‘Yes, she looks normal. She looks friendly, she looks very average. You would not think she could hurt a fly is you met her as a nurse.’
It’s often said that she looks a certain way but she did make parents feel uncomfortable and she said things to cause them upset - one told her to go away, she said to another that they had said their goodbyes now, she told another that they would die when it wasn’t her place to say. She was also disobedient and didn’t do as the senior staff asked.
All of these things have been said and we are still early into the case. It paints a picture of a bleep to me.
Couldn’t agree more, regardless of G/NG I would not want her as my, or my children’s nurse.
Looking the parents up in a sinister pattern constantly on Fb, sending the card, keeping it on her phone, taking the photos, keeping nursing notes of babies that weren’t her designated ones, leaving her own designated babies to interfere with babies not hers, leaving a screaming tiny baby and doing nothing to help, disobeying her senior, interfering with parents that just wanted privacy and ofc her totally inappropriate comments.
The list goes on, and after the next couple of babies I’m going to stick my neck out and say there’ll be a whole load more things to add to the list of things, that at the very least, show she’s an awful nurse
I followed the trial for star hobson’s murder. I know there were a lot of people worried that because the only people who were there were Frankie and Savannah, that they would both be found not guilty of murder because how do you know which of them delivered the fatal blow? They both said it wasn’t them and there was no other cctv or witnesses.
But it was the accumulation of other evidence that pointed towards Savannah and I know I have no doubt it was her and so did the jury.
I think even with this case, when you have four or five experts coming to the same conclusion (air embolus) and the defence may try to cast doubt because the description of the rashes from the staff are slightly different, or some of the experts can’t diagnose the exact cause of death, just not what it isn’t. But what’s the alternative if the defence don’t offer anything? Some unknown disease that just happened to affect 5 babies at the same hospital in a short space of time? That would be an ‘unreasonable’ doubt to me. Because it’s so very unlikely. Especially when you then add in the same member of staff who was with the babies just moments before the collapses.
so when I think of alternatives I ask myself ‘but is that reasonable?’ Like when Sandie Bohin found a disease with similar symptoms to baby e (I think it was) there were only six reported cases in 50 years, is that a reasonable doubt when you weigh up all the other evidence? Don’t think so.
You have such an excellent way of making the point, I was trying to say similar earlier except mine was a jumbled mess of ramblings