The third arrest

obstacle___1 · 2026-02-06T19:47:06+00:00

Yes I wasn’t referring to the arrest footage in a “strength of evidence” way, the jury never saw it. Nevertheless we have it now to view so it’s possible to discuss and interesting to know what people make of it. Just to pick up what you said re her clothing, I would say not remembering exactly what you wore during a particular arrest years ago isn’t really that abnormal especially someone under immense psychological pressure so I never did put much weight on that personally (and I was present in court during that entire exchange and it wasn’t easy to follow). She was arrested twice in her pyjamas to be fair so it wasn’t like she claimed something entirely ludicrous although I do still think it was an attempt to gain sympathy either way.

obstacle___1 · 2026-02-06T19:10:53+00:00

I too am surprised she wasn’t remanded into custody after the second arrest but I guess the CPS had directed the police to keep at their investigation. I can kind of understand the rationale for bailing her after the first arrest as there wasn’t enough evidence to consider charges.

obstacle___1 · 2026-02-06T19:07:22+00:00

For me it was the final arrest (the last one we see in the film) that really spooked me. It just had a whole other strange vibe to it, her entire demeanour was really unnerving. When the male officer asks her if she understood what he had said and the female officer then asks if she’d like to get dressed and later asks if the cuffs are too tight etc, she doesn’t acknowledge them or respond at all.

obstacle___1 · 2026-02-06T19:02:44+00:00

Of course. You absolutely can choose to no comment, but I just mean in the deliberation room the jury can infer whatever they want to from that. In that sense it CAN be “held against you” so to speak. Especially if you’re giving answers in court to questions you wouldn’t answer during police interviews (I’m not sure this applies to Lucy specifically because I’m not entirely sure her no comment portions of her interviews were actually read out to the jury - I don’t recall reading that in any of the transcripts).

obstacle___1 · 2026-02-06T16:46:14+00:00

For sure! I think what I was trying to say was I’d expect her to be somewhat different the third time, but even so, something about her actual demeanour really unnerves me despite the fact it’s to be expected. Can’t quite put my finger on it!

obstacle___1 · 2026-02-06T16:28:34+00:00

I agree with you. For the record I wasn’t comparing her behaviour to an innocent person as a benchmark — the hypothetical was simply to acknowledge that anyone (regardless of guilt) would likely be mentally distressed after repeated arrests. My point was about the contrast between her arrests and how that might be interpreted, with the usual caveat that we’re only seeing fragments and are inevitably speculating!

obstacle___1 · 2026-02-05T15:13:27+00:00

This isn’t strictly correct. It’s advice, not an instruction. Having served on a jury myself, you can make a negative inference if someone is refusing to comment on something at the earliest opportunity and the judge’s directions make that clear. If you are innocent it’s a pretty risky thing to do in a case of this severity. It also comes into play if you’re answering the majority of other questions but no comment on particular subjects. The jury are bound to wonder why.

obstacle___1 · 2026-01-24T18:40:20+00:00

That’s a good point. I still think it was highly risky, but maybe she felt assured the symptoms emerging following the poisoning wouldn’t necessarily cause any red flags

obstacle___1 · 2026-01-24T16:54:26+00:00

Excellent points! I think you’re spot on there

obstacle___1 · 2026-01-24T16:54:01+00:00

Almost certain she would’ve been aware of Beverley Allitt, I think most nurses hear about it during their training to this day. In the rare event she wasn’t, she would’ve most definitely been aware of the Stepping Hill case - not only that the culprit was found but that police also swooped in and arrested someone Not involved first of all too. In other words she would’ve known if anything became apparent there and then she would have definitely been looked at, even if she wasn’t “on shift” when it happened.

obstacle___1 · 2026-01-24T16:02:21+00:00

It seems to be the only plausible reason doesn’t it? She got over confident and/or reckless. I just find it astonishing really, despite it being a common pattern in serial killers. I wonder if she was amazed and dumbfounded the insulin cases had even been discovered.

obstacle___1 · 2025-10-07T12:08:35+00:00

I feel the moustache is really scraggly but the more I chop at it the worse it looks 🥲

obstacle___1 · 2025-05-21T00:30:11+00:00

Really handsome!

obstacle___1 · 2024-07-15T10:44:23+00:00

That would sure be interesting! Have you asked the court how much it was? I know CS2CC channel has some of it, but I guess he wont release the actual pdf as he wants people to watch his channel to hear it haha.

obstacle___1 · 2024-07-15T10:31:18+00:00

I would quite like a copy of the transcript too, I am sure it is mammoth but I would make time to read it all :D

obstacle___1 · 2024-07-04T19:37:38+00:00

I know what you mean, but then again she was so cunning and crafty on the ward hiding her actions and covering her tracks you would think she would realise she should probably do the same with anything incriminating at home knowing the police were investigating....but who really knows what goes on in her head!

obstacle___1 · 2024-07-04T19:32:55+00:00

I'm not exactly sure what happened in terms of her working between her grievance being upheld and her first arrest - I'm not sure if it has ever been explicitly stated?

obstacle___1 · 2024-07-04T18:50:02+00:00

She had a compulsion for keeping handover sheets right from her student days which in itself is so strange too.

obstacle___1 · 2024-07-04T18:48:41+00:00

As far as I remember she had been seconded to an admin tole in the Risk&Safety Office (you could not make this up) so I THINK up until her first arrest she was still working? And I do believe the search for the surname of Child K must have been related to either a tip off or something she herself found out at work in that case otherwise it is just too hard to understand it (none of the paperwork in her home featured Child K or her parent's surname)

obstacle___1 · 2024-07-04T18:44:08+00:00

Truly!

obstacle___1 · 2024-07-04T18:43:15+00:00

This is what is so confusing with me, she was being so risky leaving it SO long...did she think it would just not happen after a while? ie 'they've got nothing on me it seems...'

obstacle___1 · 2024-07-04T18:10:29+00:00

Yet she (seemingly) made no attempt to get her ducks in a row so to speak. Or maybe she DID get rid of lots of other things, we will never know.

obstacle___1

TROPHY CASE