Ah well. Send them my love. Tell them I think they’re all bleeps xox
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Abso-bleeping-lutely. It's a personal vendetta i have against these dickheads luring unsuspecting newbies into the case and filling them with tit. We have the verdicts but I just can't stand these people.
Only just realised i can swear on here as well, which is bleeping fantastic.
Oh ffs Drunky Mark is playing the knight in shining armour you ordered from TEMU.
He's so chuffed with Hitchens coming aboard he's had his monthly shower only two weeks after the last one!
I reckon he fancies his chances with our Lucy. She'll have to have noticed him - he's sure of it. Sprucing up for the dinner date.
He's so chuffed with Hitchens coming aboard he's had his monthly shower only two weeks after the last one!
I reckon he fancies his chances with our Lucy. She'll have to have noticed him - he's sure of it. Sprucing up for the dinner date.
Peter Hitchens on board isn't something to crow about. He's so pointless trying hard to stay relevant!
One thing I find really annoying about the supporters (besides them ignoring the shitload of evidence against her) is that they don't accept she was a crappy nurse. Even if she didn't harm or kill any babies (which she obviously did) she still had over 200 confidential documents in her home. She was still constantly on her phone on shift and probably in clinical areas. She was still inappropriate with grieving families. Why can't people see that and why do they excuse or minimise her behaviour, like "oh, anyone can forget a handover sheet in their pocket". What, 200 times! They seriously need to get a grip.
Every now and then I do find doubt creeping in because it is so hard to comprehend that anyone could do something so heinous. But then I remind myself of the evidence and it's as clear as day. So many people focus on one aspect of the case and ignore how all the details fit together to show her for the monster she is.
Every now and then I do find doubt creeping in because it is so hard to comprehend that anyone could do something so heinous. But then I remind myself of the evidence and it's as clear as day. So many people focus on one aspect of the case and ignore how all the details fit together to show her for the monster she is.
This bleep is one of the worst offenders on twitter and spouts complete rit all day every day.
I had no idea this was merlot mark referred to in these threads till I saw that picture. Headcase
---
I see that my dude is still a fan of Hitchens 🥲
I know what you mean about the doubts, because it seems almost fictional because how could an actual human being do that? But then I remember how certain we all were when the jury were sent to deliberate, and even though I’ve forgot a lot of the evidence now, a year on, I still remember being 110% certain there was no doubt in my mind she was guilty. This won’t be overturned, she isn’t innocent, and any probes into the case will come to the same conclusion I’m certain of it
He'll blame it all on Marijuana. He's demented on the topic. Dr Ravi will have been driven mad by the reefer and he dun it all then framed dear, sweet, dedicated English rose Lucy because umm, reasons.
Seriously it's like he believes Reefer Madness is a documentary. One splif & you're away with the devil. He will literally argue that marijuana is the root of all problems in British society & the reason she lost her empire.
But whhyyyy would the doctors have a nasty confrontation with such a hardworking, beyond-perfect, impeccable nurse?
Nobody was looking at them so why would they draw attention to themselves because Letby wasn’t even reporting them for anything.
Their arguments literally make no sense
Apparently Tattlers have been "stunned".
hahaha ‘there has been daily contributions from Tofino who is nowhere to be seen’
it’s nice to be missed!!
actually we’ve mostly gone quiet because we can rest easy now baby K finally has justice, Lucy has collected her 15th WLO and her appeal process has reached a dead end
What else is there to say for now? I’ll have plenty to say when the inquiry starts no doubt. In the meantime I’m enjoying my life and my freedom, sweet in the knowledge Letby can’t do the same.
"Chris Williams" is that the fella off twitter who looks like a serial killer and keeps telling people he has NOT been done for stalking women.
If so, I think he might be crazier than the green haired bleep.
Last edited:
Chris.. sweet summer sad act. You remain lurking because you know we would destroy every single one of your arguments. You cherry pick and look at every aspect of the case individually for a reason. None of your arguments make sense. Pathetic baby murderer loving psycho.
---
---
Last edited:
Chris Williams is a nutter of the highest order. Just because they keep endless ranting about NG doesn't mean we have to keep discussing her on here. The thread goes quiet when nothing much is happening, doesn't mean we are 'stunned' by all the recent NG articles. We can see through all that abd KNOW that the evidence that convicted her will see her locked up for the rest of her life. Just because a few internet quacks have come out questioning the evidence doesn't make that evidence less valid.
Definitely not stunned. bleeping relieved she was found guilty AGAIN and Baby K and family got some justice. I for one have been getting back into CS2CR videos - as someone mentioned earlier, everything can be summed up by her performance on the stand. The evidence, the patterns, it's all there. There's just no bleeping doubt imo. I've been following this case since it was first reported years ago - mostly because I could not fathom how it could happen. I'm also an Aussie so not a lot of coverage over here. I've had to do my own research etc - these threads have been invaluable, especially during the trials. I kept an open mind to start with but any shred of doubt was diminished for me personally after the trials. Not sure how any sane person could say otherwise after you actually go through everything that happened.
Buying a house behind a babies memorial garden wasn't a good look for her but making such a hullaballoo about going on her central line course, writing a Datex report about a line inserted by a doctor which Lucy Nightingale felt was incorrectly done and pointing out the risk of "accidental air embolus" - an odd turn of phrase I'd have thought as deliberate air emboluses (embolusi???) were quite rare - unless she knows some of them are not I guess.
Anyway making such an exhibition of her superior training & expertise & therefore her natural right to be in Nursery 1 with all the sickest babies all the time jars somewhat with her assertion to the police in interview that she had only a vague idea of what an air embolus was or how a medico might cause one to happen in an infant. Then we get her repeated prevarication on the stand about the risks & causes.
Read the transcripts. Call yourselves journalists. I wouldn't trust any of you to write a bloody shopping list.
Anyway making such an exhibition of her superior training & expertise & therefore her natural right to be in Nursery 1 with all the sickest babies all the time jars somewhat with her assertion to the police in interview that she had only a vague idea of what an air embolus was or how a medico might cause one to happen in an infant. Then we get her repeated prevarication on the stand about the risks & causes.
Read the transcripts. Call yourselves journalists. I wouldn't trust any of you to write a bloody shopping list.
My critique of that godawful Guardian article.....
- Scrawled notes” were barely mentioned during the trial itself
- “There was no forensic evidence to prove her guilt and no one saw Letby – who continues to maintain her innocence – causing harm” …. What forensic evidence would the author wish to see ? DNA and fingerprints would be of no relevance whatsoever, given that the defendant works at the crime scene. The fact that Letby wasn’t seen harming a child is neither here nor there, a serial killer would be apprehended quickly if someone saw them harming someone.
- Experts who are in the main anonymous and apart from Dr Hall, weren’t present in court and haven’t viewed any of the medical/clinical records for any of the babies. How can they express a credible professional opinion on the evidence given by Drs Evans and Bohin, let alone report them to the GMC for it, when they haven’t had access to this material?
- RCPCH: The RCPCH review was a “service level review” of the unit, not an investigation into causes of the deaths/collapses per se. It didn’t have access to the medical/clinical records of the babies & recommended an external, independent review of each unexpected neonatal death.
- Lack of apparent motive/psychological background: irrelevant- prosecution are not required to provide a motive
- Consultants didn’t go to the Cheshire Police, the hospital management (eventually) did via a letter/letters to the then Chief Constable.
- Richard Gill: A man who has in the recent past suggested that Beverley Allitt might be innocent, that many of the crimes of Harold Shipman were acts of euthanasia, that Dr John Gibbs (a consultant at the Countess) had been seen euthanising babies by Lucy Letby and who, while the first trial was ongoing, joked on social media about wanting to go into Manchester Crown Court with an AK47.
- Jane Hawdon: Told Ian Harvey she didn’t have time to complete a proper review of the deaths, recommended that four of them were forensically investigated
- Review after Jane Hawdon recommended a forensic review of four deaths- “different conclusions” to those reached by Evans- wouldn’t these have been available to Letby’s legal team and mentioned in court by Mr Myers if they were of benefit to her defence?
- Postmortems: The deaths of Beverley Allitt’s victims were also initially listed as natural causes after postmortems.
- Statistics: In her final twelve months working as a nurse, Lucy Letby was present for *all* of the 13 deaths on the NNU. If this was a case of scapegoating Letby as this article is clearly trying to suggest, then why was she not charged with more than the 7 which she was charged and subsequently convicted. In addition, Letby was acquitted of two counts of attempted murder charges that were on the chart and no verdicts were returned on several others.
- The only statistical element of the case was the chart that showed she was the only staff member present, exactly as was presented in the Allitt case.
- Dr Michael Hall: Stated in an article by the New Yorker magazine that he did not know what had caused the deaths/collapses. Why wasn’t this mentioned in the Guardian article?
Last edited:
"The Not guilty brigade"seems to think this is trial by social media. They think If they present enough arguments and quote enough anonymous experts in the press they will be able to free Lucy. Let's forget all the police detectives, medical experts, doctors and lawyer they are all corrupt or incompetent. It doesn't matter what public opinion is on Lucy's guilt, those babies were attacked and murdered and the evidence stands.
That's an excellent round up O'lee, interesting that she was present for all the deaths. Unfortunately I think shes killed more babies but some had medical issues presenting too much reasonable doubt for an conviction.
If Dr Hall had truly believed Lucy innocent of all charges, BM would have called him.
That's an excellent round up O'lee, interesting that she was present for all the deaths. Unfortunately I think shes killed more babies but some had medical issues presenting too much reasonable doubt for an conviction.
If Dr Hall had truly believed Lucy innocent of all charges, BM would have called him.
- Status