Be my guest
I’ve been on the LL threads on and off the entire trial and have swung between not being able to decide and guilty throughout.
For me the case is not proven
beyond reasonable doubt. There are 5 other babies deaths she isn’t charged with so what happened to them? We're led to believe these babies were not expected to die, then we're told the unit was taking babies of earlier gestation (was it child G?) than they usually did. The nurses were also caring for more than one baby at a time too which is not best practice.
The babies LL is charged with murdering or trying to also collapsed on other shifts or on days she didn’t work, so naturally she can’t be charged with those attempts, but they happened, along with 5 other deaths, why?
Baby E is the worrying case, and the two triplet brothers 'probably coming back with a bang' from her holiday. With baby E I remember evidence that babies don’t bleed like that, then much later on in the trial that early gestation babies can be prone to haemorrhage?? So I can see why the jury is taking their time to go over everything and learn about what can go wrong, and whether that’s what happened, or they were deliberately hurt.
Baby H had a butterfly needle left in her chest that nobody knew if it had punctured her lung tissue causing the problems she was suffering.
This is one case where I’d like to know more about her background and what she was like as a person before deciding, which of course isn’t allowed. BUT she was either a criminal mastermind hurting and murdering babies without being detected for so long (and I don’t think she’s that clever) or she’s a scapegoat for a badly failing unit, or?
I shared a story early on but I have relatives working in the NHS and I know how the NHS can lie, covers up and protects its own. look how many Trusts and sectors within the NHS are in special measures for failures and bullying.
So before I’d lock her up forever, I’d be taking my time, like the jury is, to come to the right conclusion.