Nurse arrested for murdering babies

I wouldn't be surprised if she was just managements scapegoat, they're certainly not above that level of cynicism.

If that is in fact the case then they've effectively already gotten away with it which means there's very little incentive to actually get rid of the people who messed up so it'll happen again... and again until the government is forced to conclude the only rational conclusion that can be made.
 
So you don't care if she is actually guilty or not, you just want her to be found guilty?

No, he's saying he hopes that the CPS would only have proceeded to trial if there was strong evidence, rather than just to pad out their stats as it seemed was being implied.
 
She can't go back to her old job even if she isn't found guilty. No parent with a shred of sanity would let their baby anywhere near her. If they did and anything happened to their baby they would sue the NHS to high heaven as well.
 
What exactly are you implying?

No, I think he's implying the evidence may not be so concrete and they simply brought these charges to tally their crime stats.

Strange perspective to hold, considering the crimes and suspect involved, which is why I sort clarification.

A stitch up obviously

Not at all... I wasn't narrowing my statement within the confines of this case.
 
All I'll say is I've been involved with 3 cases that were National News and went on for weeks, I've also been involved with several that went on for ages but didn't make the National News.
In all cases I sat back and read peoples posts on Social media, one on here, and just thought you know nothing, all you've heard is tiny little snippets from hours and hours of courtroom evidence.
I'll reserve judgement on this.
 
All I'll say is I've been involved with 3 cases that were National News and went on for weeks, I've also been involved with several that went on for ages but didn't make the National News.
In all cases I sat back and read peoples posts on Social media, one on here, and just thought you know nothing, all you've heard is tiny little snippets from hours and hours of courtroom evidence.
I'll reserve judgement on this.
But that's how GD rolls, no place for facts in here. It's quite shocking in here at the moment to be fair.
 
I read a lot of the evidence produced and although not the full story I didn't think it painted a picture of a murderer of babies. In fact a lot of the evidence I read just suggested that something was going on that a scapegoat could have been easily made. If I was on the jury I wouldn't be able to find this women guilty (But I doubt I saw all the evidence!)

As for life after, agreed she is finished, but if she does get found not guilty it shouldn't be like that. She should be able to work again and ideally she should be able to go back to her old job!!!

Unfortunately it's easy for the public to say one thing or another about the evidence, but unless you're present you're never going to know how strong the case against her is.

There must have been a reasonable level of evidence for the CPS to go forward with her case.

I think the speed at which the jury can return a verdict gives some indication of how well the case was prosecuted or defended - won't know until the verdict is given.
 
On the News now -


I've been trying to get my partners daughter to come forward for this enquiry. She was at QMC for her birth and it was more than shocking. Absolute negligence that has left her with physical issues going forward, after they nearly permanently paralysed her with a botched epidural and subsequent botched attempts to fix it. Lack of post natal care for her and the baby and just a general unacceptable level of care.

But she's the type that doesn't want to make a fuss and tbh, it left her quite traumatised and she doesn't want to keep reliving it through an enquiry.
 
No, he's saying he hopes that the CPS would only have proceeded to trial if there was strong evidence, rather than just to pad out their stats as it seemed was being implied.
The CPS prosecute roughly on two basis, one is "is there a realistic chance of conviction", the other is "is it in the public interest".

It's why they will sometimes prosecute cases where a householder has killed an intruder, as horrible as it is for the householder it can be in the public interest for every aspect of the situation to be in the public record and scrutinised in the court, especially with unusual circumstances (it's a really high bar to get it into court, and an even higher one to get 12 normal people to find someone guilty when the dead person was an intruder in their home).

This case could very easily fall under both, although I would very sincerely pray that it's mainly under the "we've got enough evidence to have a good chance of a conviction" as if not it would seem much more suited to coroners court inquiries, and a wider public enquiry into the circumstances and management of the hospital.


I'm kinda surprised how little coverage in the news this story garnered.

It's got a fair bit, but there often isn't much to report during a trial, and there are some very strict limits on what can be reported during trials due to the risk of prejudicing the outcome of the trial.
 
I've been trying to get my partners daughter to come forward for this enquiry. She was at QMC for her birth and it was more than shocking. Absolute negligence that has left her with physical issues going forward, after they nearly permanently paralysed her with a botched epidural and subsequent botched attempts to fix it. Lack of post natal care for her and the baby and just a general unacceptable level of care.

But she's the type that doesn't want to make a fuss and tbh, it left her quite traumatised and she doesn't want to keep reliving it through an enquiry.

She must do it.
It will be a good idea to try and find out the main claimant Solicitor and contact them.
There will be several but if you look through news items about cases one name will crop up more than others.
 
Back
Top Bottom