Completely understandable that people need explanations and reasons and obviously we have a long way to go in the trial so who knows what will materialise, what we will hear about her past. However, sadly I think in some cases, there is no explanation. I think some people are just evil.I think people are just looking for an explanation as to why she would do something like this, perhaps something will come up in the trial, perhaps it won’t.
Yeah and politely I’m trying to say that I can’t see why or how people think that’s the case here? Also, I’m guessing the type of cover up or blame pinning that’s going on when people are saying ‘it happens’… are rarely accusing an individual of mass murder? So while we can say scapegoating happens it’s really bonkers to me to think people have done that in this case. I’m really not bothered how many people feel they have been aggrieved in their place of work about things that weren’t really their faultMy comment was purely on the fact that although it seems unlikely lots of different services would make things fit their narrative or turn the other way about something, it does happen. Wasn't necessarily in relation to this case just a thought I had
i absolutely agree with this. i understand why people want explanations or want a “reason” but the vast majority of murder convictions will pass without that clear “why did you do it?” question ever being answered. i mean, psychologists have been debating it for (probably) centuries at this point. some people are just evil, or are at least capable of committing evil acts.Completely understandable that people need explanations and reasons and obviously we have a long way to go in the trial so who knows what will materialise, what we will hear about her past. However, sadly I think in some cases, there is no explanation. I think some people are just evil.
If a unit is running at a 20% shortfall then there'd be bank or overtime shifts out every day, a young nurse who loves her job and has no kids would pick up more of them so be around a lot more but also be more at risk of burnout.There was a text message read in court yesterday about Lucy splitting her shift. It could explain her being there more often, it seems that she was called in a lot. There was also mention of her being asked to do extra shifts.
They had no choice but to involve police they needed to find out the cause of the deaths. Of course it’s not comparable to a police investigation - nor should it or is it intended to be. They are two completely separate bodies designed to do different things. It’s out of the remit of the RCPCH to investigate criminal activity - if they suspect any it would be passed to police who are there to investigate criminals.I can understand this tbf and also wonder whether someone who looks so 'normal' could really be this evil. The only reason I can see the possibility is because I went to uni with someone who committed murder. And she was also young, pretty, very very career minded, had a husband, loving family - just a regular girl. Quite nice too as we'd hung out sometimes. When I saw it in the papers I was shocked - but they'd found the body so there was no denying it. I assumed there'd be a reason but there wasn't. And at her sentencing, her lack of remorse was noted by the judge. Since then I've realised you really can't tell what goes on behind closed door and who people are. Of course, LL could be innocent anyway!
I didn’t make my point well. The report was damning for negligence. And as serious as it was, it’s not in any way comparable to a police investigation. Only one of those investigations leads to criminal charges and potential prison. The trust published the report, the recommendations were being implemented.
By brush under the carpet I meant, they could have brushed criminal activity under the carpet and avoided a police investigation. They could have wrapped it into the RSPCH review as mismanagement and show they had taken it on board. Transferred LL out under the guise of poor performance or offer her an opportunity in the tier 3 hospital and be done with it.
Why would they add a police investigation to the mix and risk potential criminal charges that could have hit any of the staff and management and also opened up even more findings of negligence. You can’t control what a police investigation will dig up or how long it will go.
Even if LL is found not guilty the hospital can still be taken to court for negligence. They’ve opened themselves up to even more scrutiny. So initiating a police investigation served no advantage to anyone other than if they genuinely believed LL was a threat.
Also, I’d just like to add that believing LL is not guilty ≠ believing in the scapegoat theory eitherHonestly I feel like you can't have a discussion on this thread at the moment.
I've never questioned why someone feels she's guilty, I can completely see why they feel that way.
I've never belittled someone who thinks she's innocent, which has happened more times then I can count at this point.
I am firmly in the I don't fucking know camp, I will question the prosecution, I will question the defence.
But, on this thread, unless a question is angled firmly to her guilt, you're inviting to get shot down.
All the shouts of all the evidence, everything we've heard...
Anyone offers another explanation gets reminded we are only beginning the second week.
Yet if your brandishing a pitch fork, it's absolutely acceptable to have her set in stone guilty after one week.
Unless you can actually have a conversation, not an am RIGHT and let me TELL you why I am.
There's a lot we don't know yet we have only heard the very start of one side of the story, I think it makes a healthy debate when people have different opinions. I'm not sure what to think because I don't know enoughYeah and politely I’m trying to say that I can’t see why or how people think that’s the case here? Also, I’m guessing the type of cover up or blame pinning that’s going on when people are saying ‘it happens’… are rarely accusing an individual of mass murder? So while we can say scapegoating happens it’s really bonkers to me to think people have done that in this case. I’m really not bothered how many people feel they have been aggrieved in their place of work about things that weren’t really their faultI’m sure all of us have felt like that. It’s just not the same.
But a lot of the time “the other explanations” are posed as questions but if you answer it using things we’ve already heard so far then you’re being mean. Or they are posed of statements of fact that I think people should be able to say hmm is that the case? It’s not being mean. From where I’m sitting, a lot of people that want to cast doubt are using things that we don’t know rather than things that we do know. Obviously a bit of that will go on. But if somebody says “what if xyz” then they can expect answers. And if somebody says “it happens” then I would just love to know how it has happened here and what that we’ve heard so far points to itHonestly I feel like you can't have a discussion on this thread at the moment.
I've never questioned why someone feels she's guilty, I can completely see why they feel that way.
I've never belittled someone who thinks she's innocent, which has happened more times then I can count at this point.
I am firmly in the I don't fucking know camp, I will question the prosecution, I will question the defence.
But, on this thread, unless a question is angled firmly to her guilt, you're inviting to get shot down.
All the shouts of all the evidence, everything we've heard...
Anyone offers another explanation gets reminded we are only beginning the second week.
Yet if your brandishing a pitch fork, it's absolutely acceptable to have her set in stone guilty after one week.
Unless you can actually have a conversation, not an am RIGHT and let me TELL you why I am.
Just thinking about the urges and LL apparently not doing anything up the when the first charges were levied in 2015.Tbf Wayne Couzens slowly escalated from voyeurism, a common way that rapists start (and build up the courage to carry out full on sex attacks).
I think people are just looking for an explanation as to why she would do something like this, perhaps something will come up in the trial, perhaps it won’t. Harold Shipman and BA had clear ‘motives’ for their crimes, and WC we can assume did it for sexual gratification. It’s completely normal for people to look for explanations for things they don’t understand.
(I’ll also say that I don’t subscribe to the scapegoat theory before anybody jumps down my throat).
Exactly this. Noone is doubting scapegoating happens, but likening a personal experience to a trial of this scale really isn't comparable.But a lot of the time “the other explanations” are posed as questions but if you answer it using things we’ve already heard so far then you’re being mean. Or they are posed of statements of fact that I think people should be able to say hmm is that the case? It’s not being mean. From where I’m sitting, a lot of people that want to cast doubt are using things that we don’t know rather than things that we do know. Obviously a bit of that will go on. But if somebody says “what if xyz” then they can expect answers. And if somebody says “it happens” then I would just love to know how it has happened here and what that we’ve heard so far points to itI’m not being hurtful or arrogant by asking that. I really don’t mind if after I’ve said something, people use examples from the case and points that we’ve heard so far to show me otherwise. I also don’t think they’re personally attacking me - even when they say oh well guilty as charged then no point in a trial. Even though it’s provocative. Sometimes I think the wilful ignorance is simply to be provocative and get people biting anyways. It’s not one camp being worse than the other anyhoo.
I think the problem is, people discussing theories about what happened or certain pieces of evidence is often being misinterpreted by others as them actually concretely believing in that particular theory, which is usually not even the case.Isn’t the whole point of the thread to discuss our varying views and thoughts?Aside from the odd spat I think everyone’s been very respectful and polite!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?