Snipped for focus.“Shrager said there will likely be psychological information that comes into play [...]"
I hope they have all of that, because it would certainly clarify the situation and remove a lot of the confusion and doubts about what transpired. I’m assuming this young couple, having twins, would at least have a baby monitor, if not camera surveillance.Some evidence that they might have been able to collect:
1/ video recording from the baby monitor, showing LK in the bassinet and NV's interactions with him
2/ Audio recording from the baby monitor, picking up crying and/or screaming from another room, at times consistent or inconsistent with NV's account
3/ Audio recording from the baby monitor picking up no crying or screaming from another room at the relevant time before the call, but picking up NV's voice on the calls and/or other sounds inconsistent with NV's account, like banging around or talking to LK
4/ Phone activity during times NV claimed to have been asleep, steps, engaging with apps etc
5/ Deleted phone activity/searches
6/ Items thrown in the trash, like diapers and wipes with blood or vomit on them
7/ Photos of the kitchen/ baby bottles used and/or unused
8/ Video/photo on NV's phone of LK in the bouncer seat strapped in
9/ What neighbors may have heard
Oh yes they did have a baby monitor because it was mentioned in the PCA.I hope they have all of that, because it would certainly clarify the situation and remove a lot of the confusion and doubts about what transpired. I’m assuming this young couple, having twins, would at least have a baby monitor, if not camera surveillance.
If so, the defense will not be able to argue with such evidence. And probably will take a plea deal IF offered.
I’m glad to hear that. Presumably, it was on at the essential times.Oh yes they did have a baby monitor because it was mentioned in the PCA.
They don't all have recording capability though, and we don't know which brand/model it was.I’m glad to hear that. Presumably, it was on at the essential times.
That’s a problem. I guess time will tell….They don't all have recording capability though, and we don't know which brand/model it was.
I'm not sure why the first examples given above (acute shortage, acute pain) would necessarily refer to severe. Those could easily mean sudden or immediate. A sudden shortage of staff, a sudden onset of anxiety....I think the doctor meant extreme, very serious, not mild.
acute
1. An acute problem or negative feeling is extreme: 2. An acute angle is less…dictionary.cambridge.org
An acute problem or negative feeling is extreme:
There's an acute shortage of medical staff.
acute pain acute anxiety
Here's another which goes more towards your definition--
Acute and severe are terms used to describe medical conditions:
- Acute: Sudden onset or sharpness of a condition
- while "severe" denotes intensity or extremity.
I'm not sure why the first examples given above (acute shortage, acute pain) would necessarily refer to severe. Those could easily mean sudden or immediate. A sudden shortage of staff, a sudden onset of anxiety....
Honestly I don't think I've ever heard a doctor use the medical term "acute" when meaning "severe." I've also never seen it used to mean severe in medical literature that I can recall. And in this medical encyclopedia "Acute means sudden. Acute symptoms appear, change, or worsen rapidly. It is the opposite of chronic."
Acute: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia
Acute means sudden. Acute symptoms appear, change, or worsen rapidly. It is the opposite of chronic.medlineplus.gov
For effective communication & to facilitate treatment it's important medical professionals use medical terms in the same way. I've always seen acute used to mean the opposite of chronic or long-standing. Chronic renal failure vs acute failure. Chronic pain vs acute pain. Chronic anxiety vs acute anxiety. I've not seen acute used as the opposite of "mild." IMO It wouldn't make any sense to say, for example, "her anxiety developed suddenly and without warning [the normal meaning of the medical term acute] but it was not acute." However, one could certainly say "She experienced acute pain that was fairly mild." Or one could say (without being redundant) "His acute pain was severe for several hours."
I can understand LE using the medical term in a different way but not an ER doctor. It's also not really clear how severe the genital injury was (apparently the 6-week old was not admitted to the hospital) or when the doctors decided the injury was from abuse (before or after the other twin was injured?) So I might look askance at use of the word severe too given the lack of details we have. But it will be interesting to see if a doctor testifies acute means severe, not necessarily sudden as that could mean the injury might not have been extremely recent. That wouldn't help the state's case I wouldn't think.
MOO
I'm not sure why the first examples given above (acute shortage, acute pain) would necessarily refer to severe....
Yes, it’s clear that “acute” in medical terminology refers to onset, and not severity:...
BBM I haven’t heard anything that convinces me that NV hurt AK. If his parents thought she hurt him surely they wouldn’t have left LK alone with her!?It’s interesting that NV’s attorney insists that she denies any wrongdoing, that the public doesn’t have the full story, and that she’s eager to tell the truth in court. We will have to wait and see what they are planning to set forth as the “true” narrative.
I would agree that the fact that not one baby, but two babies, were injured— one fatally while she was alone with him, the other also while she alone was tending to him — really makes for a difficult situation in absolving her.
Yes, I agree it is not clear that she harmed AK, or intentionally harmed LK. I do think what happened with LK may possibly have influenced the doctors’ opinions on the AK incident. Hopefully not, but there are questions…..BBM I haven’t heard anything that convinces me that NV hurt AK. If his parents thought she hurt him surely they wouldn’t have left LK alone with her!?
Of course, even if she didn’t hurt AK, that doesn’t clear her in LK’s injury & death. I’m just going to need more information detailing what caused LK’s injuries to decide if this was a terrible accident or intentional abuse. I hope the doctors didn’t decide AK was abused because of LK’s injury. I hope these things and more come out in the trial.
Yes, good information. ‘Acute’ can also mean severe as well as sudden, as in ‘acute appendicitis requiring immediate surgery’.Yes, thank you both. At first I did think the doctor was describing the twin's or LK's injuries in how serious they were, but then as pointed out, it was meant as recent. I did post after about it meaning recent or sudden, not chronic, and not referring to the severity. Yet, voiced this connection I had in my own mind.
MOO, I think there's a connotation of sharpness to the word acute. I wondered why I do. Not that the word acute was used by the doctor that way, but in other general ways I have heard it connected to sharpness. I think it can be used medically to describe a sudden, but sharp pain. (So, I think that's where it gets confusing for me because that is describing a severity. Also, how it's used medically seems to refer more to the timing.)
Acute vs. Severe — What’s the Difference?
"Acute" often refers to the sudden onset or sharpness of a condition, while "severe" denotes intensity or extremity.www.askdifference.comCompare with Definitions
Acute
Sharp or intense.
She has an acute sense of hearing.
Severe
Extremely intense or harsh.
The storm was severe.
Acute
Extremely sharp or severe.
He felt acute pain in his leg.
Severe
Strict or stern in demeanor.
The judge gave a severe sentence.
I'm sorry if I missed a post where you said acute does refer to time of onset, not severity. For some reason, I didn't receive automatic notices of posts for this thread and was trying to catch up on a few days' worth of posts.Yes, thank you both. At first I did think the doctor was describing the twin's or LK's injuries in how serious they were, but then as pointed out, it was meant as recent. I did post after about it meaning recent or sudden, not chronic, and not referring to the severity. Yet, voiced this connection I had in my own mind.
MOO, I think there's a connotation of sharpness to the word acute. I wondered why I do. Not that the word acute was used by the doctor that way, but in other general ways I have heard it connected to sharpness. I think it can be used medically to describe a sudden, but sharp pain. (So, I think that's where it gets confusing for me because that is describing a severity. Also, how it's used medically seems to refer more to the timing.)
Acute vs. Severe — What’s the Difference?
"Acute" often refers to the sudden onset or sharpness of a condition, while "severe" denotes intensity or extremity.www.askdifference.comCompare with Definitions
Acute
Sharp or intense.
She has an acute sense of hearing.
Severe
Extremely intense or harsh.
The storm was severe.
Acute
Extremely sharp or severe.
He felt acute pain in his leg.
Severe
Strict or stern in demeanor.
The judge gave a severe sentence.
In your example it is appendicitis that makes the situation severe requiring immediate surgery, acute again means sudden onset.Yes, good information. ‘Acute’ can also mean severe as well as sudden, as in ‘acute appendicitis requiring immediate surgery’.
From the PCA:I've just been watching the first video produced by L&C back in June.
At 4.46 there is this narration:
"Shrager said there will likely be psychological information that comes into play [...]"
...I had chronic appendicitis when I was very young, starting around age 8. The only symptom was terrible belly pain. It would come & go with long spells of nothing....
I know we have beaten this with a hammer, & I wasn’t going to comment on it again, but it’s important to understand what the doctor meant, as best as we can, because sometimes those differences will matter.
It is pure speculation and based in large part on them seeking the death penalty as I just cannot see doing that without some evidence to say what she actually did to the children - put purely speculationIs that a gut feeling, or is there something specific that leads you to think there is crystal-clear (if that's what you mean?) evidence?