by Brummie 13 Replies latest jw friends
Remember the English girl babysitter who was supposed to have murdered that little baby? The court case was on live TV everyday (Like OJSimpson). I watched both and was convinced of OJs guilt but was also convinced of LWoodwoods innocence.
England supported her as being not guilty, what did the USA think?
I know the Jury found her guilty but was that reflective of most of the USA?
Brummie
I don't know about anybody else, but I watched the trial on court TV and thought that she was NOT guilty. There were too many things that didn't add up, like his fractured wrist that was never treated. Some of the experts testified that he could have suffered a head injury at the same time as the wrist fracture and didn't develop serious symptoms until later. I could see how that might be true, especially since no one was aware of his wrist. They wouldn't have been taking any precautions and anything could have aggrevated the condition.
I didn't think she seemed like the kind of girl that would flip out on a baby either.
I was kinda glued to that court case. Very compelling (same as OJs).
One thing that made me doubt the evidence was the defendant said the skull had started to heal and therefore must have happened before the baby died, hence it couldnt have been fractured by the girl as the healing process had began. However the prosecution made the point that the baby was on a life support machine for over a week and it was during that week that the healing process had taken place. It kind of threw a shadow of doubt over the whole case. Other than this one point I think there was more that a shadow of a doubt and she shouldnt have been charged.
Thanks for your reply.
Brummie
Hello Brummie, I was riveted by that trial also.
The defendant (Louise Woodward) didn't seem very convincing on the stand ,especially when she did that shaking demonstration. There was also a time during the trial when she smiled (nervously) and many people interpreted that as being callous.
She had such a baby face, she didn't LOOK guilty. I'm glad the original sentence was reduced; she really didn't belong in jail.
=suz
From what I can remember (I was living in the UK at the time), I recall thinking she was as guilty as sin. I still think so.
(US citizen).
Suzi, I like the username lol. Yep I found it riveting.
Blacksheep, sometimes people look guilty if they are not, did you find the evidence against her was convincing enough to make you believe she was guilty?
I'm a little hesitant to comment since I didn't follow the case closely, but from the bit I heard, I totally believed she was guilty. Just the fact that she admitted shaking the baby, and the motion she made, just seemed to me like she did it. The sad thing is, many people shake babies, unaware of the harm that can be done with even minimal shaking. I didn't think she was a monster who maliciously and deliberately harmed the child, just someone who let anger get the best of them.
The interesting thing about the OJ case is, I don't think he did it. I fully believe he knows more than he has ever said, but after all the evidence, police misconduct, and reading Christopher Darden's book, I don't think he committed the murders. I believe he was a wife beater, and an all around cad of a guy, but the facts didn't add up in my opinion. I have talked to a number of legal and law enforcement personnel (just out of curiosity) and I was surprised that many of them agreed with me. Not all, but more than half. Of course, maybe somewhere else all the law enforcement personnel believe he did it, I just didn't talk to them.
Happyout
I watched it avidly too.
I do recall being horrified at the prosecution making a meal of her stating that she "popped baby Ethan on the bed".
"Popped" is an alternative Brit expression for "put" (we "pop" things in the oven, just read a cookery book), but the prosecutor said that the use of the word meant an admission of guilt as "popped" meant to kill.
BTW, I think that she was probably partly responsible for his death, but this was because she aggravated an existing injury.
Englishman.
It seems that in the states, the majority thought she was guilty. It seemed to me, that everyone around me that discussed it, saw her as an awful person.
I do not have an opinion, as I did not follow the case.
But, thats just what I percieved.
Guilty --- looked like a normal person but she was definitely guilty. Even Ted Bundy's parents and friends refused to believe this wonderful young man could be a serial killer, but he was. OJ was guilty too. Even those jurors know that now. The nanny got off because England is America's friend.
