Not necessarily. But for myself, if she had been convicted of attacking my baby, I'd want to be able to see her receive that verdict with my own eyes. I think it would be frustrating that she could cower in the shadows instead.As long as justice is done, does it matter that much if the defendant is there?
What does this mean?
And that LL lionised the nurses who cared for her. InterestingHer friend just said that she had a difficult birth herself!
The reporters who put the documentary together have had a nearly year long trial to put it together. I will be shocked if there isn't a netflix series. I imagine they can drag this out to about 40 episodes at their usual pace.Hearing one of the mothers of LL’s victims on BBC ONE now when asked ‘do you ever look across at her and think “maybe it’s possible she didn’t do it?”’ Her answer a very resounding NO. I’ve wondered for months what the parents thought of LL’s guilt, seems like it was the same as many of us MOO
On BBC One now Lucy Letby: The Nurse Who Killed (lee cooper leisuresuits)
Verdicts announced today, BBC are straight on it with the documentaries, should we expect a Netflix series by the end of the year?
IMO
I don't know if she enjoyed killing but I do think she enjoyed being in control and creating chaos and being deceitful and successfully doing it all while 'hiding in plain sight.'I've seen people on here saying she enjoyed killing. I don't think that's necessarily the case. It could have been some kind of sick compulsion, with no enjoyment involved.
I think the underlying medical issues with Baby K muddied the waters. JMOI think it's interesting that the jury couldn't reach a verdict on baby K. This was the baby where Dr Ravi, an experienced paediatric consultant, walked in on LL and allegedly witnessed her post attack, watching the baby deteriorate. I thought this was strong evidence with an objective, medically-qualified eye witness.
All I can think is that the defending barrister succeeded in trashing Dr Ravi's reputation, in my view.
What does this mean?
She was due to return to the neonatal unit in March 2017?!!!
The information and timelines now coming out are absolutely shocking!!!! Consultants being ignored, action not being taken, doctors being forced to apologist, not contacting police in order to protect & preserve the hospitals name/image, almost reinstating her into her post!!!! I am ANGRY beyond belief, those families & those babies were failed - not only by LL, but by those who should have been preserving safety above all else, instead they cared more about the hospital image.
I read in the DM that they were allowed to retire or resign with very generous payments/pensions. One retired to France, the others seem to have gone on to other jobs in the NHS.Didn't post here during the trial. But, I have wondered what the consequences are for those who downplayed/took no action when the whistleblower spoke up. At the very least, those in charge should not be now. Just wondering. Do you all know of any actions taken?
Because once the deliberation is over, the jurors are released. At that time the verdicts can be made public without affecting further deliberations. And without impacting the jurors. JMOThen why reveal them at all?
The guilty party should no longer have a say in anything. That’s the pointI know - just saying that the guilty party has a choice whether to appear or not, regardless of the wishes of the family.
Deleted by me (cos this one was a duplicate)What does this mean?