Italian Nurse Accused Of Killing As Many As 38 Patients

v3-TwitterDanielap copyOne of the stories making the news here in Italy is the arrest of Daniela Poggiali, 42, a nurse who is accused of killing at least 38 of her patients because she found them or their relatives to be annoying. She was initially charged in the death of an elderly patient and now police believe that she is a serial killer.

The case of Rosa Calderoni draw attention of the authorities because she been admitted for a routine illness and when she died there were high levels of potassium in her bloodstream. At least 10 other deaths are now being listed as “very suspicious”.

Prosecutor Rossella Materia called her a sadist who “who draws pleasure in provoking the death of the patients in her care.” One picture on her phone reportedly shows her giving a thumbs up next to when of her patients who had died seconds before. The public statements are an interesting dimension since Italy prosecutes people for criminal libel, as in the abusive case against the parents of Amanda Knox that we discussed earlier. While comments against the police can bring a charge, it clearly does not apply when prosecutors make such comments against individuals.

Even a colleague described her as a “cold person who was always eager to work.” This included the allegation from a co-worker that Poggiali would give patients strong laxatives at the end of her shift to make work more difficult for the nurses taking over.

Poggiali told police that she is innocent and the victim of a conspiracy by her enemies.

The case could prove very difficult given the length of time that has passed.

Source: MSN

650 thoughts on “Italian Nurse Accused Of Killing As Many As 38 Patients”

  1. Linda. You are using your first name only and are thus still anonymous. There are thousands of Linda’s in this world. Others on this venue have chosen to use their real life identities.

    Anonymous means we don’t know (and I really don’t want to know) who you are, where you are, what you do or any other information that would lead someone on the internet to find you in real life.

    Annie is anonymous. I as Dust Bunny Queen am anonymous. In another comment I detailed why I prefer to be anonymous. There is nothing wrong with preferring to be unknown.

    Exposing that one anonymous poster has created a slew of other alias, did not expose their anonymity No one knows who the first anonymous id is IRL. All we know now is that some aliases are the same as the first alias.

    Most people just use one online ID at a time. I also explained why that is the case for me. Others find it funny or have other reasons to cast up a hailstorm of fake IDs.

    Whatever. We should just be respectful of this (and really all other) blogs and address the issues presented and stop discussing each other.

  2. Linda,
    I’ve been on here only a few months and with this being a “legal” blog, I’ve noticed an interesting pattern: in my opinion, the participants that demonstrate a respect for republican principles (republicanism); seem to be less likely to violate JT’s civility rules.

  3. Aridog,

    Thank you. This morning I was called a troll. I found this on the link you provided:

    “Like all sites, we attract trolls and juvenile posters who want to tear down the work of others. It is a sad reality of the Internet and the worst element of our species. Don’t feed the trolls. Ignore them. They are trolls and live under cyber bridges for a reason.”

    Does this count if I am using my real name?

  4. I saw this a while back on another site somewhere and copied it down. I wish I knew who the author as I’d surely credit him/her with it. Unfortunately, it seems appropriate here in a sarcastically humorous way.

    “Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.”

  5. Linda L… try HERE.

    I don’t disagree, and I am going to avoid this place for a while…just because those who know the rules avoid them none-the-less. I feel apologetic to Professor Turley because of the stunts that have occurred during his vacation absence and the obscene insults to Darren’s trying to make it compatible.

    As I said, I am out of here, no a conversant basis, for a while, I am embarrassed by the lack of civility. No matter how you define it. I am a hard case and yet I even get it. What is going on?

    I no longer care.

  6. Hi everyone. I am back but a bit jet lagged. I wanted to briefly address the controversy over the posting by one of the regular commentators.

    First and foremost, I want to thank Darren for doing a marvelous job in maintaining the blog in my absence. As he has shown over the years, Darren has volunteered his time to retrieve countless lost comments and helped people having trouble with posting comments. After the passing of David Drumm, Darren stepped forward to fill his shoes. He has always been neutral in dealing with folks on the blog. He is also the most prolific of our weekend bloggers. He does all of this without any compensation. I am particularly in debt to him for allowing me to take a long-needed vacation with Leslie. While I tried to post three items a day, it was a big help not to have monitor comments.

    I have read the original comment from Darren and some (but not all of the later commentary). Darren was responding as he always done in an honest way to what he viewed as a pattern of violations of the civility rule by one of our posters. While I had asked for people to please refrain from personal attacks to allow me to enjoy a brief vacation, some appeared to use my absence as an invitation to engage in even more taunting and personal attacks. In this case, Darren was faced with a series of false identifications that included some that were clearly intended to insult another commenter like “Don’t Be This Guy” or “Mrs. Spindelli.” He responded by noting the use of the “sockpuppets” and cited the false names. While we value anonymity, the use of such insulting and frankly juvenile titles to attack another poster should have been deleted and the poster (who has been repeatedly warned) could have been suspended. Darren instead chose to warn the poster and ask that she reconsider her approach to this blog. In doing so he did disclose the name of someone using false ids. I agree that that disclosure violated the right to anonymity and I have deleted the comment. However, the use of such multiple identities to flood the comment section with insulting titles and content will not be tolerated.

    I am now back as the sole administrator on this site. What I have seen in the comments that followed was a long series of violations of our civility rule. I am not going to go back and delete everything. Instead I will be even more vigilant in preventing further personal attacks. For those who refrained from this line of personal attacks, I want to thank you. While I am disappointed in the decision of others to do precisely the opposite of what I asked in a short period of relative civility, I deeply appreciate the majority of those who kept their comments civil and relevant. The fact is that over 90 percent of deletions on this blog are confined to the same people who accuse others of incivility as a license to engage in the same juvenile commentary. I have deleted comments from people on both sides of this small group of combatants. We are simply not interested in being forced read these personal jabs and observations. This is a site for adult discussion. The deletions remain a very small percentage of the comments. Indeed, we delete a fraction of other sites. However, it remains distressing to see the same people engaging in this type of childish conduct.

    Obviously, I will be enforcing the civility rule vigorously to get us back on track. If you want to make more personal observations on other posters, find another site. Please. If you refuse to yield to this minimal standard of adult discourse, we will have to suspend you from further participation. We do not want to suspend anyone of course. You can see numerous warnings being given to the same persons in the hope that they will conform to these basic mature standards. Most comply. Those who do not, however, have a world of blogs from which choose. In the end, this is just a blog not the Roman Senate. You will find every possible type of blog, including many that relish trash talk. Some blogs have even denounced civility rules like ours. That is part of the wonderful nature of the Internet. You can find a blog that is just right for you. If you want to attack someone, this would not be that blog. Just move on to blogs that reflect your tastes and inclinations. There is one out there. Trust me. For those who stay and comply with our minimal standards, we appreciate your comments and your friendship. I particularly appreciate your help in trying to give me a break for a few days and helping out Darren.

    All my best,


    1. I have deleted a number of comments seeking to continue the personal accusations on this thread as noted in my earlier posting.

      1. Certainly not Slartibartfast has had a comment deleted as the previously stated reasons on this thread.

  7. It’s unfortunate that she was outted. Is there anything that can be done to the person revealing her identity? Are they familiar with the blogs civility rules or suggestions.

    Is Paul correct that I have to take an exam. I thought this was an open forum. Did I miss something?

  8. Paul C, Mespo did above. Does not specifically say “sockpuppet”. The language is broad as you know.

Comments are closed.