That's just really sad. The mother would have been gutted to miss giving her baby it's first bath
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
A couple of key points in my opinion
the prosecution have given there possible causes of death for these children which differ from the original post mortems.
a lot of people are hearing that as; this is the real cause of death, just to clear up this is not the case, the prosecution agree the original causes of death are plausible.
also how were these new causes of death determined?
with the child that died of insulin poisoning. Ive read “no one else was prescribed insulin”. Which reads to me that the child had been prescribed insulin. I think people are thinking he shouldn’t have it in his system at all, but that’s incorrect.
with that incident aswel I believe she asked for a bag to be tested but no record of this could be found, the bag that she didn’t have contact with (she may have had access to it) was found to be contaminated, and in this case the child’s condition worsened without her presence.
there is also no sense in the fact that. If she’s a cold blooded killer who is willing to kill a set of twins in 24hours. Why after successful resus did she then care for the child and not finish the job. When it’s clear she had the opportunity to do so
it would be interesting to know how many children died in that time frame, and how many collapses there were? Also what percentage of hours she worked.
I’d also like to know why things that health care professionals claimed “they’d never seen before” Wasn’t reported even mentioned in the postmortems ie the bleeding and the rash like blotches.
can anyone say if a baby injected with air would show that beyond doubt or not? And how long would it take for a child to die from air being injected?
there’s a lot of questions but I don’t see how anybody on the jury could see her go to prison for life on the evidence that’s been presented so far
thanks for reading, please feel free to correct meon anything I’ve got factually wrong. And I’m completely open to her being guilty. but before I call someone a baby killer, I’m willing to hear what they have to say
the prosecution have given there possible causes of death for these children which differ from the original post mortems.
a lot of people are hearing that as; this is the real cause of death, just to clear up this is not the case, the prosecution agree the original causes of death are plausible.
also how were these new causes of death determined?
with the child that died of insulin poisoning. Ive read “no one else was prescribed insulin”. Which reads to me that the child had been prescribed insulin. I think people are thinking he shouldn’t have it in his system at all, but that’s incorrect.
with that incident aswel I believe she asked for a bag to be tested but no record of this could be found, the bag that she didn’t have contact with (she may have had access to it) was found to be contaminated, and in this case the child’s condition worsened without her presence.
there is also no sense in the fact that. If she’s a cold blooded killer who is willing to kill a set of twins in 24hours. Why after successful resus did she then care for the child and not finish the job. When it’s clear she had the opportunity to do so
it would be interesting to know how many children died in that time frame, and how many collapses there were? Also what percentage of hours she worked.
I’d also like to know why things that health care professionals claimed “they’d never seen before” Wasn’t reported even mentioned in the postmortems ie the bleeding and the rash like blotches.
can anyone say if a baby injected with air would show that beyond doubt or not? And how long would it take for a child to die from air being injected?
there’s a lot of questions but I don’t see how anybody on the jury could see her go to prison for life on the evidence that’s been presented so far
thanks for reading, please feel free to correct meon anything I’ve got factually wrong. And I’m completely open to her being guilty. but before I call someone a baby killer, I’m willing to hear what they have to say
Regardless of if she is guilty or not, tit like this does show what an utterly bizarre woman she is. Noone in their right mind would make a comment like that. Maybe she was trying to be kind but clearly did not have the good sense to see how deeply upsetting that would be.
Thanks. If we’re still in agreed facts it makes more sense that it is still a bit wishy-washy with what we’re hearing. I am fully in the guilty camp based on everything heard during the opening statements, but if I’d only heard today and yesterday there is no way I’d be confident in saying either way at the moment.
I do agree with others though. For a trial of what could be one of the most notorious serial killers of our life time, the reporting is really weak. I hope when prosecution vs defence starts that they up their game considerably.
On the flip side she could have just been sharing a nice thing about the baby.
They can’t do that. She’s pleaded not guilty. Short of changing her plea (which would throw off the whole case) you can’t say someone’s not guilty aka they didn’t do it but if they did it was because they were stressed. It doesn’t work like that.
It is really weak... I only heard about it to begin with because of Tattle. So bizarre.
I think this is sometimes the interesting thing about how events are reported. To me, the image I get is of someone (a nurse etc) giving a meek/sympathy smile and trying to give the parents a nicer memory about the bath time rather than when the baby had passed. But to others they interpret it as a 'happy' smile and a comment made to hurt. I guess that's where the written word is really tricky sometimes.
WTF. I know people have said it's normal to have gallows humour in medical fields, but a baby just died on her shift! I also think it's highly suspect, the way that she's joking about being the one who was on shift at the time. Almost as if she was hyper-aware of coming under suspicion, if that makes sense.
Imo this isn't the same as Lucy's weird, out of place 'Haha!' message. In your example the tone is more affectionate - joking to cope with a sad loss. With Lucy's text, she's bringing the conversation back to her, and it's trivialising the circumstances. That's how I read it anyway.
If she's guilty, my theory would be that she's a drama chaser. Someone who likes the feeling on being involved in big important events, the first to break the news, seeing other people's reactions. The fact that the events are tragic doesn't make a difference to her because it's the same buzz. Again, if she's guilty. Maybe she's just obsessive about work.
Honestly I’ve made mistakes in my nursing career, ones which haven’t even harmed the patient, and I’ve considered quitting then and there and had to build up my confidence again each time.I feel like if I’d noticed babies were dying every time I was on shift, that I’d be asking my managers what I’m doing wrong, what is going wrong on my shifts and I’d probably be a bit paranoid about it! If I noticed it of a colleague to be honest I might make a crass joke about it to them- I certainly wouldn’t be suspicious that they were really murdering them! My relative had five deaths in a week of shifts in a care home so we called her Shipman for a few monthsObviously that depends on how she was at work. Those messages make her sound like the office busybody, always gossiping and chatting about work and while everybody engages with her, they probably do it out of politeness.
If I’d had two unexpected, possibly preventable deaths on my patients when I was caring for them, I’d probably leave my career in the mud and never consider going back.
I’ve been following these threads and the trial as a paediatric nurse I think I can’t bear the thought that a fellow nurse similar age etc to me could do this so I am swaying towards innocent for that reason for now..
reasons being -
In my opinion Facebook stalking although unprofessional I think a lot of other healthcare professionals have done it myself included. Especially cases that hit harder (deaths or long term patients etc - wanting to know how families are getting on)
Handover sheets being taken home accidentally happens when you’re leaving work in a rush stuff shoved in your tunic pocket
being involved in other patients cares for me happens ALL the time. I work on a short staffed unit and I take charge of it. I am regularly giving medication for other nurses patients if they can’t give intravenous medication yet for example (agency nurses or not qualified enough yet), designated to put all the tpns up as no one else qualified enough to do it. Covering breaks/helping out when people are busy etc
I think all those above have reasonable explanations
what I can’t get my head around is the AMOUNT of deteriorating or sick patients. I’ve been qualified 10 years and only ever been involved in 3 real resuscitation scenarios (paediatrics not neonates) so it blows my mind one nurse could be involved in so many in just one year and this is where my doubts strike.
Other questions I have are the insulin/tpn incident, it would be incredibly poor practice to change the tpn bag and not all the lines attached to it so if there was no involvement from LL with the second bag I struggle to see how it could be linked to her
Secondly I actually did a study day today on paediatric life support. They made a point of when you manually ‘bag’ a neonate (as in manually breath for them) you have to make sure you don’t squeeze the bag too hard as it could put excess pressure into them and splint the diaphragm. Which automatically made me think of this case. Did they bag a neonate in a resus situation with poor technique and cause the air in stomach lungs etc??
Very torn by all of this, flip flopping between innocent and guilty xxx
reasons being -
In my opinion Facebook stalking although unprofessional I think a lot of other healthcare professionals have done it myself included. Especially cases that hit harder (deaths or long term patients etc - wanting to know how families are getting on)
Handover sheets being taken home accidentally happens when you’re leaving work in a rush stuff shoved in your tunic pocket
being involved in other patients cares for me happens ALL the time. I work on a short staffed unit and I take charge of it. I am regularly giving medication for other nurses patients if they can’t give intravenous medication yet for example (agency nurses or not qualified enough yet), designated to put all the tpns up as no one else qualified enough to do it. Covering breaks/helping out when people are busy etc
I think all those above have reasonable explanations
what I can’t get my head around is the AMOUNT of deteriorating or sick patients. I’ve been qualified 10 years and only ever been involved in 3 real resuscitation scenarios (paediatrics not neonates) so it blows my mind one nurse could be involved in so many in just one year and this is where my doubts strike.
Other questions I have are the insulin/tpn incident, it would be incredibly poor practice to change the tpn bag and not all the lines attached to it so if there was no involvement from LL with the second bag I struggle to see how it could be linked to her
Secondly I actually did a study day today on paediatric life support. They made a point of when you manually ‘bag’ a neonate (as in manually breath for them) you have to make sure you don’t squeeze the bag too hard as it could put excess pressure into them and splint the diaphragm. Which automatically made me think of this case. Did they bag a neonate in a resus situation with poor technique and cause the air in stomach lungs etc??
Very torn by all of this, flip flopping between innocent and guilty xxx
Making the baby’s death about her, not the parents. Making out the bath the baby had with her was better than the one they’re having with their dead baby
Agree to disagree. I already said she may have thought she was doing something nice, however noone with any sense in their head would see a mother washing her dead baby and highlight the fact you gave them their first bath instead of them and also that they loved it - something the mum missed and will never experience again. Absolutely zero social skills or awareness. Worrying for a NICU nurse.
No but we don't know what the defence are going with. They could say that mistakes were made by everyone including LL, due to stress, staffing and burnout. Doesn't mean admitting guilt but would explain some things such as inconsistent documentation.
She does seem to make things about herself. This is an example and also the amount of messages about how she's feeling after Child A. She may have just been responding to friends and it's understandable to be upset and want to discuss it but if there's an element of narcissism there it could help explain things.Making the baby’s death about her, not the parents. Making out the bath the baby had with her was better than the one they’re having with their dead baby
forgot to say think the text messages about post baby death are totally normal we would do this at work after a challenging shift check people are okay/knowing what was going on/debrief about the situation
if you’ve had a night shift with a sick child I often get home and can’t sleep until I know how they’re getting on and might send a quick text to colleagues checking in x
She never gave the baby their first bath she just said how she was present and that the baby had loved it.
I don't think LL did claim she had bathed the baby did she? Just mentioned that she was present for it, I think.
She didn't give the baby their first bath she just said she was there, not that she bathed them. So the mother could have given the first bath we don't lnow
Okay, if that is the case then I'll accept it's not quite as bad, but I still think it is an utterly senseless thing to see a grieving mother bathing her dead baby and remind her about how much they baby loved the bath when they were living.
He can’t just offer mental illness with no evidence though. He would need to provide doctor/psychiatrist evidence. And maybe she doesn’t have a mental illness so can’t offer it? Stress etc might come later but she’s obviously fit to stand trial so I don’t think there will be anything significant.
negligence (do you mean Lucy’s negligence?) is a bit risky as it would mean admitting she killed the babies but it was an accident caused by being negligent. Even if it was true, she’s on trial for murder so he won’t want to offer that up on a plate if he can avoid it. Because then the decision for the jury is just whether she intended to harm them or whether it was an accident.
- Status