Thanks for clarifying. Good to know this has already been covered.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
So so "easy" to do sadly
Dr Evans is in court today. I wish we had the live reporting on CS!
I know nursing and medicine is a very trusting profession in general, but considering how lethal insulin can be, and how little it takes to do some real damage, it blows my mind that it's not a controlled drug.
(Slight me real, apologies in advance, if I could DM you I would!)Do you have OCD at all? I do (not for cleaning though, I count obsessively). Intrusive thoughts are part of OCD and mine are terrible when I'm under stress or worried, ranging from veering my car suddenly to hitting someone as they're talking to me
I obviously never have, it's the fear that I will.
Was awful when my children were small, I kept imagining I'd just drop them
It’s like you’re in my brain! I have OCD and counting in 4s obsessively was my whole life until I was put on sertraline. I thought I would never be cured of the counting but after 2 months on it, it all stopped, it’s like I’ve got my life back!
(At the worst points I couldn’t come on tattle because if I saw a post didn’t have an amount of likes that went into 4 I’d get antsy
) Anyway back to LL, I voted guilty, shock horror!
I agree, especially when you think how often it is used by killers in a health care setting. With these babies we’re literally talking mls is enough to kill or seriously harm. And worse, when it does kill its undetectable. It’s crazy it’s so easily accessible.
Last edited:
So going by todays tweets it looks like BM is going down the route of accepting the tpn was tampered with, but blaming other staff.
So I’m wondering what the NG, or leaning to NG camp, believe has happened in the case of F. Im very much G, but have been trying to look at other angles/possibilities today, just to see if I can come up with anything that’s less than reasonable doubt.
I think the fact that LL is there for every single incident is already too big a coincidence. But, if, for arguments sake she’s being stitched up, how much more of an impossible coincidence would it be that after the police start there investigation into LL, they find that not only has she been there for each incident, but with some what luck, they then have that all this other incriminating circumstantial evidence that turns up such as the Fb searches, photo on her phone and the medical notes and the note at her house (plus all the other little bits).
But let’s just then say that happens to just be the way it’s luckily worked out for the police, they have a suspect and then find evidence from that period that also just happens to fit retrospectively. And you put babies A-E down to hospital failings, which although I do not believe for one second, I can see why others can, especially given we know there were many issues on that unit, and we’ve seen examples of bad practice. But, and this is what I can’t get my head round, what possible innocent explanation can there be for F? I genuinely am wondering what the people that can believe A-E are possibly as a result of failings on the unit, rather than LL, think could have happened with F?
My thinking when trying to look at it from an innocent angle, actually strengthens my belief that it’s LL. Because I just can’t believe that it could possibly have been two massive coincidences that not only was LL there for all 22 incidents, but also had more retrospective evidence tying her to the murder/harm of the babies.
I also can’t believe that we’ve heard from multiple staff (some of whom have gone on to have very successful careers), and they are all in on this coverup/blame scenario. And if we aren’t to believe the prosecution experts then why should we believe the defence’s? I guess it all comes down to which version you believe, and whether that’s enough for you to believe she’s guilty beyond reasonable doubt. And whether the other explanations/eliminations are over the threshold of that reasonable doubt ie whether the other explanation/eliminations are credible enough to explain what’s happened or not. I’ve tried looking at it from other points of view today while we aren’t getting much reporting but just can’t see any other explanation for all these collapses/deaths
I know we are yet to hear from defence, but given what we’ve heard from them so far I find them a bit weak and their other explanations not credible. I just can’t see how they could sway me from G, but nether the less I am looking forward to hearing what they have to say and what they come up with other than muddying the waters and discrediting. As I say if you discredit the prosecution experts, then why wouldn’t you discredit the defence’s experts in the same way
You can’t control all medicines or machines or pretty much all things that would/could be lethal to babies, otherwise a unit couldn’t function. As it’s supposed to be the doctors that deal with the insulin, they and nurses know how lethal it would be, and would never just give a baby insulin if they weren’t supposed to.
The difference is no normal doctor or nurse would ever use it in a way to kill/harm a baby, just as they would never use air in the tube, or babies milk to over feed, or switch the monitoring equipment off, or force a tube down a babies throat. I get what you mean about it’s crazy that insulin is tiny, and isn’t seen so pretty much undetectable etc so it’s scary to think about. But at the same time pretty much everything in that unit can sadly be used as a weapon when in the wrong hands…. the hands of an evil psychopath
So I’m wondering what the NG, or leaning to NG camp, believe has happened in the case of F. Im very much G, but have been trying to look at other angles/possibilities today, just to see if I can come up with anything that’s less than reasonable doubt.
I think the fact that LL is there for every single incident is already too big a coincidence. But, if, for arguments sake she’s being stitched up, how much more of an impossible coincidence would it be that after the police start there investigation into LL, they find that not only has she been there for each incident, but with some what luck, they then have that all this other incriminating circumstantial evidence that turns up such as the Fb searches, photo on her phone and the medical notes and the note at her house (plus all the other little bits).
But let’s just then say that happens to just be the way it’s luckily worked out for the police, they have a suspect and then find evidence from that period that also just happens to fit retrospectively. And you put babies A-E down to hospital failings, which although I do not believe for one second, I can see why others can, especially given we know there were many issues on that unit, and we’ve seen examples of bad practice. But, and this is what I can’t get my head round, what possible innocent explanation can there be for F? I genuinely am wondering what the people that can believe A-E are possibly as a result of failings on the unit, rather than LL, think could have happened with F?
My thinking when trying to look at it from an innocent angle, actually strengthens my belief that it’s LL. Because I just can’t believe that it could possibly have been two massive coincidences that not only was LL there for all 22 incidents, but also had more retrospective evidence tying her to the murder/harm of the babies.
I also can’t believe that we’ve heard from multiple staff (some of whom have gone on to have very successful careers), and they are all in on this coverup/blame scenario. And if we aren’t to believe the prosecution experts then why should we believe the defence’s? I guess it all comes down to which version you believe, and whether that’s enough for you to believe she’s guilty beyond reasonable doubt. And whether the other explanations/eliminations are over the threshold of that reasonable doubt ie whether the other explanation/eliminations are credible enough to explain what’s happened or not. I’ve tried looking at it from other points of view today while we aren’t getting much reporting but just can’t see any other explanation for all these collapses/deaths
I know we are yet to hear from defence, but given what we’ve heard from them so far I find them a bit weak and their other explanations not credible. I just can’t see how they could sway me from G, but nether the less I am looking forward to hearing what they have to say and what they come up with other than muddying the waters and discrediting. As I say if you discredit the prosecution experts, then why wouldn’t you discredit the defence’s experts in the same way
See I kind of disagree, as we’ve seen lots of things can be lethal to babies for example a syringe of air, medical equipment, babies own feeds, and lots of other medicines that would be lethal to babies in the wrong doses.
You can’t control all medicines or machines or pretty much all things that would/could be lethal to babies, otherwise a unit couldn’t function. As it’s supposed to be the doctors that deal with the insulin, they and nurses know how lethal it would be, and would never just give a baby insulin if they weren’t supposed to.
The difference is no normal doctor or nurse would ever use it in a way to kill/harm a baby, just as they would never use air in the tube, or babies milk to over feed, or switch the monitoring equipment off, or force a tube down a babies throat. I get what you mean about it’s crazy that insulin is tiny, and isn’t seen so pretty much undetectable etc so it’s scary to think about. But at the same time pretty much everything in that unit can sadly be used as a weapon when in the wrong hands…. the hands of an evil psychopath
Last edited:
I've been nursing for many many years and have always said this, from almost day one....potassium too...both lethal and so easily accessible
I'm still in the unsure frame of mind only because I haven't heard the full thing and things just haven't fully 'clicked' for me yet. The Facebook searches, photos on her phone and paperwork, to me, are just background noise - because I bet if they investigated the other members of staff they would also find the same (some posters on here have already said they would probably have a sheet stuffed in a pocket etc). I guess the context is what is missing for me. Are they talking box files upon box files of babies sheets organised in a system, or some crumpled up pieces in a drawer? Are we talking multiple pictures of irrelevant things, or one picture of a card which really, proves nothing? I think the bigger picture for those things are missing, it's just adds a wee bit of speculation for me.So going by todays tweets it looks like BM is going down the route of accepting the tpn was tampered with, but blaming other staff.
So I’m wondering what the NG, or leaning to NG camp, believe has happened in the case of F. Im very much G, but have been trying to look at other angles/possibilities today, just to see if I can come up with anything that’s less than reasonable doubt.
I think the fact that LL is there for every single incident is already too big a coincidence. But, if, for arguments sake she’s being stitched up, how much more of an impossible coincidence would it be that after the police start there investigation into LL, they find that not only has she been there for each incident, but with some what luck, they then have that all this other incriminating circumstantial evidence that turns up such as the Fb searches, photo on her phone and the medical notes and the note at her house (plus all the other little bits).
But let’s just then say that happens to just be the way it’s luckily worked out for the police, they have a suspect and then find evidence from that period that also just happens to fit retrospectively. And you put babies A-E down to hospital failings, which although I do not believe for one second, I can see why others can, especially given we know there were many issues on that unit, and we’ve seen examples of bad practice. But, and this is what I can’t get my head round, what possible innocent explanation can there be for F? I genuinely am wondering what the people that can believe A-E are possibly as a result of failings on the unit, rather than LL, think could have happened with F?
My thinking when trying to look at it from an innocent angle, actually strengthens my belief that it’s LL. Because I just can’t believe that it could possibly have been two massive coincidences that not only was LL there for all 22 incidents, but also had more retrospective evidence tying her to the murder/harm of the babies.
I also can’t believe that we’ve heard from multiple staff (some of whom have gone on to have very successful careers), and they are all in on this coverup/blame scenario. And if we aren’t to believe the prosecution experts then why should we believe the defence’s? I guess it all comes down to which version you believe, and whether that’s enough for you to believe she’s guilty beyond reasonable doubt. And whether the other explanations/eliminations are over the threshold of that reasonable doubt ie whether the other explanation/eliminations are credible enough to explain what’s happened or not. I’ve tried looking at it from other points of view today while we aren’t getting much reporting but just can’t see any other explanation for all these collapses/deaths
I know we are yet to hear from defence, but given what we’ve heard from them so far I find them a bit weak and their other explanations not credible. I just can’t see how they could sway me from G, but nether the less I am looking forward to hearing what they have to say and what they come up with other than muddying the waters and discrediting. As I say if you discredit the prosecution experts, then why wouldn’t you discredit the defence’s experts in the same way
See I kind of disagree, as we’ve seen lots of things can be lethal to babies for example a syringe of air, medical equipment, babies own feeds, and lots of other medicines that would be lethal to babies in the wrong doses.
You can’t control all medicines or machines or pretty much all things that would/could be lethal to babies, otherwise a unit couldn’t function. As it’s supposed to be the doctors that deal with the insulin, they and nurses know how lethal it would be, and would never just give a baby insulin if they weren’t supposed to.
The difference is no normal doctor or nurse would ever use it in a way to kill/harm a baby, just as they would never use air in the tube, or babies milk to over feed, or switch the monitoring equipment off, or force a tube down a babies throat. I get what you mean about it’s crazy that insulin is tiny, and isn’t seen so pretty much undetectable etc so it’s scary to think about. But at the same time pretty much everything in that unit can sadly be used as a weapon when in the wrong hands…. the hands of an evil psychopath
It may well be that once the defence have had their say, that will be the 'click'. I just haven't heard the full story, and I don't like to make a judgement based on one side.
A good example of this is the Star case - the prosecution said they had video evidence of Savannah hitting Star in the car (
) - lots of people said the video evidence was really grainy and couldn't really be made out. So when the defence came and Savannah claimed she was doing 'the claw' from the Jim Carrey film because Star liked it (Star being 16 months old and the film being about 16 years old), it locked and loaded that that was completely untrue. Does that make sense? Had the defence brought out videos and pictures of Savannah doing 'the claw' with Star at other points in time, it wouldn't have rung quite so suspiciously.WOW
ETA double wow
ETA double wow
Last edited:
Yea, and I know it maybe doesn’t come across this way, but I genuinely can see how some people don’t feel they’ve heard enough yet, some maybe never will.I'm still in the unsure frame of mind only because I haven't heard the full thing and things just haven't fully 'clicked' for me yet. The Facebook searches, photos on her phone and paperwork, to me, are just background noise - because I bet if they investigated the other members of staff they would also find the same (some posters on here have already said they would probably have a sheet stuffed in a pocket etc). I guess the context is what is missing for me. Are they talking box files upon box files of babies sheets organised in a system, or some crumpled up pieces in a drawer? Are we talking multiple pictures of irrelevant things, or one picture of a card which really, proves nothing? I think the bigger picture for those things are missing, it's just adds a wee bit of speculation for me.
It may well be that once the defence have had their say, that will be the 'click'. I just haven't heard the full story, and I don't like to make a judgement based on one side.
A good example of this is the Star case - the prosecution said they had video evidence of Savannah hitting Star in the car (
But I am just wondering if anyone can give an innocent explanation for what they believe may have happened to F, if they don’t think/haven’t heard enough so far to believe LL is G? Some may never think she’s G, or as you said, (and gave an good example of another trial you followed), may eventually hear something that is your “click” moment. I just can’t see what other innocent explanation there could be for F, I’m genuinely curious if anyone can come up with one.
But I can see at a stretch how other people can explain A-E with negligence/bad practice (although I don’t personally). I’m just trying to put an effort in today to looking at alternatives to see if there’s anything else plausible. All roads for me lead back to LL, but I will look forward to hearing from defence to see what they can add to the mix
*ETA* just seen this tweet so added on
Ahhhhhhhhh I really wish we were getting a transcript or more details of this, I hope we get to hear more in one of the roundups later on. I feel it’s something that so many of us really want to hear more detail on:
Last edited:
See I think alot of things are true here. The hospital was a shambles, Lucy took advantage of that and some professionals are throwing her to the wolves so to speak as it's easier to blame her for everything and save their own skin. As I've said before baby A-E for me if I was a juror simply wouldn't meet the threshold to convict although in my spirit I feel she is guilty of E. I can understand why some people are still NG as someone previously pointed out - Sally Clark I remember the medical evidence being once is a tragedy, twice is suspicious and three is murder and look how that turned out, the fact some of these babies didn't have PM's as someone who was staunchly NG until recently I defo see both sides of the argument.
@avabella having been on other trial threads with you, I know that you like a fair trial and like to wait out for the defence. You've always said that you disliked the 'burn them at the stake' mentality. This trial being no different. I appreciate your opinions and questions...along with everyone else's!I'm still in the unsure frame of mind only because I haven't heard the full thing and things just haven't fully 'clicked' for me yet. The Facebook searches, photos on her phone and paperwork, to me, are just background noise - because I bet if they investigated the other members of staff they would also find the same (some posters on here have already said they would probably have a sheet stuffed in a pocket etc). I guess the context is what is missing for me. Are they talking box files upon box files of babies sheets organised in a system, or some crumpled up pieces in a drawer? Are we talking multiple pictures of irrelevant things, or one picture of a card which really, proves nothing? I think the bigger picture for those things are missing, it's just adds a wee bit of speculation for me.
It may well be that once the defence have had their say, that will be the 'click'. I just haven't heard the full story, and I don't like to make a judgement based on one side.
A good example of this is the Star case - the prosecution said they had video evidence of Savannah hitting Star in the car (
Also that’s it for today. Tomorrow we move onto G, I feel that G is a particularly difficult case to hear. If you believe LL has done this, then it seems she really steps her cruelty up with G, and leaves G with permanent brain damage, there’s also all the little milestone celebrations for G, and then what happens in the evil clutches of LL after she was doing so well, it’s just very sad hearing that she was doing so well and really progressing before LL. And also she is attacked multiple times, not just once or twice
. There is also the evidence that prosecution say shows LL tampering with the equipment , at the very least you can see that she was again just leaving a baby in a high level of distress. I found it a really really hard read on the wiki, so can imagine it’s going to be even more difficult to hear in detail in court from tomorrow onwards
. There is also the evidence that prosecution say shows LL tampering with the equipment , at the very least you can see that she was again just leaving a baby in a high level of distress. I found it a really really hard read on the wiki, so can imagine it’s going to be even more difficult to hear in detail in court from tomorrow onwards
I agree. I think some are out to save their own skin, so will happily throw her to the wolves. She may be guilty, but that doesn't mean she was guilty of all those charges.
Thank you - I guess the Star trial was a little bit more clear cut in some ways but yes, I like to gather everything I can then decide
not that it matters hugely as I’m not on the Jury, and I’d probably piss everyone else on a Jury right off 
It’s just the way I like to look at things, doesn’t mean it’s any better or worse than anyone else 
Not looking forward to G it’s the one that really upset me how well they was doingAlso that’s it for today. Tomorrow we move onto G, I feel that G is a particularly difficult case to hear. If you believe LL has done this, then it seems she really steps her cruelty up with G, and leaves G with permanent brain damage, there’s also all the little milestone celebrations for G, and then what happens in the evil clutches of LL after she was doing so well, it’s just very sad hearing that she was doing so well and really progressing before LL. And also she is attacked multiple times, not just once or twice
View attachment 1771828
Baby G and I..both heartbreaking in as much as they were such fightersNot looking forward to G it’s the one that really upset me how well they was doing
So Baby F has definitely been given insulin Deliberately as nobody seems to be arguing that not to be the case.
So if it’s not Lucy it’s someone else on the ward, another nurse or dr as presume they only had keys to the locked fridge.
And if it’s been put in the bag as suggested it has to be a deliberate act of trying to harm baby and not accidenFal.
So is Lucy just very unlucky to be on the ward at the same time as this happened or is this another coincidence along with all the others we have see so far ……..
So if it’s not Lucy it’s someone else on the ward, another nurse or dr as presume they only had keys to the locked fridge.
And if it’s been put in the bag as suggested it has to be a deliberate act of trying to harm baby and not accidenFal.
So is Lucy just very unlucky to be on the ward at the same time as this happened or is this another coincidence along with all the others we have see so far ……..
- Status