Yes, they performed compliance and suggestibility tests on Frankie. It revealed that she was in the top 3% of most compliant people and low to average suggestibility. She had an IQ of 70 iirc.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Yes I completely agree with what you’re saying. I guess if we flipped it round to the experts for the defence it’s the same kind of thing, are all the experts wrong or is it a case of which ones you believe? I really found it interesting with what PP had said about BM actually possibly helping the prosecution. Guess we will just have to wait and see. Also the pharmacist is going to be continued to be examined tomorrow by prosecution, and then ofc cross with BM, for a number of reasons I’m looking forward to hearing this tomorrow. And also I agree, the expert today didn’t claim to know for defs about air, all she could say for defs is that it wasn’t linked to any haematological condition. I guess she’ll be back for baby N with the next bleeding charge.I think it can go both ways tbh. He’s basically doing his job isn’t he when he tries to discredit them. The fact he brought up this drs lack of knowledge around air embolism was good for LL’s defence. However, given how rare they are & how rare the studies are etc there is a reasonable explanation for this. Hopefully he is covering all bases - like a pp said maybe in the last thread, could he be assisting the prosecution during his cross?
I do think his cross may have put some doubt in the jury’s mind however, as the evidence continues & a bigger picture is painted, it may not make a difference. She never claimed to be an expert in air embolism, just that she was using her existing knowledge to explain it/how it likely occurred so
Also I’m sure I remember this, or did I imagine it, at some point was there some suggestion (from BM) that E could have had a clotting disorder? If so that was also ruled out today also
I suppose though that I find the air embolus cases we’ve heard so far (absence any strong defence) as a case of who did it, not what killed them. Because any other reasonable explanation has been ruled out. And the insulin one I don’t think anyone is debating.
I appreciate its not as obvious as the injury star received though. But air embolus never would be. I know the case is extremely unique as it’s healthcare murders but I’m not sure a lack of cause of death is unique. People get convicted of murder without bodies.
There are also cases where people get convicted of murder but a body has ever been found. Bernadette Walker is the most recent case that springs to mind. They had to prove with the circumstantial evidence they had that BW was not alive, there was nothing pointing to BW being alive but also no hard evidence she wasn’t. For example, no blood or a murder weapon. The case was based around text messages and their movements after she went missing, and the parents behaviour. Her mother and stepfather were both convicted of her murder. This was the first case I followed closely. It was Heartbreaking but, equally, it was fascinating. The family lived their life online and none of their socials had been removed and all their TikTok’s were full of videos, was really bizarre to be able to look at them.
Her parents did it, there is no doubt about that, but the how and where is she is still unanswered. The mothers other children at the time and (some still now) believe their sister just ran away and their mother is innocent.
I know it’s not relevant to anything in the trial, but I really want to see her mugshot.
They won’t release that unless she is found guilty. I’ve seen people online asking where is her mug shot etc etc, if she was a man it would be released and all the rest! However, I am fairly certain mug shots are only released if a person has entered a guilty plea or after a trial. I’m sure once the trial has concluded and (she is found guilty), the mugshots will come and so will the comments from the people “who knew there was something off about her all along”!
I know you weren’t asking why we haven’t seen it
I’m sure you are aware, but there are many online who can’t grasp this.I was really replying to the original poster in regards to how she looks.
I personally am not taken in on how she looks, iat all. It doesn’t make me think she’s in anyway blameless.
But the person I was replying to said it’s the way she looks, and in terms of looks she looks ordinary enough, you wouldn’t pick her out, but the point I was making is there are plenty of serial killers who have been surprisingly normal ( looks or otherwise )
I really hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think we are going to have any live reporting tomorrow. There’s no mention of it from anyone that was in court today, or in the usual round ups 
We're unlikely to hear much about her childhood during the case unless the prosecution has dug up something that's an obvious red flag. The defence aren't likely to show her childhood as being anything other than normal and happy because anything else might make people think she's guilty.
If/when she's convicted no doubt the press will find out as much as possible about her psst.
If/when she's convicted no doubt the press will find out as much as possible about her psst.
You'd do this when normal treatment isn't working. Usually with a hypo, you give a bit of dextrose (sugar) and it fixes it (which makes sense - if you're having a hypo from insufficient intake, you just need to top up).
They've given Child F dextrose and it hasn't worked. So now they're thinking other causes (innocent things like insulinoma, where the baby has an insulin secreting tumour. When our bodies make insulin, it's made with C-peptide attached, which is taken off by our enzymes. You include the C-peptide test always, because high C-peptide = high natural insulin).
Then it's come back with high insulin, but low C-peptide. The insulin we use most (and was used by the ward) is made by a bacteria or yeast that we've genetically modified to have the DNA for making insulin. It doesn't need to make C-peptide in how it makes insulin, so it's not there.
Therefore they know the insulin Child F got was injected.
it’s one test that’s part of several sent as a hypoglycaemia screen in neonates. In the last thread there was a photo included of all tests expected in the initial screening process for unexplained hypoglycaemia and it includes insulin/c-peptide levels.
I suppose if you think they’ve proven murder then it becomes a case of who done it, I think it’s unique in the fact they can confirm the suspects presence but the case solely rests on there ability to prove murder, rather than in a typical serial killer trial it would be a case of putting the suspect at the crime in the time line. Here it’s kind of backwards if you get me?
Is there any natural reason for cpeptide levels to be low and insulin levels to be high? Can the body just not create one without the other under any circumstances?
no you can not. C-peptides are a by product of insulin. You can’t have insulin (unless synthetic) without c-peptides. The only wayit is possible is with synthetic insulin. This part is indisputable, baby F was 100 percent without a doubt given synthetic insulin, it is the HOW they are trying to establish. Most logical explanation so far is the nurse who hung the original bag, Letby, who was also present just before all the other suspicious collapses.
what is wrong with some of these bleeping people? We still have a guy claiming this is a conspiracy.
On that note - how can anyone still argue her innocence after these past few days? Am I really missing something??
I recently attended a talk on the Psychology of Serial Killers. Some interesting things came up I won’t go into in detail. But,
- for those questioning motive. A study you may want to read up on is Holmes & Holmes (1998?) about thé 4 types of SK (visionary, mission, power/control and lust - lust and P/C can overlap);
- (common knowledge) but female SKs are much more likely to kill with poison/medicine
- male SKs generally operate for 2 years on average whereas the average time for female SKs before apprehension is 9.5 years
- two books that sounded interesting where A Serial Killers Daughter by Kerry Rawson - written by the daughter of Dennis Rayder and The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker..
- another book that made me chuckle at then brazenness, is by Dorothea Puente - a female SK from US. She wrote a cookbook whilst in prison (oh and she killed her victims by putting poison in their food she made for them)…
- finally for anyone thinking LL HAS to be a psychopath.. check out James Fallon and his study into the OFC in brains of killers.. interesting!
- for those questioning motive. A study you may want to read up on is Holmes & Holmes (1998?) about thé 4 types of SK (visionary, mission, power/control and lust - lust and P/C can overlap);
- (common knowledge) but female SKs are much more likely to kill with poison/medicine
- male SKs generally operate for 2 years on average whereas the average time for female SKs before apprehension is 9.5 years
- two books that sounded interesting where A Serial Killers Daughter by Kerry Rawson - written by the daughter of Dennis Rayder and The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker..
- another book that made me chuckle at then brazenness, is by Dorothea Puente - a female SK from US. She wrote a cookbook whilst in prison (oh and she killed her victims by putting poison in their food she made for them)…
- finally for anyone thinking LL HAS to be a psychopath.. check out James Fallon and his study into the OFC in brains of killers.. interesting!
So there’s not even a really rare condition where this can occur?
it seems weird if the results mean it cannot be disputed then why was it not taken further at the time?
Just because this is scientifically how it works, doesn’t mean someone who isn’t a specialist in the area would know this.
There is so much research out there which will tell you all about the relationship between c-peptides and insulin. Have a look.
I am happy to be proven wrong though, so if you can find anything that suggests otherwise please share.
I’ve looked and can not find anything so far.
I think I understand what you are trying to say just not sure I agree - not deliberately arguing, just interesting discussion and I think it may be just how people approach what evidence they want to see to make a decision differently.
Even with Star the prosecution still had to prove to the jury she was harmed deliberately and had multiple medical experts giving evidence. Savannah said she was in the kitchen and heard a bang. I think she claimed star fell or was hurt by another child. So the prosecution had to prove otherwise. I think it was easier to prove than air embolus because of the amount of force she must have sustained for that kind of injury
, but the process is the same - deciding if the evidence of deliberate harm is proven beyond reasonable doubt. I think the air embolus one has been clouded by poor care and prematurity but ultimately where I’m at (and I know not everyone agrees) is that so far there is no other reasonable explanation so that leaves me with them having proved murder.
My original post about star’s case though was just responding to discussion about reasonable doubt and was an example I could relate to because of the amount of doubt people had at the time that she would not be found guilty due to lack of evidence of who delivered the fatal blow in that room. I was not comparing the case with this one as they are different types of murder. This is definitely more complex.
I remember Dorothea Puente-she was this sweet looking old woman, talk about making judgements on looks and who you'd think you could trust!
I keep thinking of all the folks I know that are diabetic & that nipping it from the workplace is not the only way to obtain insulin. Opportunities are everywhere for diabolical minds.
- Status