking . She’s basically sent that text for the colleague to respond giving her attention and nice words . She knows she is going to work it’s just a stunt for attention . The more I see the texts the more I’m convinced she killed these babies for praise and attention from co workers , I have not seen any texts yet from her work colleagues acting the way she has .
She is a nurse she knew before she trained what to expect from the job . She knows that in her job role she will have patients sadly pass away . I know the texts look innocent but she is definitely attention seeking . She’s basically sent that text for the colleague to respond giving her attention and nice words . She knows she is going to work it’s just a stunt for attention . The more I see the texts the more I’m convinced she killed these babies for praise and attention from co workers , I have not seen any texts yet from her work colleagues acting the way she has .
Attachments
I'm not assuming she's guilty or innocent at the moment, I'm just looking at these from a totally blank piece of mind and they don't actually say much to me at all. They read just like normal texts. I could probably imagine myself sending and/or receiving things like this. I understand what the prosecution are trying to do, and it's clear they are succeeding in some cases, but to me it's just additional noise and it's not evidence.You just seem to think anyone who sees evidence as adding to the picture of guilt is automatically biased. Is it not the same bias to automatically assume she's innocent and we simply must be missing something?
I dunno, I just think it's kinda off to suggest anyone who thinks she looks guilty based on evidence can only be biased and not someone making an informed conclusion for themselves. I mean at the end of the day, that's all the jury do. Also the bold kinda suggests we are all just being conned? Just don't get why thinking she is innocent is OK but thinking she is guilty is bias. Trust me, none of us want there to be a mass baby murderer, no subconscious need to be 'right'.
These aren't particularly evidence though, that's what I'm saying. You could say it's 'context' - but context to what? An accusation. So if your bias (for want of a better word) is that she's guilty, anything contained in those messages will only serve to compound your own belief. I have no idea if she's guilty or not, there's certainly been evidence to support both outcomes in my eyes - but these just don't say much to me personally. As I said, I find it interesting on how they are viewed depending on what angle you are looking at them from, it's not a criticism.
I’d say it is good evidence it’s not huge no but it’s definitely building a picture on potential reason she killed these babies .
I can honestly say I have never spoke to my work colleagues about a patient especially the way she has . I also have never felt the need to text work colleagues looking for attention . A simple are you ok yes today was hard see you tomorrow is normal . It’s obvious that she’s looking for more and it’s her who starts the conversation. She doesn’t need to broadcast that she doesn’t want to go to work tonight but she dies because she knows she will get the attention she craves like she did from the work colleague .
I can honestly say I have never spoke to my work colleagues about a patient especially the way she has . I also have never felt the need to text work colleagues looking for attention . A simple are you ok yes today was hard see you tomorrow is normal . It’s obvious that she’s looking for more and it’s her who starts the conversation. She doesn’t need to broadcast that she doesn’t want to go to work tonight but she dies because she knows she will get the attention she craves like she did from the work colleague .
I know they're not supposed to, but I could guarantee that half of that jury has had a "tit, not looking good for you LL" moment during the trial so far. They are only human!
To be honest, although I think she's guilty, I do like reading why people believe she's innocent, because it provides another perspective. Things that maybe I've not thought of in my own mind. I know we're not on jury but it would be a very boring discussion if we all thought the same!
We're not Facebook!
We're not Facebook!
It isn't bias to think she's guilty. I don't know how else to say that. Clearly like you say, agree to disagree
Yeah, I definitely prefer the discussion here than on FB which is like the Wild West. I like hearing other people’s thoughts (even if they differ from mine).
I've given up with that lot
what do you make of the message timeline though ? Because while I do think they build on her personality, I don’t necessarily think that is what the prosecution is going for. Or what about the messages about trying to get into room 1 ? Which contradict her police interview? Do you not think that appears sinister ? Not goading genuine question.
I think people need to rememebr the point of the evidence is that the prosecution WANT to bias the jury to a decision of guilt. So of course they are utilising what they can to paint the picture. To put doubt in the mind. Why was she so desperate to be in that room all night? Despite being told by her senior no. Why then after she got into that room for reasons she constructed a baby die 20 mins later ? It isn’t a conclusive answer, but I agree with the poster above who said this all adds to the picture that she placed herself there. The defence will likely be painting her as a caring nurse who wanted to help everyone and do her best. But when you do read the messages about being in room 1 you can’t deny she is pushing for something
- Status