Ffs so she searched for everyone which throws it off. They need to bring out the shift statistics then. We need to know how often she picked up overtime if LL regularly did 5 shifts a week (she was childless and seemed obsessed with work) then logically she would be present for more incidents and deaths. That's what happened in the case of Lucia Deburk and she was cleared.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
So I’d think she’d want to be in work then? Rather than being off and not getting all the attention at work for having a rough time of it
I lean heavily towards guilty, but another explanation for the Facebook searches could be that she simply didn't have a lot going on in her life, not a lot of friends etc, and became obsessed with finding out about her patients lives, living vicariously through them perhaps?
Well the obvious difference being that one incident is a common work occurance. The other is a out of work occurance. She had to remember the parents name to search them on Facebook in the first place and them she periodically did so over a period of months. Each time she would have to search the parents name. I don't think the two incidents are comparable.
I’m sure Facebook (app) remembers people you’ve searched so could she not have just looked on previous searches rather than remembering names?
Nothing made it hugely remarkable yet? He’s remembered the remarkable aspect with the mothers conditions. The babies delivery was normal, they’d not died yet. She searched the grieving parents at times in sets. So she remembered why they were of interest to her surely yet she offers no reason for it
i don’t think this is true. the threshold to be found guilty is to be considered guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, so if the jury have reasonable doubt they should find the defendant not guilty. I don’t think they are allowed reasonable doubt.
Facebook remembers what you search, so it would just be a case of clicking the search bar and then she’d have a list of everyone she had searched to click on. She wouldn’t have to remember the name and type it in each time.
How many murder charges is she facing? An old article said she was arrested for the death of 17 babies plus further attempts.
I’ve missed a few days so I could be ruminating on things that someone else has already covered. Forgive me if this is the case.
But, I’m wondering why this has devastated her so much if she works with neonatal babies and has come across babies dying previously.
Is it because it’s so unusual? Is it because the deaths and manner of deaths were out of the ordinary? Or is it because it’s the first time she’d murdered a baby?
She has worked there for a long time, surely she has come into contact with baby death before… did she react the same on other baby deaths or just these?
Hopefully prosecution (if they think the information / evidence implies guilt) or defence (if they feel it helps cast doubt on her guilt) will bring this up.
But, I’m wondering why this has devastated her so much if she works with neonatal babies and has come across babies dying previously.
Is it because it’s so unusual? Is it because the deaths and manner of deaths were out of the ordinary? Or is it because it’s the first time she’d murdered a baby?
She has worked there for a long time, surely she has come into contact with baby death before… did she react the same on other baby deaths or just these?
Hopefully prosecution (if they think the information / evidence implies guilt) or defence (if they feel it helps cast doubt on her guilt) will bring this up.
Last edited:
Agree to an extent, I think you'd remember that you'd searched for them in general but probably not each individual time and why. If someone came to me and said did you search for xyz on fb on a specific date and why, I wouldn't have a response for them. But I'd know that I had at some point, if you get me?
You would still have to remember the name in the first place and she contually searched people, even years later. She cannot then claim she didn't remember doing so, that's an obvious lie.
I really don’t think the Facebook searches show anything, I’ve had people I worked with and looked after that I’ve really cared about, and even looked their family up on Facebook because I heard so much about them and was interested to see what they were like. Call me weird, I don’t care it’s just me being nosey, but if anything happened to these people I’d look guilty as sin but infact I’d be completely innocent. It’s just us as humans being inquisitive. Makes me actually wonder if I even want Facebook anymore, amazing how it can be twisted when it’s totally innocent.
If the names were fairly common first names she might not even have been meaning to look for them I’ve saw myself start to type someone’s name in the search box and it brings up someone else
And also I still Facebook people from years ago to check they are doing okay! Some people leave an impression…. I don’t know why that’s deemed as weird or strange. even if I am I’m absolutely not a murderer!
Yeah I get ya! Just don't see the FB searches as this big sinister thing some people are making them out to be and now we know she searched loads of people what evidence do we actually have infront of us at this point? That she's a nosey Parker who was overly invested in her job?
I think the FB thing looking weird really depends on how you use social media yourself. I’m super nosy so if I meet someone I will look them up and within ten minutes I’ll be looking at their brothers girlfriends cousins holiday photos from 2017! 
LL is a similar age to me and I think the way we use social media is different to people older and those younger too. Whether it is professional or not to be doing so is a different matter but nurses on here have said it does happen.
LL is a similar age to me and I think the way we use social media is different to people older and those younger too. Whether it is professional or not to be doing so is a different matter but nurses on here have said it does happen.
I think your twisting that tbh. They’ve questioned her about searching the family of child A on Facebook. It wouldn’t be suspicious if she said she looked them up but couldn’t recall exact dates and times, and that she looked them up because she wanted to check they were ok. Bearing in mind this is meant to have been a death that hit her really hard. But to say you have no memory of doing so but if the evidence from her computer says she did then she accepts it? That’s not credible especially when this is the same response for multiple families.
But would you search them every few months, I mean even up to 2 years later? And if you did would you genuinely not remember doing so and say so to the police?
Sometimes you become attached to a particular patient and their family more so than others. You aren't supposed to have favourites but it's human nature. I've been affected by some deaths more than others.
- Status