I imagine to play dumb or appear innocent. Simple as that.
Like the post it note, I don't think the texts are good evidence of either guilt or innocence.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Like the post it note, I don't think the texts are good evidence of either guilt or innocence.
Since they only report half the text on certain pages who knows 
Agreed. Either genuine concern if innocent or part of her “obsession” or checking up on victims if guilty.
Can be interpreted either way
Yeah that message is very neutral. Would she really draw attention to wanting to know about the baby if she had done something? Surely she would keep a low profile…. IMO this is all working in her favour at the moment, I see nothing but a genuinely concerned nurse wanting to know her patients are doing ok. Could be wrong obviously. Also forgot to say, come on if a doctor and other nurses had concerns a colleague was murdering babies they would absolutely report it, any normal person would and if they didn’t they are just as guilty if she is. It just makes no sense, I can’t get my head around it.
Interesting. Seems she was really affected by Child A. If this truly was the first, that makes her struggle over the death telling.
Attachments
Where does it actually say that the 2nd TPN bag was tested and found to be contaminated with insulin?
The baby was tested and found to have a very high level of artificial insulin.
Are people confusing the 2 points?
I could be wrong but to my mind a TPN bag contaminated with insulin would be an automatic police matter.
This could explain why there wasn’t another allegation until August? (Depending on how long she has off)
Except that there were no more incidents for the next month and then they coincidentally started up again shortly after she returned to work or after she had “processed” the deaths
It wasn’t murder, but my husband had this happen and says it’s the most traumatising thing he’s ever been through.
Won’t go into detail so as not to derail the thread, but he said that at the time it felt like everyone had already decided he was guilty and he was convinced he was going to go to prison over something he didn’t do. I think the worst feeling for him was knowing there were people who believed it, because it was such an awful thing he was being accused of.
That took a massive toll on his mental health and he ended up diagnosed with serious depression.
Thankfully after over a year of messy investigations he was able to prove he didn’t do it.
I met him not long after that and when he told me the story it completely changed my perspective on things like this - things often aren’t as clear as they seem. Even when you think the evidence is right there, there could be a lot be more to it.
I don’t think we have enough to say for definite either way, but if Lucy Letby is innocent I feel for her immensely.
They must have had an explanation for the high levels of insulin in the baby? How doesn't someone see thst and instantly investigate what happened, unless they found a way to explain it away?
I thought they tested the second bag but found nothing but the high levels of artificial insulin could have only be delivered deliberately rather than accidentally? Thus the conclusion is that the poisoning happened with the first bag and the second bag simply continued to push the contaminated product through the IV tubes?
I am totally open to correction but that was my understanding!
Interesting! Wonder how her leave and return to work lined up with the stop and then resumption of deaths? This to me is more key than any texts or notes.
I’m becoming more and more frustrated with the reporting because context is everything. For every message that we are hearing about it can be interpreted either way. This could have followed her colleague starting to question how ‘odd’ it was. Maybe she’s panicking about potentially being caught out if people are starting to notice.
When I googled about air embolisms it says it can take minutes to hours (days) so could she have just been unfortunate that someone else did do it but it only had an effect when she was in charge? (Maybe different in babies?)
Ah so it's confirmed that she made lots of Facebook searches, not just for the families of alleged victims.
exactly, it’s been known people have been convicted wrongfully before, I cannot imagine how they felt inside. Absolutely horrendous, im sorry he went through that 🥹 the problem is though, when it’s so public even if she was found not guilty there will be small minded that will in their eyes still think she is, because they automatically like to think the worst in people. XxIt wasn’t murder, but my husband had this happen and says it’s the most traumatising thing he’s ever been through.
Won’t go into detail so as not to derail the thread, but he said that at the time it felt like everyone had already decided he was guilty and he was convinced he was going to go to prison over something he didn’t do. I think the worst feeling for him was knowing there were people who believed it, because it was such an awful thing he was being accused of.
That took a massive toll on his mental health and he ended up diagnosed with serious depression.
Thankfully after over a year of messy investigations he was able to prove he didn’t do it.
I met him not long after that and when he told me the story it completely changed my perspective on things like this - things often aren’t as clear as they seem. Even when you think the evidence is right there, there could be a lot be more to it.
I don’t think we have enough to say for definite either way, but if Lucy Letby is innocent I feel for her immensely.
A lot of you were asking if she searched for parents of children who hadn't died. Seems that was indeed the case.
Police interviews are obviously recorded these days, are the also videoed?
If so, will these recordings and/or videos be played in court? Or will it just be a transcript?
From my standpoint (because I'm in the guilty camp), it looks like classic covering to me. I mean if you're murdering babies and want to cover that up, you're not gonna be texting people saying "really enjoying what's happening in work at the moment, get me back in there so I can do it some more" are you? (Not meant to be sarcastic BTW, just saying how I see it). If she wasn't on trial for murder, I would read it the same way as you.
It would be interesting to know how long she was off for. I’m assuming she would have been offered support from work or it would be logged that she needs time off for her mental health to process the deaths.
There’s also an element of her seeking attention and making it about her in my opinion.
- Status