I know someone has to do it but I don’t know how you’d live with your self knowing you might be allowing a baby killer to carry on their life.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
The way I now see it, is the better the defence team the better really. It should ensure a conviction of a truly guilty person. The onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt. The defence needs to ask the right questions which I’m sure they will. to cover all bases.
You don’t want a guilty person getting off because they find some loophole down the line that puts an original trial at risk. If she had a crap barrister or simply one so inexperienced that they clumsied about she could later argue that the trial wasn’t fair etc.
You don’t want a guilty person getting off because they find some loophole down the line that puts an original trial at risk. If she had a crap barrister or simply one so inexperienced that they clumsied about she could later argue that the trial wasn’t fair etc.
I think the timing of the facebook look ups would be interesting, would it be possible she was looking up after to see if they were okay? I could imagine someone doing that, if the parents were very upset, perhaps she looked them up to see if they were doing okay?
Professional people -
1. Is it possible that with the air injected, she was just a very terrible nurse, incompetent? I'd be interested to hear her record prior to working on the NICU , I'm assuming this will all come out.
2. Does prosecution always go first? I do always think this has an impact on the jury / public. As some people have already mentioned, after day 1 they believe she is guilty however I imagine it's possible to do a complete u turn after defense and as that's the most recent information relayed to you, especially with this trial over 6 months I wonder on the impact this has? Of course they'll do closing arguments but it must be hard for prosecution given there could be months passed between prosecution argument and the end of the trial?
Could her defense be that machines malfunctioned with air? That the insulin was an accident? Is that plausible?
Like others have said, it's so hard to prove unequivocally that she did it. Obviously the amount of times suggests it's intentional but if this was her first tike working NICU could she just be really really bad at her job?
Definatly lessons to be learnt by Hospitals, I know that everyone is stretched but especially after the remarks regarding motteling which was unusual, how did it take for 22 attempts / successes before anyone did anything about it? I find that extremely upsetting and worrying. As others mentioned, after 1 case if a suspicious death there's interveiwa etc so how with this hospital was there 22?! I expect this will form part of the defense.
Professional people -
1. Is it possible that with the air injected, she was just a very terrible nurse, incompetent? I'd be interested to hear her record prior to working on the NICU , I'm assuming this will all come out.
2. Does prosecution always go first? I do always think this has an impact on the jury / public. As some people have already mentioned, after day 1 they believe she is guilty however I imagine it's possible to do a complete u turn after defense and as that's the most recent information relayed to you, especially with this trial over 6 months I wonder on the impact this has? Of course they'll do closing arguments but it must be hard for prosecution given there could be months passed between prosecution argument and the end of the trial?
Could her defense be that machines malfunctioned with air? That the insulin was an accident? Is that plausible?
Like others have said, it's so hard to prove unequivocally that she did it. Obviously the amount of times suggests it's intentional but if this was her first tike working NICU could she just be really really bad at her job?
Definatly lessons to be learnt by Hospitals, I know that everyone is stretched but especially after the remarks regarding motteling which was unusual, how did it take for 22 attempts / successes before anyone did anything about it? I find that extremely upsetting and worrying. As others mentioned, after 1 case if a suspicious death there's interveiwa etc so how with this hospital was there 22?! I expect this will form part of the defense.
Someone asked about Jury break down and I now can't find the post. Have just read this:
Judge Mr Justice Goss earlier told the jury of eight men and four women to put their emotions “to one side” when hearing evidence bound to provoke “horror”.
(If someone has already posted, sorry! (Trying to catch up))
Judge Mr Justice Goss earlier told the jury of eight men and four women to put their emotions “to one side” when hearing evidence bound to provoke “horror”.
(If someone has already posted, sorry! (Trying to catch up))
When my nephew was in intensive care only the parents and grandparents could go in to see him and sit with him
Prosecution has to put their case forward so yes they go first it’ll all be reiterated during and at the end the jury will take notes throughout
'Your truth, their truth and the actual truth!'
So I’m guessing she’s pleading not guilty because the whole thing will be hard to unequivocally prove? And thus she may not be convicted (my initial gut feeling says otherwise, although like others I am really trying to keep an open mind since it’s only day 1)
I am curious to know what she like, boyfriend, best mates etc, it’s morbidly fascinating that it got to the point where she was (allegedly at this stage) killing tiny helpless babies.
I am curious to know what she like, boyfriend, best mates etc, it’s morbidly fascinating that it got to the point where she was (allegedly at this stage) killing tiny helpless babies.
If a professional ever came to my house having looked on my social media trying to "confront me"
gotta be careful doing stuff like that cause not everyone will roll over and take violations like that just because of your profession.I work with adults so, I can only give my opinion based on what I know from experience. But there has to be quite a bit of air, like a syringe full, for it to cause any problems (a doctor told me this once!) but as babies are smaller perhaps this is different too and maybe it is possible to be an accident? I’m not sure.
I have had the thought perhaps it’s equipment malfunctioning, not getting serviced etc and she is being used as a scapegoat rather than the trust admitting fault. But it’s hard to say without more facts. However yesterdays update did change my mind on this opinion..
It’s quite common for social services etc to use social media if they think a child is at risk. Sadly mothers will deny being in a relationship with someone who is considered a risk (convicted sex offender etc) and allow them around their children despite being warned by social services it could lead to their children being removed. So in cases like this then yes absolutely all means should be explored if a child is at risk. And it’s not necessarily a case of “confronting” someone, they wouldn’t go marching round to their house. It would be used in their case in a professional manner.If a professional ever came to my house having looked on my social media trying to "confront me"
If it was equipment malfunctioning, why would it only ever happen on Lucy’s watch over the course of an entire year and not any other nurse? How would the hospital go about covering this up without the police finding out after years of investigating?
Like I said, not everyone will sit back and take professionals doing things like that. Stay safe out here.
Good points, she could of also been incompetent. It was just one of my thoughts before more evidence came to light yesterday.
In social work and safeguarding work they're usually accompanied by the police for those visits.If a professional ever came to my house having looked on my social media trying to "confront me"
Police or no police not everyone will roll over and take whatever is thrown at them because its a social worker.
Day 2 today I think the prosecution finishes outlining their case, it’s going to be long and harrowing hearing about the rest of the babies murder and attempted murder charges.
I am so glad I am not in the jury, but as a parent imagine having to sit there and listen to how the accused murdered their child whilst she is sitting across the bench from them. My thoughts with all the parents today. Including Lucy’s mum and dad, at this moment she is still innocent and as parents they are having to listen to what she’s accused of.
I am so glad I am not in the jury, but as a parent imagine having to sit there and listen to how the accused murdered their child whilst she is sitting across the bench from them. My thoughts with all the parents today. Including Lucy’s mum and dad, at this moment she is still innocent and as parents they are having to listen to what she’s accused of.
I can't read anymore of the stuff that's out there to do with the babies. It's truly horrific.
This could be the first time Lucy’s parents are hearing about what actually happened. I would guess she had been spinning them excuses about cover ups at work.
What would you do though? I can't tell if you mean you'd fight them all or try and take legal action? Cos the former would only make things worse and the latter wouldn't work as its not a crime.
- Status