On our ward we'd often be asked to do a split shift so we'd usually do 7am till around 12-1pm then go home and come back and do the twilight shift which would be 7pm till around 1am.Sorry posted at end of last thread and so my question may be missed, so I'll post it again here.
Someone mentioned the text she sent to a colleague about working a split shift. For those of us not working for NHS...what is a split shift and what (if any) significance is that to this case?
Would the jurors be offered support I wonder? Six months is a long time to live this case.I still can't wrap my head around this being a 6 month trial, so bloody harrowing for everyone involved but the sheer body of evidence to go through, I don't envy the judge or jury
Ah the way I read it was that they'd asked her to split her line of shifts, so 2 shifts right now because of the acuity due to unwell twins then her other shifts as planned. I've seen both happen when really understaffed. It also shows that she was very accommodating to the ward, I'd only ever text the nurses I thought would say yes.On our ward we'd often be asked to do a split shift so we'd usually do 7am till around 12-1pm then go home and come back and do the twilight shift which would be 7pm till around 1am.
Could be something like this
The only significance it highlights to me at the moment is that the ward was seriously short staffed and they were trying to keep as many bodies on a safeish ratio as they possibly could
I would say so, especially the victims of this case. I know you probably can’t say this type of thing these days but it’a the type of case to make the toughest of criminals/men/women break. I would hope the innocent jurors are getting support. Surely they are.Would the jurors be offered support I wonder? Six months is a long time to live this case.
Lol! He’s not a Tory any more thank fuck for that@MmmB777 just wanted to say you have my condolences on the whole being married to a tory front
Although I feel differently to you I can appreciate this as a well thought out, well put post.I know on previous threads a few people have said that motive isn’t really relevant on this but I do think it would add a whole load of context to why the CPS have decided to proceed with prosecuting her. I also think that they will introduce this and it will explain the digging up of the garden etc.
Equally there’s also a few people asking why did she wait X years to begin killing as it’s a stumbling block for them mentally between guilty/not guilty - it’s worth noting that the police have extended their investigation and it’s not due to finish for a few years so the first deaths to be prosecuted could very much be the tip of the iceberg.
I appreciate all sides of the argument at this stage and am reading each post and considering each point however I am very much in the mindset of guilty just now.
I don’t believe this many coincidences could occur together - the statistic probability of this has to be absolutely tiny, far tinier than the probability that she’s a wrongun.
I also think there’s credence to the fact that the death and collapse rates shifted when she changed shift, that staff were concerned about her enough to check on her and her behaviour around certain babies is questionable (being stood in the doorway saying their colour is off etc) - then upon full investigation by the police, so something her colleagues would have absolutely no knowledge of, she’s found to have searched for the exact families of the babies she’s being investigated for killing on significant dates such as anniversaries and Christmas, has pictures of two of the children, plus the note in her house saying “I killed them on purpose” - potentially more evidence from her home as well as the prosecution have stated there were multiple items of interest found.
Scapegoating, I’ve said a few times, makes absolutely no sense to me. There is no benefit whatsoever to the trust of having a member of their staff charged with murder. The financial and repetitional liability of this is astronomical in comparison to what it would have been had they just took the findings of an independent review and got on with fixing them.
There’s coincidence and then there’s the universe conspiring against you - I don’t buy it. I am however reading absolutely everything you guys are posting and willing to be proved wrong.
Genuine question, not baiting, I'm just honestly curious, for you and others who think it's plausible she is innocent and it is a cover-up - do you believe then that it was just pure coincidence she was present for all cases? And the NHS have just taken advantage of that and are using her as fall boy?Although I feel differently to you I can appreciate this as a well thought out, well put post.
I don't believe she's innocent or guilty at this point but if we're looking at how many cases she was present at, then to be fair we should also look at how often she was picking up bank or overtime to plug the staffing shortages. I've worked every single day in a week several times when short staffed, so of she's done this and others haven't, she's much more likely to be present.Genuine question, not baiting, I'm just honestly curious, for you and others who think it's plausible she is innocent and it is a cover-up - do you believe then that it was just pure coincidence she was present for all cases? And the NHS have just taken advantage of that and are using her as fall boy?
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?