I can’t see why they wouldn’t have said that deaths followed to the day shift. They’ve said thing like “babies falling Ill” and “unexplained collapses”follow her.
no confirmation either way as yet though
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
no confirmation either way as yet though
So far we are only hearing Baby A and B, and if It was just these cases ,I can see how it could be they just got sick very quickly and sadly one passed [ bit of a coincidence though) , however we have many more cases and the ones where the poor babies were deliberately given insulin, it had to be someone. And at this point Lucy is the most likely culprit, given she’s involved in a long list of babies that passed/collapsed. I also think if she is guilty Baby A was not the first attempt
It's a tricky one this, so will try to explain it the best I can.
Hospital PM are requested by the doctor or family of the patients, they would be handled by a pathologist.
Depending on the consent and permissions granted by the family it may only involve certain parts of the body, again samples can be limited by consent.
There may have also been inadvertent bias, due to the fact these babies were coming from a nicu. It shouldn't happen, but I can see how it may have.
However, a death should be reported to the coroner by the hospital if there is a question of negligence in the treatment they received before the death. Or if the cause of death is unknown/unexpected
A coroner is a judicial officer, so doctor, solicitor, barrister.
If they receive a report (they can and do refuse reports, if confident death was of natural causes)
a full post mortem will be performed, by a pathologist at the coroners request, no need for consent.
They may also build a case depending on the circumstances and findings, to establish if there is foul play.
There is a lot of thought given to the families of babies who pass away in nicu as to not cause unnecessary stress.
So I am not sure how heavily that will factor in this trial, as I don't know the ins and outs specifically for nicu babies.
I am assuming those questions will be answered during the next 6 months, i am wondering about the pathology and coroner input during the trial.
When was it referred? why wasn't it referred? Was it referred and refused? Sorry for the giant message
I’m going to sound like a real old foggy, which I am, but birthday and graduation notices started creeping in later, at least in my local area.
It probably didn’t cost too much money but it would still be added outlay if you weren’t particularly flush.
Or it could prove that the ward was chaotic, without adequate staffing and without access to enough appropriately qualified healthcare professionals which led to incompetence and sadly what appear to be avoidable deaths and collapses. I'm not saying that's the case, but surely it's to be considered as much as the fact it was used to her advantage.
I understand that she was on shift and had been involved in some capacity with the first bag but
Do you not think it’s relevant that she wasn’t actually present for the actual collapse? Especially as this charge stands out with the insulin being the cause?
We know LL was around for some of the other collapses, as parents were contacted by the police surrounding their child's collapse in COCH within that time frame, but there was insufficient evidence at the time to bring charges.
As previously mentioned, there is a lady on the preemie group I'm in, her son suffered a collapse she knew nothing of it till the police got in touch. Looking back at her posts she deleted a lot of them after the police got involved as someone from the group leaked her details to the press.
I imagine we won't be told if other collapses are linked to LL as the investigation is still very much ongoing given the fact Cheshire Police are advertising a 3 year post. I imagine sometime in the future after the trial it may come to light, it may not. With all the reporting restrictions surrounding the trial protecting those affected (and rightly so) its hard to grasp a real clear picture of everything.
As previously mentioned, there is a lady on the preemie group I'm in, her son suffered a collapse she knew nothing of it till the police got in touch. Looking back at her posts she deleted a lot of them after the police got involved as someone from the group leaked her details to the press.
I imagine we won't be told if other collapses are linked to LL as the investigation is still very much ongoing given the fact Cheshire Police are advertising a 3 year post. I imagine sometime in the future after the trial it may come to light, it may not. With all the reporting restrictions surrounding the trial protecting those affected (and rightly so) its hard to grasp a real clear picture of everything.
*Might be triggering*I just want to add if anyone follows hayleigh the mortuary tech on TikTok she herself has had late term losses and works within a hospital so has had babies sadly come to her from NICU and the wards etc and she has done a few videos explaining her self that she would never recommend a PM on a baby. I guess from a mothers point of view because she knows what they have to do to rightfully find the info but I just wondered if at the time it was advised to just let the babies who had sadly passed, rest? I wondered if hayleigh working in a hospital setting if that would be the same kind of advice given to some parents who didn’t have a pm?It's a tricky one this, so will try to explain it the best I can.
Hospital PM are requested by the doctor or family of the patients, they would be handled by a pathologist.
Depending on the consent and permissions granted by the family it may only involve certain parts of the body, again samples can be limited by consent.
There may have also been inadvertent bias, due to the fact these babies were coming from a nicu. It shouldn't happen, but I can see how it may have.
However, a death should be reported to the coroner by the hospital if there is a question of negligence in the treatment they received before the death. Or if the cause of death is unknown/unexpected
A coroner is a judicial officer, so doctor, solicitor, barrister.
If they receive a report (they can and do refuse reports, if confident death was of natural causes)
a full post mortem will be performed, by a pathologist at the coroners request, no need for consent.
They may also build a case depending on the circumstances and findings, to establish if there is foul play.
There is a lot of thought given to the families of babies who pass away in nicu as to not cause unnecessary stress.
So I am not sure how heavily that will factor in this trial, as I don't know the ins and outs specifically for nicu babies.
I am assuming those questions will be answered during the next 6 months, i am wondering about the pathology and coroner input during the trial.
When was it referred? why wasn't it referred? Was it referred and refused? Sorry for the giant message
Wanted to add she also said if you sadly had your child pass at home SIDS for example she always says to never say no to a PM for that.
Agreed. For me personally as well, this point makes the- well was she searching lots of people on fb all the time too, did she have handover notes of lots of babies (for years
) - essentially irrelevant (won’t be the view for others and I see why). I mean personally it doesn’t mean a lot to me anyway because it doesn’t change what she HAS done regarding what is on trial if we look at what she has ALSO done - I know I’m probably in the minority on that view. But the fact there’s likely potentially going to be a lot further investigations into her makes me even more confident that I shouldn’t put much emphasis at all on her having lots of other babies medical details or searching lots of other parents. Not looking for a debate on it just my opinion 
Might have to go and have a look at tiktok, ive not bothered with it for years!
I have noticed that a parent refused a PM in one of the cases, so does suggest that the hospital were suggesting them in at least some of the cases.
Unexplained death of a child would always be referred straight to the coroner
It’s a very valid point. I wonder how the defence (or prosecution) will, or legally can, handle that?Agreed. For me personally as well, this point makes the- well was she searching lots of people on fb all the time too, did she have handover notes of lots of babies (for years
They obviously have a lot more information than us.
You’ve got to remember that those doctors have years and years of experience and every staff member mentioned so far was surprised by the deaths each time.
But as mentioned earlier, three deaths in June alone and all completely surprised by each one, so why was nothing done sooner?
And with the text messages we’ve seen atleast one nurse describes one of the nights as “odd” this was in June, if you think something is odd surrounding a babies death you can maybe brush it off but if it then occurs twice more in that month, at what point do you raise it with somebody?
Who on here can answer that at this point?
This is her profile. I really like her, no bullshit really balanced and seems so compassionate and very good at her job.
Attachments
I wasn't expecting anyone to answer it. It was just a thought I was adding to the previous point.
I think the point with the insulin poisoning is that they *think* she tampered with the first bag, but they don’t have the first bag and it was never tested. So it seems like when something happens and Lucy is there, it was definitely her and not what anyone did before she arrived. When Lucy isn’t there, it was definitely what she did before the next nurse arrived. Almost like they’re moving the goalposts to ensure she’s always in the frame.
- Status