A new investigation into the case of Lucy Letby, the nurse convicted as a "serial killer of babies", comes to light: the report's revelations

The criminal trial of Lucy Letby horrified the world in 2023. The British nurse, who was 33 years old at the time, was charged with the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of seven others, committed at the Countess of Chester Hospital in the United Kingdom between June 2015 and June 2016.

Three years ago, the court heard how the former nurse, now 36, attacked the babies in her care by injecting air into their blood and stomachs, overfeeding them with milk, physically assaulting them and poisoning them with insulin.

The case made Letby the most prolific serial killer of premature babies in the United Kingdom. She is currently serving the 15 life sentences to which she was sentenced, but has always maintained her innocence.

She is now seeking, once again, to challenge her convictions following the release of a public inquiry report that has reignited the debate surrounding the healthcare system.

Video

This is Lucy Letby, 33 years old, who worked with premature babies. She killed seven in total by injecting them with air and sought to murder at least one more.

The new public inquiry into the Lucy Letby case

Following the shocking conviction, Letby's defence, led by lawyer Mark McDonald, filed successive appeals before the Court of Appeal focused on the argument that the intense media coverage of international scale had compromised the impartiality of the jury.

All appeals were rejected. Judge James Goss described her crimes at the time as a "cruel, calculated and cynical campaign of child murder involving the smallest and most vulnerable children."

UK Health Secretary Yvette Cooper expressed her deep regret and announced an urgent review of training and plans for the installation of surveillance cameras in neonatal units.

Lawyer McDonald did not stop there and in 2025 requested that an international panel of experts challenge the evidence presented by the prosecution, which was fundamental to convicting his client.

Part of the investigation involved examining the response of the UK's National Health Service (NHS) and analysing whether management staff should have responded differently when suspicions arose about Letby's behaviour. She had begun working at the institution in 2011 and her file recorded no objections.

This week, the results of that investigation were released — a 100-page document shared by the BBC.

"I have reports from psychologists about what was presented to the jury as a confession. It was not a confession at all; I have obstetrics reports discussing some of the injuries that allegedly occurred and were presented to the jury as serious injuries — they were not serious at all," Letby's lawyer told the BBC on Monday.

The lawyer indicated that as part of the investigation, 37 nurses and midwives from Countess of Chester Hospital were asked to respond to a series of questions.

"Did you have any concerns or suspicions about Lucy Letby's conduct?" was one of the questions in the questionnaires. "All but two answered no."

One stated that she did not recall Letby showing any emotion when babies died in the neonatal unit, and the other indicated that Letby "became involved with more babies than necessary."

"Do you believe that if the babies had been monitored by security cameras, Letby's crimes could have been prevented?" was another of the questions they were asked.

"Lucy did not commit any crime. If there had been security cameras, the footage would have proven her innocence," responded a nurse who had worked in the unit for 36 years.

For his part, Dr. Shoo Lee, a Canadian neonatologist who chaired the expert panel, stated that a research paper he wrote in 1989 was misrepresented at Letby's trial.

"There was no medical evidence to support the existence of malpractice that caused death or injury in any of the 17 cases in the trial," Lee stated.

For McDonald, the new information could have implications for the former nurse's legal situation: "We now have evidence provided by 14 internationally renowned experts in insulin, endocrinology and laboratory medicine that fundamentally undermines the scientific evidence on which the trial was based."

"The strength of the new evidence lies in its breadth and convergence, as independent experts from different disciplines and jurisdictions identified fundamental problems with the scientific basis upon which the jury was invited to conclude that babies 'F' and 'L' had been deliberately poisoned," the lawyer stated.

It should be noted that the inquiry has no direct connection to Letby's convictions, which have already been examined more than once by the Court of Appeal.

However, the former nurse's defense submitted a document to the United Kingdom's Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates possible miscarriages of justice, for its review.

The rebuttal of two specialists who were part of the panel in the new Letby case investigation

Following the publication of the report, Helen Shannon, a British expert in chemical engineering, and Geoff Chase, a professor of bioengineering based in New Zealand, who formed part of an international panel of doctors and scientists, expressed concern about "scientific credibility."

In a letter addressed to the CCRC, the experts stated: "While it is entirely legitimate for the defense to present multiple arguments, some of those currently being put forward do not strike us as scientifically credible and, in our opinion, present fundamental and irresolvable problems."

Speaking to The Guardian, they accused McDonald of "placing Ms. Letby's long-term interests at serious, unnecessary and unacceptable risk" and that the consequences also extend to the affected families.

Both specialists clarified that they maintain their assessment that it is "highly unlikely" that the babies known as Baby "F" and Baby "L" at trial were poisoned, but that they could not endorse other evidence used by Letby's defense team in relation to the insulin cases.

"Some arguments being presented are incompatible with the available evidence, established science and physiology," Shannon and Chase indicated.

They also revealed that Dr. Shoo Lee wrote to an unspecified number of doctors asking them to review the medical records of 17 babies involved in the Letby trial.

While Dr. Lee claimed that his experts had been assembled without bias to carry out an "objective review," an email was subsequently leaked in which he wrote to the doctors: "We could be her last hope," in reference to the convicted nurse.

A neonatologist told the Daily Mail that he declined to participate in the panel for several reasons, among them the biased nature of the language used in the email sent by Dr. Lee.

In addition, the families of the deceased babies have filed a formal complaint against lawyer McDonald before the Bar Standards Board for alleged professional misconduct.

The findings of Judge Kathryn Thirlwall

Judge Kathryn Thirlwall presided over the public inquiry hearings and shared her findings. "The report found evidence of poor management and medical staff at the hospital where Letby worked, along with a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of safeguarding," she stated at a press conference.

She asserted that they identified a long list of failures at the British hospital and that some babies could have been saved had those responsible acted sooner.

"There was a total failure at every level to trigger safeguarding procedures at any point," Judge Thirlwall stated.

She indicated that chief executive Tony Chambers, 60, a former nurse who earned £160,000 ($214,000) and held a degree in media studies, "obstructed the police investigation."

"He was so determined to discredit the doctors who were raising concerns about Letby that he lost his objectivity," the judge noted.

She also stated that the director of nursing, Alison Kelly, had the misguided determination to protect Letby "simply because she was a nurse" and overrode her professional judgment.

The families of the deceased patients criticised the former executives and agreed that the report is a "chilling account of multiple and repeated failures by organisations and individuals."

When asked by journalists whether this report could alter Letby's criminal situation, Thirlwall declared: "It is not for me to question or impede the work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission, which is working on Letby's application to have her case referred back to the Court of Appeal."

According to the BBC, the CCRC is the only organisation with the authority to return Letby's case to the Court of Appeal following two previous rejections.

Beyond this report, there were other decisive elements for the jury that convicted the nurse. During one of the searches of the defendant's home, notes from her personal notebook were recovered.

Police found several handwritten papers containing phrases that subsequently made front-page headlines: "I killed them"; "I am evil, I did this."

The prosecution interpreted those words as a confession, and the fragments were analysed in detail by expert witnesses. The defendant argued that they represented a silent crisis of mistreatment at the hospital, where endless shifts were worked, and said they were a metaphor for feeling guilty about not being able to do more for the babies.

The court's conclusion was that they could not be understood as mere expressions of anguish and that they qualified as statements of direct responsibility.

As the atrocious crimes return to the headlines, the former nurse remains behind bars. It is unlikely that the Court of Appeal will consider the new investigation as sufficient material to reopen the case, but the process will continue through the appropriate criminal channels.

See also

Newsletter Clarín