A British Nurse Was Found Guilty of Killing Seven Babies. Did She Do It?

Looks like the inquiry TORs have done both and will not revisit her guilt. Will be interesting to see how that plays out and how much evidence both used and not used in the Court case is presented by witnesses called by the inquiry.

Why should they?
There is an appeals procedure should new evidence come to light that was not available to her defence at the time of her trial.

1 Like

You are making my point for me. They won’t, the inquirey already knows what caused the death of the children, it only needs to find out why it took so long to stop her as well a give the families a voice. It’ll take a couple of years no doubt.

That all makes sense Wayne and it does seem that these procedures/protocols were not followed. I imagine it also makes it extremely difficult to identify bad actors when the whole maternity system is in such a desperate state.

In terms of LL herself my son is the crime correspondent at the Telegraph and attended the whole of the trial; he told me throughout l that it was the most difficult case to report on because the evidence was so circumstantial. None of the journalists he worked alongside could call the verdict, all felt that it could go either way.

The public inquiry is of course not about assessing her guilt but about the Trust itself - however it does seem as if the legal wheels have not finished turning and the two tracks could coincide at some point, but as others have said this may takes years.


I’m not surprised, especially given the nature of the circumstantial evidence.

Standing back, what are the possible explanations for these deaths -

  • Lucy Letby was directly responsible for them
  • It wasn’t Letby but some-body else (the SODDI defence)
  • It wasn’t any individual deliberately setting out to kill them but they were avoidable deaths caused by lack of clinical competence and/ or clinical oversight/ governance
  • The deaths were not suspicous and fall within expected mortality within a neo-natal unit

Clearly the trial was concerned with proving the first possibility (I don’t know what type of defence was put on), and the inquiry will focus on aspects of the third. I’m assuming that there has been sufficient independent clinical investigation to discount the fourth but that’s only my assumption.

1 Like

Good summary Wayne - I’ll send that over to Will😉 As with hi fi, huge potential for confirmation bias and all the other assumptive failings in this sort of situation. IRA bombers come to mind.

1 Like