I've been thinking about Dr choc again.
1. That 'go commando' text message to the colleague where she starts off saying she 'had a strange message from doc choc' ...
But then she denies a romantic connection. But why send the message in the first place? It's like she wants a chance to deny it, or to play innocent. Something v manipulative about the whole exchange, like it's a game she's playing.
This led me to think about:
2. the weeping LL did when doc choc appeared on the stand.
If guilty, I wonder if she was hoping for some kind of narrative about her being the victim of the mean doctor.
IMO that weeping is similar to the manipulation of the colleague in the text, it's sort of 'off' , doesn't really make sense. If you are on trial for murdering babies, it's just impossible to fathom that even an actual AFFAIR would lead to that kind of dramatic emotional reaction.
But she then goes on to deny that relationship on the stand.
So why do the weeping?
If guilty, I think she was expecting, in the beginning, that it would be easy for her to get sympathy, feign naivety, play the victim, manipulate the truth, her usual MO which has been so successful throughout her life. If guilty, she underestimated the prosecution IMO and the value other humans place on TRUTH.
I wonder what her demeanour will be during closing statements.
Will we get more weeping?