Accused nurse must stay in jail

This comes from my post:
No mention of what references the parents had for hiring this nurse, and the reason why she was told not to give him any meds, makes me suspect that they had misgivings about her at the getgo. The newspaper article said she was licensed. Did anyone verify that, and whether there were dings in her record?

Okay first this judge should not be presiding over this trail. He is biased. Yes it is his job to interpreatethe law and apply it but it is not his job, to pass judgment, that is a job for jurors unless this is a bench trial. And, with the judge already obviously biased, that is of course lead to biased trail, and the judge will sway the jury.

Second, the layer should ask for and be granted a change of venue.

And lastly, last time that I checked first degree murder requires intent, and premeditation. Unless the DA wants an acquittal or a mistrial he should reduced the charge, because there is no way non-biased jury could find this woman to have had intent, to kill this child, that she didn't know, before hand,unless she has done it before.

Stanley,

You raise some valid points, but I still disagree. Big surprise there

At least 2 things work against the defendant by being kept in jail awaiting trial. One, she is not able to fully participate in her defense. Of course she can be deposed there, but that is a very tiny part of building a defense, especially in a medical case where the lawyer is not likely to be knowledgable about nursing care, standards of practice, policies and procedures, disease processes, etc. The defendant has demonstrated a minimal flight risk. Even if she were kept on house arrest, she would have access to telephones, computers, journals, textbooks, visits from co-workers to assist in developing a defense. None of that is available to her (to the same extent) from a jail cell.

Secondly, by being forced to remain in prison, she looks guilty to the general public which will make up the jury pool. And despite the burden of proof, we all know that perceptions matter. She has surendered her license and poses no threat to the public health and safety of Lancaster, PA, or anywhere else.

Would you have it that all those accused of first degree murder be free on bail?

No.

Admittedly, we are trying this case on the BB based upon information from popular press news articles.

But this information (available in the other thread:http://allnurses.com/nursing-news/de...se-350198.html presents no solid evidence of any wrongdoing on the nurse's part, ample reasonable doubt and evidence of the nurse's stable living situation in the community. I do not understand, even after reading the judge's explanation, how he reached the decision that a 1st degree murder conviction is a reasonable outcome, which is the criterion for denying bail.

If there were eye witnesses to the nurse's actions, evidence that the nurse had diverted morphine or a significant risk of harm to the community, I could understand and support the order to remain in jail.

In a case with purely circumstancial evidence, and very little of that, it is not reasonable.

Fair enough, but rest assured my indignation at this woman's continued presence in jail is not based upon her profession. If there was substantial evidence of her guilt or her danger to society, I'd be beating the drum to keep her there, nurse or not. Probably even more so, because of her profession.