a funeral post wouldn’t go up 12hrs after death (esp when baby died at night and she looked up mum the following morning.)
Baby B was discharged the following month (it was in the opening statement)
-
not-a-medical-Dr Jessica Taylor monetising the Russell Brand and David Walliams news is disgusting. She forced her vulnerable employees to sign an NDA to stop them whistle blowing. She threatened survivors of sexual abuse to sue them for “every single one of their assets” if they spoke up. She is one of the most dangerous people in the VAWG sector and does so much harm to women and girls.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Baby B was discharged the following month (it was in the opening statement)
The denial makes no sense! Is she thick? Whether innocent or guilty, surely you'd have something more to say for that. Like I've said I've searched for a family after a death, not something I'd do regularly this was a particularly awful event and I was curious as to how they were doing. I've had colleagues look on fb after a death when a family have been particularly vocal or derogatory about the care they received, because they wanted to make sure they hadn't been named on there. Not everyone would do it but either of those excuses would have sounded reasonable enough, but to just say you don't remember? As if the child wasn't significant enough to recall these details? Can't get my head round that.
Yeah even if she just said I know it seems strange but I was concerned for the family or even that she was really nosy anything but ‘ I don’t remember ‘
You know how some serial killers or murderers like to insert themselves into the investigation… this is what I kind of think about these messages. She is trying to talk to people about them. I don’t know. Just what I think.
Exactly, if it was so significant to you, you searched it that many times you don't just then forget.
No an announcement of passing might, funeral would follow a few weeks after that. Giving you what could potentially trigger a search, as for the discharge as I said I wasn't sure.
John Wayne Gacy was a PiscesWhat's a pisces like ?
John Wayne Gacy was an American serial killer and sex offender who grape, tortured, and murdered at least 33 young men and boys. Gacy regularly performed at children's hospitals and charitable events as "Pogo the Clown" or "Patches the Clown", personas he had devised.
Could she have been searching to see if anything was said in relation to the *hospital* level of care etc.
Some say she was obsessed by her work and from her previous message saying she was interested in how the public portray their jobs, I guess it would be feasible to say she could be worried about known to be working at 'that' hospital if things started appearing on Facebook.
Why you'd deny it is strange though, what was the time frame between the searches and the interviews?
Some say she was obsessed by her work and from her previous message saying she was interested in how the public portray their jobs, I guess it would be feasible to say she could be worried about known to be working at 'that' hospital if things started appearing on Facebook.
Why you'd deny it is strange though, what was the time frame between the searches and the interviews?
On June 30, following the deaths of Child A, C and D, and the non-fatal collapse of Child B, Letby's colleague messaged her there was something 'odd' about that night.
Letby replies: 'What do you mean? Odd that we lost three and in different cicrumstances?'
different circumstances?
Child A and D - suspected embolus in the blood stream
Child C - suspected air embolus via NG tube
Letby replies: 'What do you mean? Odd that we lost three and in different cicrumstances?'
different circumstances?
Child A and D - suspected embolus in the blood stream
Child C - suspected air embolus via NG tube
Yes might be fishing to see it people suspect anything.
At least a year, these particular searches were on children at the start of the allegations, police don't seem to have become involved until after she was put on admin duty
She’s
She is so guilty. No one will be on the fence after the trial is over.
But they didn’t suspect embolus at the time. The coroner said:
Child A - unascertained
Child C - lung disease
Child D - infection/pneumonia
So at the time they were all different.
Lucy didn’t want to be around Baby A and Bs parents but she took baby A to them when they passed so it’s contradictory.
I think she didn’t want to be on their radar if they started to point the finger and she didn’t want to be the nurse connected to baby B when they collapsed.
I think she didn’t want to be on their radar if they started to point the finger and she didn’t want to be the nurse connected to baby B when they collapsed.
But they said the messages continued in a social format ie nothing to do with work, so sounds friendly to me?
it also notes not all messages are included - only ones considered relevant by the prosecution and defence. Otherwise I’m sure it would take 6 months to go through her phone messages alone!!
I think they said that yesterday when they were talking about working extra shifts. Once the babies died it seemed to me like she was only really talking about the babies.
100% agree
A lot of messages haven't been read as evidence, because both defence and prosecution have agreed they have no relevance to her trial.
Re the “attempts to charge her” that’s not really how it’s probably worked if I’m honest.
She would have been arrested for X offences but to get medical records released, the police would have needed the parents permission, they can also take some time, then they’d of needed to find impartial people to look over such evidence etc. she has a right to give an account for EVERY charge against her, hence them arresting her a further 2 times as she has to be questioned under caution. They also can’t keep her in a cell for months on ends whilst medical evidence is collected & reviewed so obviously they had to bail/release her under investigation. That’s how investigations work??
CPS are the deciding party to authorise a charge, depending the processes of the force, this could have been done electronically for them to view the amount of evidence as well which again, would have take a lot of time. They may have identified areas where the police needed to obtain further statements from people or get further medical records from different times. It’s not that they “made evidence to fit” this is a HUGE investigation & when I worked in my old role, CPS could take up to 6 months to decide a charging decision on a S39 assault with all possible evidence available (victim statement, independent witness statement, CCTV injury photos, no comment interview, prev DV history)…it’s not fast but that doesn’t mean the evidence isn’t there. The burden of proof is very high & realistically, would you have wanted her to be in court after a slap dash quick investigation? I wouldn’t.
She would have been arrested for X offences but to get medical records released, the police would have needed the parents permission, they can also take some time, then they’d of needed to find impartial people to look over such evidence etc. she has a right to give an account for EVERY charge against her, hence them arresting her a further 2 times as she has to be questioned under caution. They also can’t keep her in a cell for months on ends whilst medical evidence is collected & reviewed so obviously they had to bail/release her under investigation. That’s how investigations work??
CPS are the deciding party to authorise a charge, depending the processes of the force, this could have been done electronically for them to view the amount of evidence as well which again, would have take a lot of time. They may have identified areas where the police needed to obtain further statements from people or get further medical records from different times. It’s not that they “made evidence to fit” this is a HUGE investigation & when I worked in my old role, CPS could take up to 6 months to decide a charging decision on a S39 assault with all possible evidence available (victim statement, independent witness statement, CCTV injury photos, no comment interview, prev DV history)…it’s not fast but that doesn’t mean the evidence isn’t there. The burden of proof is very high & realistically, would you have wanted her to be in court after a slap dash quick investigation? I wouldn’t.
But at the time Letby sent the message saying that they wouldn't have know what the latest baby had died from.
To me the messages come across as planting the seed with her colleague that they all died a different way when in reality, once foul play was suspected, it was discovered they all had died in a similar way. And that Letby knew this but wanted to keep people from making the link.
- Status