#karen read murder trial

[amelia802]

Reactions after judge declares mistrial in Karen Read murder trial

A judge declared a mistrial in the murder trial of Karen Read when the deeply divided jury failed to reach a verdict after days of deliberation. Read is accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O’Keefe, in 2022. #news #karenread #boston CBS News 24/7 is the premier anchored streaming news service from CBS News and Stations that is available free to everyone with access to the internet and is the destination for breaking news, live events, original reporting and storytelling, and programs from CBS News and Stations’ top anchors and correspondents working locally, nationally and around the globe. It is available on more than 30 platforms across mobile, desktop and connected TVs for free, as well as CBSNews.com and Paramount+ and live in 91 countries. FULL VIDEO

[wellthatsclever]

Look the Other Way - Karen Read Case: 3D Recreation by Microdots

[subaquatic-skyscraper]

“Yeah, she’s a babe—weird Fall River accent though” is the most Boston text message ever sent

[cal-daisies-and-briars]

I’m breaking up my emojis this week because the most recent murder mystery party bit has me desperate for more!

☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️

Ahhh yay! Glad you're enjoying! 96 for ☠️:

---

Athena thinks if she were facing a murder trial, she might make her social media private. But it looks like Tommy has just abandoned his. There have been no updates since before the murder mystery party. 

There are no photos of Buck. Maybe he deleted them? He’s not following Buck, either. Has him blocked, in fact. Interesting. Athena looks through Tommy’s tagged photos. Obviously any from Buck have also been removed. She scrolls back a bit, to December. There’s a photo of Tommy with his arm slung around a shorter, handsome man with dark hair and eyes, an eyebrow piercing, and a very expensive-looking shirt. Athena thinks he looks familiar, but she isn’t quite sure why. 

She reads the post. 

ro.ortiz93. Another night in the sky with this hunk! 🚁 Thanks for the lift @ tkinnard 

The date is January. Not long before he met Buck. Hmm. Something is amiss here. 

Athena clicks on the profile. 

It belongs to Roman Ortiz. Self proclaimed ‘Los Feliz DJ living the high life’ according to his bio. It only takes reading down a few posts for Athena to realize why he looked familiar. On his grid, Roman has shared the obituary for Kyle Ortiz. The son of Councilwoman Olivia Ortiz. Kyle, who Roman refers to as his cousin. Meaning…Meaning, before he dated Buck, Tommy Kinnard seems to have dated Councilwoman Ortiz’s nephew. The woman who took away Mara from Hen and Karen. 

Which means… Hen and Karen have a motive not only for wanting Gerrard gone, but for framing Tommy Kinnard. Potentially. If Athena really thinks about it. 

This could all be a damn coincidence, she supposes. But when is anything ever? Athena doesn’t believe this isn’t connected for a second. The only question is, how much?

Athena pinches the bridge of her nose and gets to thinking about the timeline. Kyle Ortiz died in March, while Athena and Bobby were on that damn boat. Buck and Tommy showed up together at Maddie and Chimney’s wedding in May. She doesn’t know all the details about how they got together, but she’s fairly certain they hadn’t met before Tommy flew the helicopter rescue to the sinking Uno. Which was within twenty-four hours of Kyle dying, if Athena’s memory serves. And it usually does. 

Hen’s troubles with Councilwoman Ortiz only started in May. Whatever trouble she’d been in on the day of Kyle’s death, it was short lived. He’d refused care. Her hands were tied. There was nothing else to do but reinstate her, because she didn’t do anything wrong. Somewhere in between March and May, Councilwoman Ortiz gathered all that information on Hen. Slandered her career. Attacked her family. 

Could Tommy have been connected? 

If Buck found out, would that have made him snap? Would he and Hen have worked together? Both bringing their partners in on the plan? Because based on the way they’ve been behaving, Athena is certain Buck and Eddie were together in some way, shape, or form before Buck and Tommy broke up. A double-date murder and frame job. How sweet. 

Now that she thinks of it… Eddie had been right by the door when she knocked. Could he have gone outside to call 9-1-1 and slipped the functional epipen back in the truck? Could he have been on the phone with Dispatch while planting evidence? Is that insane? 

And where does this leave Chimney? Would three of his closest friends and his brother-in-law plan this sort of a crime without involving him? Or Maddie? Maddie, who was home watching Mara, Denny, and Jee during the party. On the one hand, Chimney has more reason to hate Gerrard than anyone. He put up with his abuse the longest. He was instrumental in getting him moved, only to suffer from him being brought back. And he has reason to want revenge against Tommy in the matter of Mara, if Tommy was at all involved in helping Ortiz. He and Maddie love Mara, too. They’ve fought for her, too. On the other hand, this is still Chimney they’re talking about. Chimney Han, notoriously bad secret keeper and liar. 

Then again… Chim was stressed and fled on an impromptu vacation. And, did he lie? She thinks back to his interview. Come on. Tommy didn’t do this. 

Athena has no idea what to think when it comes to Chimney and Maddie. She has some very serious suspicions about the others. And that hurts. It hurts her to feel suspicious of people she loves. There is a game of tug-o-war in her chest. One side telling her to pursue truth and justice at all costs, like she has always, always done. The other? The other side tells her to close her eyes and ignore what she is unveiling. To stop. Before it’s too late. 

[coochiequeens]

“On November 23, Natalee Bingham, a friend of a Club Q victim, appeared on CNN to refute the shooter’s alleged gender identity. When asked for comment on Aldrich’s “non-binary” identity, Bingham called it “ludicrous,” and claimed “it was obvious” Aldrich was a man based on his appearance.”                                     But I thought you couldn’t assume gender based on appearance?

After it was revealed that a shooter who killed 5 people and injured 25 others at an LGBT nightclub in Colorado identifies as “non-binary” and uses gender neutral pronouns, trans activists took to social media to express disbelief over his self-declared identity.

Anderson Lee Aldrich, 22, opened fire at Club Q on November 19, tragically killing Raymond Green Vance, Kelly Loving, Daniel Aston, Derrick Rump and Ashley Paugh. At least 25 others in the venue were also injured during the incident. Aldrich was arrested at the scene and taken into police custody.

Following news of the mass killings, prominent figures blamed “homophobia” and “transphobia” for the shooting.

California Senator Scott Wiener, who introduced a bill that turns the state into a refuge for youth and parents of children seeking out puberty-halting drugs, went so far as to blame the shooting on the use of the word “groomer” online.

However, a recent court filing revealed that Aldrich identifies as a non-binary individual, and therefore could be considered a member of the LGBTQ community according to his chosen status.

On November 22, Aldrich’s legal team submitted court documents stating that their client prefers use they/them pronouns and goes by “Mx. Aldrich” as opposed to “Mr.” or “Ms.” Aldrich. The shooter also had legally changed his name shortly after his 16th birthday, and was born Nicholas Franklin Brink.

The revelation came after days of fierce online assertions over the shooters motivations, with many trans activists blaming both conservatives and gender critical feminists for the shooting. Some took aim at conservative commentators such as Matt Walsh and Tucker Carlson, with others even directing their ire at children’s author JK Rowling.

“Wow turns out I had never in my life experienced fury until the second I read the sentence ‘the shooter now claims he is non-binary,'” tweeted Gretchen Felker-Martin. Felker-Martin recently published a novelcentered around trans-identified males graphically murdering feminists.

Some reporters even struggled to decide which pronouns to use for the shooter when reporting on the case. One CBS News clip showed reporter Karen Morfitt stumbling over her words as she attempted to use gender neutral pronouns for Aldrich, while CNN presenters speculated that Aldrich wasn’t really non-binary, but was instead setting up his defense case against the hate crime charges. 

On November 23, Natalee Bingham, a friend of a Club Q victim, appeared on CNN to refute the shooter’s alleged gender identity.

When asked for comment on Aldrich’s “non-binary” identity, Bingham called it “ludicrous,” and claimed “it was obvious” Aldrich was a man based on his appearance. 

“It was obvious with the mugshot that’s a man. That’s not a non-binary person because in no way shape or form could they appear as a woman the next day,” Bingham claimed.

Bingham called it “offensive” for a “male” to “play that role,” and reiterated that it was easy to tell Aldrich was not really what he claimed to be.

The clip of Bingham’s appearance began circulating on social media, and many users were quick to point out Bingham’s hypocrisy over not respecting Aldrich’s identity because of his appearance.

Disclosure notice: @Slatzism is the Editor-in-Chief at Reduxx.

“But I thought we can’t tell anyone’s gender until they tell us? Aren’t we just supposed to believe what people say? Fairly sure Natalee is engaging in some double standards here,” one user said in response to the clip.

“Oh so it sounds like we don’t need to declare or recognize pronouns any more, we can just go by looks. Right?,” another user questioned.

The narrative that Aldrich is claiming to be non-binary as a legal maneuver to secure leniency during the trial began circulating across social media shortly after news of the court filing broke. Many trans activists are now claiming that Aldrich is only pretending to be non-binary, citing evidence such as family members using he/him pronouns to describe him on social media. 

Trans activist and alleged sex offender Eli Erlick repeatedly misgendered Aldrich on Twitter and claimed he is “playing the media by lying” about his gender identity.

“Using queer and trans self-determination ethos against us is a disgusting but effective way to further harm our communities.” Erlick stated on Twitter. In the past, Erlickhas criticized those who accurately identify him as male, despite some anecdotal evidence that he leveraged his own self-declared transgender status to avoid criticism for alleged crimes he committed. 

The debate amongst trans activists about Aldrich not being “authentically” non-binary are in contrast with long-standing assertion that trans activists claiming the only requirement to being “non-binary” is to self identify as such.

A viral tweet from September asserted that non-binary people “deserve to be respected without having their identity picked apart.”

The situation with Aldrich resembles recent controversies surrounding non-binary actor Ezra Miller.

Miller, known for his roles in The Flash and We Need to Talk About Kevin, became the subject of international outcry after numerous disturbing incidents came to light.

Miller is alleged to have committed multiple acts of violence against women, some of which were filmed and well-documented. In 2020, Miller was caught on video choking a female fan in Iceland and throwing her to the concrete. Earlier this year, Miller was reported to police by a Hawaiian woman who stated he had hit her in the head with a chair.

Most disturbingly, the mother of a young woman took to Twitter to report that her daughter had been effectively kidnapped by Miller, who had groomed her from when she was a minor, and plied her with illicit drugs.

Environmental activist Sara Jumping Eagle told her followers that her daughter, Tokata Iron Eyes, has not had a phone since January of this year, and that her family has been unable to locate her.

Yet despite all of his controversies, activists on Twitter asserted that Miller’s non-binary identity must be respected regardless of his improprieties. The actor uses the pronouns they/them/it and zir.

Similarly, earlier this year, internet celebrity Christian Weston Chandler, known more commonly as Chris Chan, appeared in court charged with raping his own 79 year old mother. 

During the court proceedings, people on Twitter began posting about the importance of not misgenderingChandler, who identifies as both a woman and a lesbian.

In addition to those outright denying Aldrich’s identity, some claimed it was “suspicious” for him to have begun using they/them pronouns only after his arrest. 

Trans activist and writer Katelyn Burns tweeted: “I just think it’s very convenient that the first time anyone on the planet has ever heard of you preferring they them pronouns is just after you’ve been arrested for shooting up a queer bar.”

But women’s rights advocates were quick to retort by pointing out that criminals identifying as transgender following an arrest, conviction, or incarceration was a relatively common occurrence.

Responding to Burns, one Twitter user wrote: “It’s almost like gender identity ideology allows males to do as they please and then claim trans status to avoid the repercussions. Most (transwomen) in Scottish jails only discovered they were trans after they were arrested. Funny that.”

Many pointed to a study published in the British Journal of Criminology which speculated that “the transitions of transgender people might be an attempt by pedophiles or other sex offenders to access cis-women in the female prison estate.” The same study found that a large percentage of men who identified as women in prison detransitioned upon release. 

“So, the Colorado shooting suspect is identifying as ‘non-binary’ with ‘they/them’ pronouns. Many desperate for this inconvenient info to go away are claiming ‘they’ are just gaming the system. Possibly true. But haven’t gender critical women been warning about this for years?” tweeted podcaster Stephen Knight.

The motive for Aldrich’s horrific actions have still yet to be determined by official investigation, despite the array of online speculation. So far, it has been revealed that the shooter had a traumatic upbringing with both parents having criminal backgrounds.

At 16, Aldrich filed a legal petition in Texas seeking to “protect himself” from his father, who had a criminal history including domestic violence against his mother. Aldrich’s father is an MMA fighter and porn actor who is reportedly addicted to methamphetamine. 

Formal charges are to expected to be brought against Aldrich at his next court hearing, set for December 6.

By Shay Woulahan Shay is a writer and social media content creator for Reduxx. She is a proud lesbian activist and feminist who lives in Northern Ireland with her partner and their four-legged, fluffy friends.

It is possible to mourn the dead and point out the hypocrisy of the TRA response to a shooter with pronouns.

[entityupdates]

wfhlahdlu Arc Guide (Live Post)

This is a reading guide for my Magneto stepdad adoption X-Men 97 fic. The fic makes sense if you read the chapters in order and you should do so but I still wanted to make a table of contents type post.

Arc 1: Adoption (7 Chapters)

This is the introduction to the fic, originally intended to be the entire fic. This arc shows the first month after Xavier's death with emphasis on Magneto's arrival and how the kids' reacted to it.

Arc 2: Trial (7 Chapters)

This arc explores some legal and political aspects of the situation Magneto and the X-Kids find themselves in, specifically the fact Gyrich murdered Xavier and Erik Lensherr being outed as Magneto. This arc takes place over another month. It also includes an interlude showing some backstory before resuming the regular story.

Interlude: Magnus's Story (4 Chapters)

This is a story within a story. This arc jumps between Karen Page's interview with Magneto about his past and an actual story depicting Magneto's life with Xavier. It begins with meeting Xavier and covers Magneto and Xavier's time as soldiers, going to college, their encounter with Sinister, their divorce, and the establishment of Genosha. The Trial Arc resumes after these chapters.

Arc 3: X-Men (8 Chapters)

These chapters were what I originally intended to be bonus chapters if the fic ended after Trial. Each chapter is treated like its own stand-alone self-contained story, though it fits into the chronology of the story and covers about three months. Here, the X-Kids settle into a new normal and develop connections with the superhero world.

Arc 4: Apocalypse (7 Chapters)

Apocalypse returns and collects his Horsemen. New York’s heroes come together to defeat him and witness the latest threat to mutantkind.

Arc 5: Sentinels (Estimated 7)

Outlined but not yet written.

[tailoredshirt]

I was tagged in this book meme by @lemonlyman-dotcom and @guardian-angle22 a while back, and I'm finally doing it!

Last book I…

Bought

Apollo 13 by Jim Lovell and Jeffrey Kluger / Trials of Life by David Attenborough

I mostly borrow books from the library these days, so I only tend to buy books my library doesn't have. I'd been really wanting to listen to Apollo 13, and it was part of Libro.fm's BOGO sale. I also added Trials of Life, which is nonfiction about animal behavior.

Borrowed

The Terror by Dan Simmons (audiobook)

I’ve had the paperback for ages, but I've been reading so much by audiobook lately that I thought that might be best, since it's so long. I had to wait quite a while for it to become available, and yesterday it finally was! 🎉 I've been reading a ton about polar exploration lately in preparation. After I finish it I'll finally be able to watch the TV show!!

Was gifted

The Hurting Kind by Ada Limon

I don’t get gifted books very often! Probably because I have too many already, and also because I mostly read ebooks and audiobooks. But it was on my wishlist (I tend to put poetry on my wishlists because I like reading poetry from physical books), and my mom got it for me for Christmas. Haven’t read it yet.

Gave/lent to someone

I usually give my mom a book for Christmas, but I don't remember what I got her last year. Unfortunately I don't have a ton of people in my life who read.

Started

Guard! Guards! by Terry Pratchett (audiobook)

I’ve never read any Pratchett (chorus of shocked gasps), so I decided to start with the first of the Night Watch books. It’s very fun so far!

Finished

Labyrinth of Ice: The Triumphant and Tragic Greely Polar Expedition by Buddy Levy (audiobook)

I've been obsessed with the history of polar exploration lately, particularly the ones that went horribly wrong somehow (sorry to this man). It's a really interesting story. I found a good map of the region online and was able to track all of the landmarks and locations they mentioned while I listened.

Didn’t finish

A Murder Was Announced by Agatha Christie (audiobook)

I’ve been reading a bunch of Agatha Christie lately, mostly Poirot novels, but this would be my first Miss Marple. I just couldn’t understand the narrator. 😩 The other books were narrated by Hugh Fraser, who I’ve enjoyed. I think this one was narrated by Emilia Fox. I cannot distinguish between British accents, but something about hers was difficult for me to understand against the ambient noise of my bus ride. Two minutes in, I noped out and returned the book (via Libby). I'll probably try it again sometime when I'm at home and can hear it better.

Gave 5 stars

11/22/63 by Stephen King (audiobook)

This gave me the worst book hangover. It’s about a guy who travels back in time to 1959(ish?) and lives in the past for a few years as he prepares to try to stop Kennedy’s assassination. It’s not actually a perfect novel, but I think I listened to it as fast as humanly possible because I was so engaged. (32 hours long!) I love time travel stories.

Gave 2 stars

A Limited Run by Karen McQuestion (audiobook)

This had a Truman Show-like setup, with actors living - in character - in a gigantic enclosed 1940s neighborhood. All of that was an immediate yes for me, but the story itself was very boring and contrived.

-

Idk who to tag for reading memes, but please consider yourself tagged if you want to do it! And tag me so I can see what you're reading.

[frances-baby-houseman]

My husband alerted me to the existence of the Karen Read murder trial, which began in April and is now on the third day of jury deliberations, so I'm a little late, but I'm RIVETED. FREE KAREN!! Never date a cop!!! I have read one cnn article and the lede of an AP story and that's all I need to know!

[skippyv20]

As I have said I have been watching the Karen Read murder trial….on Day 30 of testimony, the Defense rested after 2 expert reconstructionists said….”the vehicle damage was NOT consistent with an accident, and the injuries and death of John O’Keefe were NOT consistent with being hit by a vehicle.

This picture is of Karen Read and her attorneys taken today after court. It says so much, no words needed! You all rock!

Closing Arguments tomorrow than it goes to the jury. We have waited 30 trial days. This case NEVER should never have gone to trial. Karen Read was charged with murdering her boyfriend of two years. Prosecution said she did so in a rage….yet, the trial did show the level of corruption within the Canton Police department, and the Mass State Troopers involved in this case.

This woman lived in Canton……

[lastavenged]

i need to work it more, but instead of karen going the full reporter route exactly; what if her articles and pieces, are talking points or essays she reads on the air, over the radio, for a midnight show.

given how much i love her paige angel arc in the comics, so for context;

the paige angel arc starts, after her and matt have gotten back together, and karen's been looking for a job. matt and foggy are going to work for rosalind sharpe.

she finds work at a radio station WSFK, which she does momentarily keep from matthew, given she knows what is said about this station; that is has connection to the mob. she keeps this parly becaue she isn't certain matt would approve

(do not worry paige angel is one of their healthiest relationship arcs; besides when matt kisses natasha three times; seriously the amount of times matt is kissed by other women when he is with karen is a lot more than twice)

her producers are shady, heavily have to censor her or ward her off topics

matt finds out about paige angel (her alias) by listening, one night when she's taking calls about daredevil and people's theories on him; he calls in as "mike" and subtly tells her that he approves of her new job, she realizes its matt as he hangs up (its very cute)

things stay good, before Fear starts fucking with everyone, and the radio station closes down. skipping some details (like the whole nat thing; starts with matt concerned friend, but he doesn't exactly tell nat to stop nor stops thinking about nat like that while with karen; neveer tells her) and moving ahead. rosalind sharpe, who is biologically foggy's mother, ends up purchasing/saving the radio and securing karen's job back

which when that happens, it is revealed, that karen was very controversial for the WSFK station, due to well, it was a mob owned radio, and karen is anti-mob and was daredevil-positive. matt even says he admires that karen was brave enough to take a job there, and be the one good thing among the bad / the angel against the devil / light in the dark (that is literally the theme of paige angel arc for karen)

she resumes being paige angel and working midnight radio, now with more freedom than ever (which is why i think the idea of her being the radio host for vigilantes as an arc i wanna take into the mcu is one i wanna play) to say and do as she wants on air

the paige angel arc ends when she gets a stalker who has been calling in, sends her a human heart to the station, and then subsequently kills about ten people in her name; one of which, is a cop, whom karen is framed for the murder of (and that is such a rough, sad, and scary arc for her; as the mal prison guards threaten to r-word and the female guards attempt to physically assault her)

she is kept safe by elektra in disguise as another prisoner in jail; while matt tries to save karen in court. she is saved and thus ends the paige angel and trial of karen page arcs.

so expect me to play around with this, in the mcu setting, as i do love the idea of karen specifically using her voice, to say what she has to say, as well as take in calls, and bring the news and challenge theories over the radio air.

[coffeeandbatboys]

Trial and Error (Matt Murdock x Private Investigator!Wife)

Playing With Fire Part 3! Masterlist

Your first day of trial involves many familiar, yet distant faces.

Warnings: I guess mentions of murder, court cases, unfair treatment from the law system, one slight mention of pregnancy.

You caught a glimpse of his face as he, Karen and Foggy joined you.

Oh that beautiful face, hidden behind a wall of red glass.

Moving towards him wordlessly, you heard the same whimper he'd made when you were being interrogated at the beginning of this nightmare. Nodding to you, Foggy moved Matt's hand to your shoulder as the three of you awkwardly danced around.

"Hi." You crooned, earning a loving squeeze to your shoulder.

"Hi, love." He answered. Voice crack. Even a small flicker of his lips made you want to throw your arms around him, but not here, not now. You had to put on a brave face and keep the interaction professional. Which you'd hated.

"Good to see you, Murdock." A voice called out from next to a pillar. Both you and Matt turned to the name, only you relaxing as you realized who it was.

"Barton?! What are you doing here?" You gave a two-fingered 'salute' from your temple, the sign for 'hello'.

He repeated the action, shaking his head as if to say 'you don't want to know' before continuing on anyways. "They called agent Hill as a witness, given your connection with Ronin in twenty-nineteen."

"Right....that."

"Hey, you've got a good lawyer."

You looked up at Matt with a small smile, before turning back to Clint. "Yes I do, and thanks...for coming today."

"Not a problem."

An awful three words hit you halfway through the trial.

Jury. Paid. Fisk. If he wanted you taken out, he would make sure of it.

Matt must have heard your rising heartbeat, because he took your hand, under the table in his, brushing your wrist briefly. He grimaced as he felt the raw skin where the cuffs had chafed. Squeezing his hand, you focused on his face, noticing the light peppering of stubble on his cheek and the perfectly-combed brown locks you once ran your fingers through. God, you missed him.

Turning your attention back to the trial, Maria was the next called to the stand.

After taking the oath, she faced you for a brief moment.

"Agent Hill." The prosecutor began. "How long have you known y/n Murdock?"

"Since 2012."

"And that was, if I'm not mistaken, the year of the Chitauri invasion? Battle of New York?"

"Yes, it was."

"Do you know what her role was during that time?"

"An agent. She was on the helicarrier bridge, I believe."

"And, in the time that you've known Agent Murdock, has she ever displayed any unwarranted malicious behavior, unaffiliated with the job?"

"Never."

The prosecutor seemed unhappy with the answer.

Oh how you read that tell.

"So tell me, how you would describe y/n?"

"She's got a big heart. Much like her husband, she does the job pro-bono for the more unfortunate. She's never killed a single human being, and never hurt one without justifiable reason."

"And when you say...'without justifiable reason', are you implying that she has, in fact, injured someone?"

"Yes."

"Who?"

"When the Winter Soldier attacked her, Steve Rogers and Agent Romanoff once. He got away but not without a shot from Murdock."

"And with the dissipation of S.H.E.I.L.D., is she under protection for any wrongdoing?"

"No, she is not."

"No more questions your honor."

"Mr. Murdock, would you like to cross-examine the witness? The judge asked.

"Ah, yes."

He let go of your hand, standing up and 'feeling' his way around with his cane, stopping in front of the stand.

"Agent Hill. I understand that you are, -were, an agent of S.H.E.I.L.D. Are you by any chance still active in duty?"

"As an assistant to Director Fury, yes."

"And what exactly does Director Fury do?"

"Well, um, we recruit the remaining Avengers concerning large threats, operations, etc."

"So technically, S.H.E.I.L.D. is still in operation?"

"Not exactly. There's very few agents and technology left. Like I said we're more of a recruiting branch."

"Thank you, Agent. I have no more questions, your honor."

You felt like a high schooler having to meet curfew again as you parted ways, getting dragged back to your cage. A small kiss was all the two of you could spare before being pulled away for who knows how long again.

NEW: IF YOU WANNA BE ADDED TO THE TAGLIST FOR THIS SERIES PLEASE MESSAGE ME!!

@sgt-morgan

[onlytiktoks]

Full video ↑

[lucy-the-demon]

Spoilers for warriors, asc, book 4 (thunder)

Time for another warrior cats book Review

review under the cut

I know last time I talked about the book I was very negative over it, but I actually finished the book despite being very angry over it and I felt hope over the ending of book 3, i felt hope about squirrelflight becoming squirrelstar and bramblestar stepping down from being leader and how nightheart's family became positive and how sunbeam was getting away from her toxic, Karen of a mother

And before I started reading I was worried they would do some bullshit about how squirrelflight would get taken away and frostpaw would trust splashtail despite how obvious it was that he had tried to murder her, or nightheart would leave sunbeam and she would purposely fail the trials to go home because he wasn't there and go back to a genuinely toxic place where her mom, berryheart would be even worse to her

But I opened the book and was relieved that none of those things happened, squirrelflight became squirrelstar, frostpaw didn't bring splashtail with her and whilst she did get nightheart to help her sunbeam stayed in thunderclan and found her place without him.

And frostpaw wasn't victim shamed! The park cats around her and nightheart reassured her that it wasn't her fault that she trusted splashtail, she wasn't at fault for being attacked by someone she trusted.

Victim shaming is so fucking common in warrior cats it's nauseating (squirrelflights hope, skyclans destiny, spottedleafs heart, the list goes on and on) , it's a breath of fresh air to see a cat who was a victim be told it's not their fault.

Also tree once again being used for his purpose as a mediator is great, in the broken code I was so confused on why he wasn't used to help, his purpose is literally in the beginning of every book (naming all the clans and the cats in those clans) but this book actually remembered that he was created for that purpose, even though the Erin's forgot it's great to see that his role was remembered and used, even if it was added last minute ( seeing that none of the meetings were seen in book) its good for it to even be there at all.

I love that so much, it's like the Erin's are actually listening to their fans for once! I'm so happy to hear that.

I enjoyed reading this, I'm glad I stuck around instead of quitting the series midway through. I'm glad that sunbeam found her place in thunderclan with or without nightheart and stood up for herself instead of letting her mom push her around. The ending left me on a cliffhanger and I'm excited to read the next book when it comes out in April (according to Amazon.) I'm probably gonna pre-order it when it comes closer to the release date. ( In mid March perhaps?)

I have to preorder them on hardcover now because I don't want spoilers ok bye

But I hope the series continues on this route, for the first time since avos I've felt excited to read these books again.

Idk how to rate books, but It's good, I liked it.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

When doctors warned that she might be a killer, hospital bosses took her side — offering to support her with a master’s degree and find her a role at a top children’s hospital. This is the inside story.

By: Shaun Lintern and David Collins

Published: Aug 19, 2023

Lucy Letby sat with her parents in a meeting with senior managers at the Countess of Chester Hospital, where she worked, waiting patiently for an apology. She had prepared a statement that was read out by her parents to Tony Chambers, the hospital’s chief executive, about being bullied and victimised on the neonatal unit.

It was December 22, 2016, and for the previous 18 months, two doctors on the unit had been trying to find an answer for a series of mysterious deaths of babies. Their detective work had led them to a single common denominator: Letby. The neonatal nurse had been on shift for each of the incidents.

Rumours of a killer on the ward had spread and Letby had complained about the doctors and their finger-pointing, claiming she was being wrongly blamed.

Chambers, who had trained as a nurse, was convinced by Letby’s account, and in front of her parents, John and Susan, offered sincere apologies on behalf of the hospital trust. The doctors in question would be “dealt with’’.

Except the doctors were right. By that point Letby had secretly murdered seven babies and tried to kill six more, one of them twice.

Last week a jury sitting at Manchester crown court found her guilty following a ten-month trial. She was cleared of two attempted murders and the jury was unable to reach a conclusion over charges of attempted murder relating to four other babies.

An investigation by The Sunday Times, based on a cache of internal documents, can now reveal in detail how the hospital delayed calling the police for months and that senior management, including the board, sided with Letby against doctors after commissioning perfunctory investigations.

The files, including the outcome of a grievance case that Letby brought against the trust in September 2016, reveal that an apology from the hospital and the doctors was not all the 33-year-old got. She was also to be offered a placement at the world-famous Alder Hey Children’s Hospital in Liverpool and was to be given support for a master’s degree or advanced nurse training.

The grievance report details how consultants first raised concerns with board directors in 2015 and that doctors had been heard referring to “killing” on the ward.

One doctor was said to have described a “drawer of doom” containing links between Letby and as many as 16 unexpected deaths and collapses of babies on the neonatal unit. Another told the ward manager: “You are harbouring a murderer.”

But Ian Harvey, the medical director, told the grievance the trust wanted to “protect Lucy Letby from these allegations”. A senior nurse, Karen Rees, had told Letby “the intention was to get her back onto the neonatal unit”.

Some doctors were threatened with misconduct investigations and their attempts to escalate their worries were met with angry responses. One nurse described the consultants as conducting a “witch-hunt” against Letby.

Responding to the Sunday Times investigation, Susan Gilby, the former chief executive of the trust, said a full public inquiry was required. She said she knew within a week of arriving at the trust, in 2018, that police needed to be involved.

She said managers “had a very fixed view” and the paediatricians were “clearly psychologically in distress” when she arrived at the trust a month after Letby’s arrest.

Along with the then trust chairman Sir Duncan Nichol, Gilby commissioned an independent investigation of the trust’s handling of the Letby scandal by the consultancy firm Facere Melius. Nichol has called for it to be published and said he believes the trust board were misled by hospital executives.

First suspicions

In June 2015, Dr Stephen Brearey, a senior paediatrician and head consultant at the hospital’s neonatal unit, was trying to work out why four relatively healthy babies on his unit had “collapsed” — suffered a catastrophic and unexpected decline in their health — for no clear reason in a fortnight. Three babies had died; one had been saved. That is more than they would normally expect in a year.

Brearey, a calm, measured, clear-headed consultant, decided to open up the medical notes for each case to examine one by one their care on the ward.

He noted the doctors and nurses on duty, the times of the collapses, and the people in the room at the time. Letby was the only one at each of the four collapses.

The nurse, then 26, had a wide circle of friends at the hospital. “She was like Miss Perfect,” said a former friend. “Maybe slightly awkward, but sociable. She’d go on nights out with the hospital staff into bars and nightclubs in Chester. Her parents used to think butter wouldn’t melt in her mouth. She’s literally the last person anybody would suspect as a killer.”

She was a godmother to two children, did salsa classes, went on holiday to Ibiza with friends, and lived in a £200,000 semi-detached house close to the hospital with her two cats, Smudge and Tigger. She had grown up in Hereford, and went to Aylestone School, a state secondary, before moving to Hereford Sixth Form College. She graduated in 2011 and started at the Chester hospital in 2012.

She also had an alleged close relationship with a married registrar. He had driven her home the night one of the babies died, and it was claimed in court that many of her actions were motivated by a desire to be noticed by him. Records showed she had searched for his wife on Facebook, and had sent him heart emojis in a WhatsApp message.

Letby’s first murder was of a one-day-old boy known as Child A, on June 8, 2015. Delivered by caesarean section at 31 weeks, he had been admitted to the intensive care room at the neonatal unit, but was in good condition and breathing without help.

An hour after starting her shift, Letby called doctors to the baby’s incubator because his health had suddenly deteriorated. Both a doctor and a consultant noticed an odd discolouration on the boy’s skin — patches of pink over blue skin that appeared and disappeared — but had no idea what it could be.

Letby had injected air into the baby’s bloodstream through one of two tubes attached to his body, in what would become a tried and tested method of killing for the nurse.

Despite resuscitation attempts, Child A was pronounced dead at 8.58pm. A day later, Letby targeted Child A’s twin sister, Child B, using a similar method of air injection. She too suffered an unexpected collapse, but survived with no long-term consequences. On June 14, Letby murdered a five-day-old baby, Child C, using an injection of air through a nose tube.

Seven days later, she killed Child D, with an injection of air into the bloodstream. The baby collapsed three times in the early hours, and could not be saved.

All Brearey had was a suspicion that something was amiss. Healthy babies, no matter how premature, do not collapse and die for no reason. In neonatal units it is accepted that sudden unexplained deaths of babies is rare.

Brearey’s informal review of what had happened to Children A, B, C and D was shared with his colleague, Dr Ravi Jayaram, a consultant paediatrician in the children’s ward, who once presented Channel 4’s TV show Born Naughty?, a programme about children with behavioural problems. Brearey told Jayaram there was nothing that linked the deaths, “other than one nurse”.

The deaths were reported by consultants to the hospital trust’s committee for serious incidents, responsible for examining matters of patient safety. But the hospital classified them as “medication errors”, rather than a “serious incident involving an unexpected death”.

Had they been classified as unexpected deaths, NHS England policy would have allowed the hospital to group them together, which could have led to an immediate further investigation about what had caused them.

New ways to kill

In the early hours of August 4, Child E, a twin boy, collapsed and died. Letby had injected air into his bloodstream. The next day she used insulin to try to poison the baby’s twin brother, Child F. He survived.

Letby was becoming more prolific, and she started experimenting with her killing methods. In September, she twice tried to murder Child G, by feeding him an excessive amount of milk. The baby was left severely disabled.

On October 23, Child I died. Letby had injected a large amount of air into her stomach via a nasogastric tube. She sent a sympathy card to her parents and made Facebook searches for the family.

The same day as Child I’s collapse, Eirian Powell, a nurse and ward manager responsible for the nursing staff on the neonatal unit, conducted her own review of the cases. Like Brearey, she spotted that Letby was the only member of staff on shift for all the deaths. She emailed her findings to Brearey.

“Unfortunate that Lucy Letby was on — however each case of death is different,” she told him. By now, doctors and staff on the unit were gripped by fear and confusion. What was going wrong?

By November 2015, Ian Harvey, the hospital’s medical director and second in charge overall, was aware of the rising death rate on the neonatal unit. He felt assured, however, that the hospital had a mortality rate lower than or comparable with other similar-sized hospitals.

Joining the dots

In February 2016, Brearey, who remained suspicious of Letby, carried out a half-day thematic review into the deaths and collapses on the neonatal unit. With the help of a specialist consultant from Liverpool, he tried to join the dots.

The working group produced a report detailing complex clinical issues alongside a mortality table and an appendix. The appendix, which was reproduced in a police report, showed Letby was on shift for each of the deaths and collapses and that they had happened only between midnight and 4am.

On February 15, Brearey emailed a table of deaths, showing Letby on shift for each one, to Harvey, who as well as being medical director, had been a respected orthopaedic surgeon. Still there was no action and hospital management, believing Letby’s involvement was a coincidence, allowed her to continue her work at the neonatal unit.

Brearey continued to be concerned and emailed Jayaram. “I think we still need to talk about nurse Letby . . .”

The head nurses at the hospital were also emailing each other. On March 17 Powell, the neonatal unit’s ward manager, emailed the hospital’s chief nurse, Alison Kelly, and they discussed how Letby was a “commonality” in all the deaths. Powell asked for help.

Her plea went unanswered and she twice had to chase for a meeting, getting one 56 days later.

On April 7, Powell moved Letby from night to day shifts, telling her it was to support her “wellbeing” because she had been present for so many of the collapses. Two days after the switch, Letby attacked twin baby boys. She attempted to murder Child L using insulin and Child M was injected with air. Both survived.

These attacks would become a cornerstone of evidence in the police and prosecution’s case against her. The prosecution was able to show the jury that the deaths and collapses “followed” Letby from night shifts to day shifts.

Powell was feeling under increasing pressure. The neonatal unit was busy and understaffed. Stressed and anxious nurses were at breaking point. Internal emails from a consultant to Chambers warned of doctors working shifts of more than 20 hours. And the Letby rumours showed no sign of going away.

At the beginning of May 2016, Brearey emailed Kelly, the chief nurse, flagging Letby’s presence at the deaths and also asking for a meeting. Kelly sent it to Harvey, the medical director, expressing alarm that a doctor was implicating a nurse and told him she had been reassured there was no evidence but that a wider review might be needed.

She asked senior nurse managers to examine any staffing trend linked to the deaths, adding that it was “potentially very serious”.

After the exchange of messages, Brearey and other doctors met Kelly and Harvey to set out their concerns. They agreed to review all deaths and to keep Letby on day shifts for three months.

Doctors remained concerned. In one meeting with Powell on May 16 a senior doctor told her: “You are harbouring a murderer.”

A few weeks later, in June, Letby tried to murder Child N, a baby born at 34 weeks with mild haemophilia, a blood disorder. She injected him with air and a clear fluid into his stomach via a tube.

‘Back with a bang’

In June 2016, Letby travelled to Ibiza for a week-long holiday in the sun with two close friends. She returned to work on June 23, texting a friend the day before: “Probably be back in with a bang lol.”

Within 72 hours, she murdered two triplets Children O and P. Child O suffered “trauma” akin to a road traffic accident that damaged the liver. Both babies had air in the stomach via a nasogastric tube that would have put pressure on their diaphragm, making it difficult to breathe.

The latest unexpected deaths proved traumatic for the neonatal unit. Brearey held a staff debrief, but noticed Letby did not seem upset at all. He decided he wanted Letby off the ward.

On June 24, he called the hospital’s nursing director, Karen Rees, and expressed concerns about Letby being on duty. He wanted to stop her working.

Brearey told the trial that Rees insisted there was no evidence against Letby and said she would take responsibility for allowing the nurse to continue to work.

Claims of a witch-hunt

June’s deaths caused a flurry of emails and meetings between doctors, nurses and hospital executives. “[We need] help from outside agencies . . .” one doctor emailed. “I believe it is the police.”

Jayaram replied to the email chain, with Harvey, the hospital’s second in command, copied in: “They [the hospital directors] do not seem to see the same degree of urgency as we do.”

Harvey replied, denying a lack of action and saying concerns were being “discussed and action taken”. He told the doctors: “All emails will cease forthwith.”

At the end of June, the executive directors met and sources say they debated for the first time calling in the police, with notes from the meeting recording “all say yes to the police”. The discussion went on to consider the impact of an investigation and the arrest of Letby and the “subsequent reputational issues” and impact on the trust.

The evidence was circumstantial and directors had concerns about the unit leadership and fears the doctors were carrying out a “witch-hunt”.

Kelly, the chief nurse, contacted the Nursing and Midwifery Council for advice about Letby and whether to refer the problems to the police.

The trust did not contact the police. But the board agreed to downgrade the unit so the sickest babies were sent to neighbouring hospitals. This was designed to relieve pressure on the unit.

In late June, Harvey and Chambers, the chief executive on a salary of £160,000 plus benefits, decided to ask the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) for an independent review. The parameters were set narrowly and did not specifically ask the experts to look at Letby’s actions or the deaths but to carry out a general review of the service.

Harvey and Chambers met the doctors and told them the trust had considered calling the police but would handle the situation “in a different way”.

Letby was called to a meeting with a senior nurse and HR manager. For the first time, she was told of her link to the baby deaths and that she would be one of several staff placed under supervision. She was visibly “upset” and “distressed”.

Staffing shortages meant she could not be supervised on the ward and in mid-July she was redeployed to an administrative role. She never returned to the unit, despite her best efforts.

On July 14, the trust board held an extraordinary meeting at which the neonatal unit was the only item of discussion. Jayaram and Brearey presented their concerns. Discussions included the link between Letby and the unexplained deaths and the possibility of involving the police. The board also discussed installing CCTV.

One source said the doctors were told that calling in the police would mean “blue tape everywhere and the end of the unit as well as the trust’s reputation”. The next day, a non-executive director, James Wilkie, went to Kelly with concerns following the board meeting. She agreed to escalate his concerns.

Letby’s grievance

At the start of September, the RCPCH arrived. Letby was one of the first to be interviewed. She hoped that engaging with the review might help her back to a frontline nursing role.

At the same time she was fighting back against the doctors she claimed were falsely blaming her for the deaths. On September 7, she raised a formal grievance against the trust for victimisation and discrimination. She said she felt she had been singled out, moved away from the job she loved, and the hospital trust had not been honest about doctors’ allegations against her.

Her Royal College of Nursing (RCN) union representative emailed hospital bosses outlining “grave concerns” about her treatment. Letby was demanding to know the grounds for an investigation into her practice.

In October, the RCPCH reported back to Chambers and Harvey. They found that what had happened “appears unusual and needs further inquiry to try to explain the cluster of deaths”. They recommended a forensic review of each death but it never happened.

The review also found that not all the deaths had been classed as serious incidents and some were not sent for post-mortem examinations, despite this being best practice. It also found gaps in staffing and poor decision-making. But it did not explain why babies had died.

Harvey contacted Dr Jane Hawdon, an expert neonatalogist at the Royal Free Hospital in north London, asking her to examine the deaths, but she told him she could offer only a summary.

Another consultant at Alder Hey told Harvey he should commission an expert review. Three separate experts had now advised him to do this.

A draft version of the RCPCH report, including a confidential section linking the baby deaths with Letby and the “subjective” concerns of the doctors, was drawn up but only a redacted version was circulated to the board, the doctors or bereaved parents.

When Letby lodged her grievance complaint in September 2016, it started a two-and-a-half-month investigation into her treatment by the hospital and, in particular, the consultants. Documents show that in particular she wanted to know what allegations were being investigated about her.

Doctors who had raised concerns about her being a baby killer, including Brearey and Jayaram, were forced to sit through interviews, along with their union reps, where an investigator grilled them about Letby’s bullying complaint.

By now, the relationship between seven senior consultants and the hospital’s management had deteriorated. The doctors felt they had not been listened to and police needed to be brought in.

In October, the executive managers met again and sources say they were told “not calling police was the right decision” and that the doctors’ evidence was “unconvincing”.

Ten hospital staff were interviewed as part of Letby’s complaint. Many of them had threatened to call the police if she was allowed back on the ward.

Not everybody agreed with them, however. One senior nurse gave evidence saying the doctors were operating “a witch-hunt”, adding: “I hope she returns to the unit . . . we would be delighted.”

Harvey is quoted as saying the doctor’s concerns felt “purely circumstantial . . . we wanted more if we were going to call the police”. He said the executive team felt strongly that if they raised concerns with the police without foundation, Letby would have been arrested which would have resulted in a “bomb-site” for the trust to manage.

As part of the grievance, investigators looked into Letby’s conduct too. The formal report found no concerns about her competence. “No red flags,” according to documents.

The grievance process had found no evidence to justify calling in the police. In fact, it found the doctors were at fault for suspecting her of murder. “This behaviour has resulted in you, a junior colleague and fellow professional, feeling isolated and vulnerable, putting your reputation in question,” the grievance inquiry told Letby. “This is unacceptable and could be viewed as victimisation.”

The report said the hospital would aid her professional development by supporting her wih a master’s degree or an advanced neonatal course. She was also offered weekly welfare meetings with a senior nurse. Documents show that hospital managers proposed offering her an observational role at Alder Hey.

On November 12, the investigation was completed, and three days later, HR and senior nurses discussed Letby’s possible return to the neonatal unit, which had not suffered a single mysterious death or collapse since her transfer more than four months earlier.

Three days before Christmas 2016, Letby and her parents arrived at the hospital. Chambers issued her with a full apology on behalf of the hospital trust, and assured her family that the troublesome doctors who had victimised her would be dealt with accordingly.

Letby had had her revenge.

Bosses back nurse

In January 2017, the hospital held an extraordinary board meeting, at which the board, chaired by Sir Duncan Nichol, was updated on the RCPCH review.

Nichol was a career hospital administrator and head of the NHS at the time of the Beverley Allitt scandal. Allitt was the serial killer nurse who injected infants with insulin and air bubbles. She was given 13 life sentences in 1993. Copies of the redacted report were handed out at the start and taken in at the end.

Harvey said that the report had found the incidents in the ward were down to “issues of leadership, escalation, timely intervention” and that it “does not highlight any single individual”. He said some case reviews were continuing but were not expected to change that finding.

The doctors were not invited to the board, and a victim impact statement from Letby’s grievance was read out. “There was an unsubstantiated explanation that there was a causal link to an individual,” Chambers, the chief executive, said. “This is not the case and the issues were around leadership and timely clinical interventions.

“As a board we did nothing wrong,” Chambers said, with Harvey adding the trust was “close to drawing a line” under their investigations.

Chambers described the behaviour of the doctors as “unprofessional” and told Nichol he was “seeking an apology from the consultants”.

By now, Brearey and Jayaram, along with five other clinicians, were being backed into a corner by management.

In January they met Chambers and Harvey and were told: “Things have been said and done that were below the values and standards of the trust.”

Managers also demanded “mediation” between Letby and the two lead doctors, Brearey and Jayaram. Harvey told them it would protect them from a referral to the General Medical Council (GMC), the doctors’ watchdog.

Their BMA union rep told them that while there were “disturbing similarities to Beverley Allitt” they should agree to write Letby an “apology letter”.

They reluctantly agreed, but behind the scenes kept trying to find an explanation for the deaths.

In late January, they wrote to Chambers asking for a full investigation: “What is the reason for the unexpected and unexplained deaths? What should we as paediatricians do now?”

On February 5, The Sunday Times reported that deaths in the baby unit at the hospital were being investigated.

In a letter to Letby dated March 1, all the paediatricians apologised. “We are sorry for the stress and upset that you have experienced in the last year,” they wrote.

On March 27, Brearey again told the hospital’s most senior managers that it was time to bring in the police. Chambers finally requested a formal investigation in a letter to the chief constable of Cheshire police on May 2, 2017. Two weeks later, after meeting the doctors, police launched Operation Hummingbird.

‘I am evil’

Letby was arrested on July 3, at her home in Chester. In her home, police discovered hospital paperwork relating to some of the babies she had murdered. They also found erratic scribbles on pieces of paper: “I don’t deserve to live. I killed them on purpose because I’m not good enough. I am a horrible evil person.” Then, in capital letters: “I AM EVIL I DID THIS.”

In November 2020 she was charged with the murders and attempted murders. Her trial began in October last year.

Her defence team always argued that she was a victim of coincidence and of a conspiracy by doctors. They said the neonatal ward was poorly run and dirty.

Inside a glass-windowed box at the back of the court, Letby showed little emotion as the prosecution and medical experts described how she murdered baby after baby on the ward. Her parents attended every day.

The attention of the police will now focus on Letby’s activities at Liverpool Women’s Hospital where she had worked briefly before Countess of Chester ��� Hummingbird is investigating the entire time Letby was employed as a nurse. Cheshire police are supporting an unknown number of families affected by their new inquiries, and serious questions remain for the NHS and Countess of Chester Hospital about how Letby was allowed to kill for so long.

Almost immediately after Letby’s arrest the doctors started to find justice. Trust sources say Harvey was criticised for his secrecy during a private meeting of the board, and then Chambers wrote to the doctors.

He said: “The issues were the most intellectually and emotionally challenging sequence of events I have ever had to manage in my professional career and I am sure I have been found lacking.”

In August 2018, Harvey retired from Countess of Chester. A month later Tony Chambers resigned after agreeing a non-disclosure agreement with the trust.

The Countess of Chester Hospital said it welcomed the announcement of an independent inquiry. Jane Tomkinson, the acting chief executive, said: “The trust will be supporting the ongoing investigation by Cheshire police. Due to ongoing legal considerations, it would not be appropriate for the trust to make any further comment at this time.”

Sir Duncan Nichol was head of the NHS when the serial killer nurse Beverley Allit was convicted and was tasked with writing to all hospitals following an inquiry into that case to ensure similar failings never happened again.

He said: “We were told explicitly that there was no criminal activity pointing to any one individual, when in truth the investigating neonatologist had stated that she had not had the time to complete the necessary in-depth case reviews. We were not given the full information we needed.”

In a statement Chambers said he would co-operate with the inquiry, adding: “What was shared with the board was honest and open and represented our best understanding of the outcome of the reviews at that time.”

He added: “All my thoughts are with the children at the heart of this case and their families and loved ones at this incredibly difficult time. I am truly sorry for what all the families have gone through. As chief executive, my focus was on the safety of the baby unit and the wellbeing of patients and staff. I was open and inclusive as I responded to information and guidance.”

After the trial it was reported that Harvey, who retired to France in 2018, said his comments to the board were true to the best of his knowledge. “I wanted the reviews and investigations carried out, so that we could tell the parents what had happened to their children,” he said.

He added: “These are truly terrible crimes and I am deeply sorry that this happened to them. I believe there should be an inquiry that looks at all events leading up to this trial and I will help it in whatever way I can.”

Alison Kelly, the former chief nurse who is now interim director of nursing for Salford, within the Northern Care Alliance Trust, is reported to have said: “These are truly terrible crimes and I am deeply sorry that this happened to them.”

She said lessons needed to be learned and she would co-operate with any investigation.

Karen Rees, now Moore, could not be reached for comment but is understood to dispute the account given by Dr Brearey.

[ Via: https://archive.md/a63Iq ]

==

This is horrific, and the fact we live in a culture where she could fabricate and successfully exploit a fake claim of victimization, where despite the justified suspicion around her, she was shielded and protected, at the cost of multiple infant lives is incredible.

[ladykailolu]

I read this fanfic where Godot gets on a rather shady person’s bad side,

Said Shady person makes bullshit health code violations and gets Godot’s cafe/home taken away

Imagine if some absolute garbage Karen trash tried to fuck over Godot by making bs calls to child services to try and get Marigold taken away from him

Arguing “since he was a convict and stuff he isn’t fit to be a parent” “he couldn’t possibly care for this child properly”

The shady person in the fanfic had certain ties to the legal world that allowed them to get away with getting Godot’s cafe place shut down, so if they had similar ties to cps

That could end badly

Hopefully Nick and pals can help (you don’t get trials for health code violations, but you do for child abuse and custody)

Uuuhhhhhhh.....link to me the fanfic??? I love some post aa3 Godot content!!

I'm not sure how that would work, but for the sake of angst, that sure would be fucked up! And make it that this shady person is sooooooo damn good at navigating the legal system either by himself or through some powerful friends that it's basically a done deal for Godot. It's unavoidable. He can't get out of it. Marigold will be taken away from him, and that's the final word.

So Godot runs to Nick for help, and now that it involves Marigold's life, Nick is furious too and takes Godot's case. Instantly, Nick can see that the whole trial was a sham and that Godot was not the monster the prosecution (which is not Edgeworth or a prosecutor whom Nick previously fought) was trying to paint him as. But it seems like the whole world is against him right now because it doesn't sit right with any of the witnesses how a murder convict is the legal guardian of a vulnerable young child. Basically, the prosecution twists the facts to align with the people's fears. It becomes pretty damning.

How do you think that this case would turnabout? As in, could Nick sniff out this shady person and reveal their plot? Would that shady person be proven suspicious and Godot be exonerated? Maybe Nick would catch the person in one lie on the stand then reveal that he's been lying the entire time, which would exonerate Godot and make the shady person into the defendant.

Even so, the damage has been done. Godot was sitting in jail, away from Marigold, and as a condition of his confinement, he was not allowed to see Marigold unless he is found not guilty and free to go. Meanwhile, Marigold was probably placed in foster care because she doesn't have blood-relatives available to raise her. And she's not allowed to see her dad when she wanted to see him most.

I imagine though that they would use Nick as a proxy. Nick visits Marigold at the youth center then he goes to the visitor's center at the jail and tells Godot all about how Marigold is going. It gets touching when Nick tells him more sentimental things, like Marigold can't wait to see Godot again, and vice versa.

[thatbookgirl1212]

Introduction

So, nice to meet you. I’m that book-obsessed girl. You can call me M, or whatever you want really. I like Taylor Swift, reading, Olivia Rodrigo, mysteries, writing and art. If you have anything you’d like to see me read, just tell me! I’ll add it to the ever-growing list below.

Where to read?

So you can’t afford to buy a ton of books. Me neither, well I just don’t want to. I have a couple websites I use for reading.

Pdfseva.com

Ebookscart.com

libgen.rs (use ad blocker)

libgen.is (use ad blocker)

libgen.st (use ad blocker)

oceanofpdf.com

My to-be-read list

now playing: london boy by taylor swift

1. Midnight Strikes by Zeba Shahnaz

2. Red, White, and Royal Blue by Casey McQuinston

3. Malibu Rising by Taylor Jenkins Reid

4. The Summer of Broken Rules by K.L Walther

5. One of us is lying by Karen M. McManus

6. Better than The Movies by Lynn Painter

7. The Spanish Love Deception by Elena Armas

8. Daughter of the Moon Goddess by Sue Lynn Tan

9. One True Loves by Taylor Jenkins Reid

10. American Royals by Katharine Mcgee

11. They both die at the end by Adam Silvera

12. The Song of Achilles by Madeline Miller

13. Never Getting Back Together by Sophie Gonzalez

14. A Court of Thorns and Roses by Sarah J. Maas

15. The Inheritance Games by Jennifer Lynn Barnes

16. If we were villains by M. L Rio

17. I am not your final girl by Claire C. Howard

Read

1. The Summer I turned Pretty, It’s not summer without you, We’ll always have summer by Jenny Han

2. The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo by Taylor Jenkins Reid

3. A good girl’s guide to murder, “Good girl, bad blood,” and As good as dead, by Holly Jackson

4. Percy Jackson’s series up to the trials of Apollo

5. Harry Potter

6. Heartless by Marissa Myers

7. The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, Mockingjay, and A Ballad Of Songbirds and Snakes by Suzanne Collins

8. The Playlist by Morgan Elizabeth

9. I am not your final girl by Claire C. Holland

And more that aren’t listed, these are just my favorites or most recents.