UK - Healthcare worker arrested on suspicion of murder/attempted murder of a number of babies, 2018

[arrogantcat]

Timeline-wise I’m seeing some similarities with the case against Victorino Chao:

2011 Stepping Hill Hospital poisoning incident - Wikipedia

In that case, the murders took place during a short period, from the end of June 2011 to mid-July 2011. Chao was first arrested in January 2012 and finally charged in March 2014. The trial took place over a period of 4 months and he was found guilty on May 18th 2015. With that in mind 6 months for LL's case doesn’t seem to be unusually long period of time for a trial. People can read the sentencing remarks in the Chao case here for more information:

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/r-v-chua-sentencing.pdf

Of course, in the Chao case the method used was well-known (saline ampoules and saline drips had been contaminated with insulin), whereas in this case we have absolutely no idea how LL is supposed to have killed the victims. Here is a link to two articles when Chao was arrested in 2014:

Stepping Hill deaths: nurse Victorino Chua charged with murder

Nurse re-arrested in Stepping Hill poison probe

Note that in both articles the method used is clearly mentioned, unlike the news articles in LL's case. Also interesting to note is that Chao was charged with multiple offences of attempting to administer poison, but LL is not.

This, combined with the fact that it has been continuously emphasized that this is a highly complex and difficult investigation, seems to be an indication to me that (unlike the case against Chao) the method of death is unknown and the police has no clear direct evidence of LL poisoning the alleged victims. It may well be that this prosecution primarily rests on a correlation between LL’s working pattern and the incidence of deaths and emergencies (as in the case against Lucia de Berk). If that’s the case, the following caveat applies: Post hoc ergo propter hoc (correlation does not imply causation)!

Is there a reason you call the convicted here by a different name (Chao instead of Chua) or just autocorrect? Just curious!

 

[Mrs Marple]

@arrogantcat good point. Many people have been lured into thinking they are safe by appearances.

Look at Myra Hindley, the children thought they were safe because there was a woman in the car.

 

[altojack]

I still don't believe she is a killer, no way. There has been no rumours in the media of anyone speaking out against her. She comes across as a demure, caring person, her friends have spoken of her good character, JMO as I have no link.

I just can't see her as being guilty.

 

[annpats]

member: 193435"]She comes across as a demure, caring person, her friends have spoken of her good character.

Well, as lot of people with personality disorders and psychopathic traits do.
Otherwise, their cover will be blown...

 

[altojack]

Well, as lot of people with personality disorders and psychopathic traits do.
Otherwise, their cover will be blown...

Quite true, but in this case it does fit. JMO

 

[Sarahlou]

I've always found it a bit confusing why some people assume she is innocent based on appearance and there not being rumours. That's not really how it works.

I agree with arrogantcat's points though about a possible "angel of mercy" type situation

 

[Marantz4250b]

I've always found it a bit confusing why some people assume she is innocent based on appearance and there not being rumours. That's not really how it works.

I agree with arrogantcat's points though about a possible "angel of mercy" type situation

I don't really see it as being that straight forward; it's more than just that, it's the whole larger picture. She simply doesn't seem to have anything at all even slightly similar to people we know are multiple killers.

Obviously none of that is clear evidence that she's absolutely innocent but I do think that isn't unreasonable to say that it makes it extremely unlikely that she's guilty. She just seems so completely and utterly different to every other serial killer I've ever heard of.

 

[Mandos]

Is there a reason you call the convicted here by a different name (Chao instead of Chua) or just autocorrect? Just curious!

You're entirely correct about the autocorrect! ^^ It's Chua, not Chao. I'd fix my post, but for some reason I can't edit it?

 

[JosieJo]

I'm also reserving judgement till the trial , I trust there has been enough evidence to pass the charges and now I wait the evidence.
Until we hear the evidence there is nothing to sway anyone in any direction imo

 

[Bakers]

The 182 days limit will be up around the 20th August 2021 then......so still some way to go.

Holding a Defendant on Remand while awaiting Trial - InBrief.co.uk

hasnt remand time been extented because of corona virus

 

[Bakers]

The 182 days limit will be up around the 20th August 2021 then......so still some way to go.

Holding a Defendant on Remand while awaiting Trial - InBrief.co.uk

hasnt remand time been extented because of corona virus

 

[Parker Knoll]

I worked in a criminal barristers chambers for 25 years, this case is bizarre for many reasons.
I have never had a case where the defendant has not had the opportunity to plead G or or NG for so long. If LL intends to plead NG ( which I suspect she will ) then it could of been done today. It’s been adjourned yet again until next week for a further case management hearing. Ok so they are preparing the court timetable I get that but that indicates it will be a contested trial not a GP and it will go on for many months. The preparation for a 6+ month trial for a case of multiple murders for one person is very rare and it will be staggering work for all involved. There is an air of secrecy that I have only seen in a few cases ( Thompson and Venables springs to mind ) where their names did not appear on any lists due to their age and their legal right to anonymity but LL name is not appearing either even though the court hearing dates are in the public domain - why ? She’s been named. It’s not common practice. This has been going on for years. The parents must be beyond traumatised at this point. There is something very strange going on. IMHO obviously.

 

[Marantz4250b]

I too am baffled as to why she hasn't been allowed to enter a plea; do you think that the judge is not happy with the evidence for some reason? There is no obvious reason as to why an accused person should not be allowed to plea. There must be potential Human Rights violations approaching fast given that fact coupled with the length of time she may potentially be held on remand. Holding someone in limbo indefinitely is a fairly good example of degrading and inhuman treatment, surely?

I understand that a timetable has to be set but it's already not slated to start for months yet and there were murmurings today of it being put back from that so why no plea?

 

[Parker Knoll]

I really couldn’t say without knowing what evidence had been put forward from the CPS via prosecuting counsel. It may simply be down to the enormity of the charges but it has been done before ( Shipman ) so whilst it’s a very complicated and unusual case there is precedent. It was a very short hearing today, less than 20 mins which again is unusual for a case of this complexity. It’s been in the court diary since February so plenty of time to prepare. It’s impossible to second guess what’s going on behind the scenes. Maybe LL is not taking her legal advice and wants to go a different way to what she is being advised ? God alone knows. Maybe a plea will be entered next Monday. If they are suggesting the trial date in January 22 may be put back to a later date next year this is going to be a very long drawn out case.

 

[annpats]

hasnt remand time been extented because of corona virus

Could be. I'll have to see what it's been extended to....

 

[annpats]

What I find odd, is that none of her fellow colleagues, doctors, managers or other healthcare workers - or even the babies' parents - noticed anything odd in her treatment of, or toward, the infants.

No concerns about her were ever raised. There were no red flags or complaints to the health trust or hospital about her.

No-one ever witnessed her do anything she shouldn't....or shouldn't do something she should.

Either she was very surreptitious and devious, or she didn't do it.

 

[Parker Knoll]

The problem is Annpats we simply do not know at this stage what has or has not happened. We have very limited information ( quite rightly ) as to who or how concerns were raised. All that at present is solely with the legal teams. Until trial if there is one everyone else is in the dark and simply speculating.

 

[arrogantcat]

I really couldn’t say without knowing what evidence had been put forward from the CPS via prosecuting counsel. It may simply be down to the enormity of the charges but it has been done before ( Shipman ) so whilst it’s a very complicated and unusual case there is precedent. It was a very short hearing today, less than 20 mins which again is unusual for a case of this complexity. It’s been in the court diary since February so plenty of time to prepare. It’s impossible to second guess what’s going on behind the scenes. Maybe LL is not taking her legal advice and wants to go a different way to what she is being advised ? God alone knows. Maybe a plea will be entered next Monday. If they are suggesting the trial date in January 22 may be put back to a later date next year this is going to be a very long drawn out case.

Where would mental health fit in with this process? If she was considered unfit to plea, would that have usually been stated by now?

 

[MrsWatson]

When I started following this case, I had no clear opinion of her guilt or innocence. Thirty-five pages later, I still don't know what to think. It seems incredible to me that no one had any indication something was off with her nursing care, and she seems a really unlikely predator. But to bring these charges, over the course of such a long investigation, there's got to be some really compelling evidence.

MOO

 

[Bakers]

I worked in a criminal barristers chambers for 25 years, this case is bizarre for many reasons.
I have never had a case where the defendant has not had the opportunity to plead G or or NG for so long. If LL intends to plead NG ( which I suspect she will ) then it could of been done today. It’s been adjourned yet again until next week for a further case management hearing. Ok so they are preparing the court timetable I get that but that indicates it will be a contested trial not a GP and it will go on for many months. The preparation for a 6+ month trial for a case of multiple murders for one person is very rare and it will be staggering work for all involved. There is an air of secrecy that I have only seen in a few cases ( Thompson and Venables springs to mind ) where their names did not appear on any lists due to their age and their legal right to anonymity but LL name is not appearing either even though the court hearing dates are in the public domain - why ? She’s been named. It’s not common practice. This has been going on for years. The parents must be beyond traumatised at this point. There is something very strange going on. IMHO obviously.

Yes lucy is named on the court listing it was Manchester crown she appeared via video link