Elizabeth H Bonesteel
*horrified* have
You obviously know next to nothing about that case and the fact that you "live in the state in which it happened" does not give you any greater insight into the case than those who live elsewhere, as you tried to imply with your "I may have focused on it a bit more than some" comment.
Try studying the actual evidence for once and you might learn something, such as how it is impossible for LW to have done what she was wrongfully convicted of for numerous unrebutted and indisputable reasons, such as:
1. Osteoblasts (identified from slides taken of the dura) were found at the fracture site. These do not appear until healing has been underway for at least one week.
2. The fracture had clearly identifiable lipped edges. A new fracture has sharp edges which do not develop to this new stage for 2-3 weeks. Dr DeGirolami testified that to the best of his recollection there was no lipping. However, the photographs which, conveniently for the prosecution, were kept hidden until the trial was almost over, showed that this lipping was indeed present.
how to deal with nanny at home 21Elizabeth H Bonesteel Really? And yet you were unable to cite a single piece of evidence from those transcripts in support of your contention that "Ms...
3. Periosteum (covering new bone growth) was clearly identified at the fracture site. This takes 10-14 days to begin to appear. Dr DeGirolami (a PROSECUTION witness) testified that this could only be explained by the injury being an old one.
how to deal with nanny at home 22Leslie Are these big issues? (1) She does not squeeze the sponge dry when she's done washing, so it's a disgusting, wet, soppy mess...
4. The prosecution alleged that Louise had slammed Matthew's head against a hard surface with a force equal to him falling from a 2nd storey window, head first, onto hard concrete. But Matthew's head did not have a single external mark on it - no bumps; no bruises; no cuts; no scratches.
5. There was no soft tissue swelling around the fracture. It would have taken weeks for the swelling to completely disappear.
6. Proliferating capillaries were found in the dura. A healing fracture requires a supply of blood through capillaries into the fracture hematoma. The presence of these proliferating capillaries shows that the injury was at a stage of healing that could not be less than 2 weeks.
7. The CT scans showed layered subdural bleeding which was several weeks old.
So now explain, against that background, how, as you put it in your other post, "Ms. Woodward was convicted because she was guilty."
Or are you going to run away from that challenge with the usual cop out of "because the jury said so"? Or maybe again try that "I'm from Mbuttachusetts, so I don't need facts to back up my wild claims"?
And let's look at another of those wild claims:
been physical
That is because no such "statement" has ever been made. So now let's see YOU back up YOUR statement that LW has ever said what you accused her of saying there.
Show where she has ever accused Matthew Eappen's brother, Brendan, of shaking Matthew or harming him in any way. And don't try to wriggle away from this by merely showing where some other person might have suggested that. You accused Louise Woodward of making that accusation, so put up or shut up.
