Lucy Letby medical experts publish bombshell report claiming nurse killed NO babies

A panel of international experts have published a bombshell report alleging  committed no crimes - with police refuting the "ill-informed" claims.

The 14-strong panel concluded that no had been committed at the Countess ofin 2015 and 2016 and instead provided alternative causes of deterioration. Experts claim jurors were misled by prosecutors who claimed unreliable and misrepresented insulin tests. In the new report, six experts have come together including a forensic toxicologist, a professor of forensic science and an endocrinologist, to cast fresh doubt on the validity of the evidence of insulin poisoning used by the prosecution.

“Our inescapable conclusion is that this evidence significantly undermines the validity of the assertions made about the insulin and C-peptide testing presented in Court,” the experts said in a summary provided by her legal team. Letby has always maintained her innocence. She was found guilty in 2023 and is serving 15 whole life sentences for murdering seven babies and attempting to murder eight more.

READ MORE:

READ MORE:

The experts provided their alternative causes of deterioration which was submitted to the Criminal Cases Review Comisssion, who are responsible for investigating possible miscarriages of justice.

The report claims: 

– Baby 1 (known as Child A in the trial): The prosecution said the boy was murdered by an injection of air into the bloodstream which caused an air embolism where bubbles form and block the blood supply. The panel found no evidence of air embolism and said the child had died from thrombosis, where a blood clot forms in a vessel.

– Baby 2 (Child B): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder Child A’s twin sister by also injecting air into her bloodstream. The panel found no evidence of air embolism and said the child had collapsed from thrombosis.

– Baby 3 (Child C): The prosecution said the boy was murdered with air forced down his feeding tube and into his stomach. The panel said the child died following ineffective resuscitation from a collapse after an “acute small bowel obstruction” that went unrecognised.

– Baby 4 (Child D): The prosecution said the girl was murdered by an injection of air into the bloodstream. The panel found no evidence of air embolism and ruled the child died of systemic , pneumonia and disseminated intravascular coagulation (blood clotting). Issues with failures to give relevant antibiotics were also identified.

– Baby 5 (Child E): The Crown said Letby murdered the twin boy with an injection of air into the bloodstream and she also deliberately caused bleeding to the infant. The panel said there was no evidence of air embolism and bleeding was caused either by a lack of oxygen pre-birth or a congenital blood vessel condition.

– Baby 6 (Child F): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder Child E’s twin brother by administering insulin. The panel ruled that the child’s insulin levels and insulin/C-peptide ratio did not prove that exogenous insulin was used and were within the norm for pre-term infants. It added that there was poor medical management of the child’s prolonged hypoglycaemia.

– Baby 7 (Child G): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder the girl by overfeeding her with milk and forcing air down her feeding tube. The panel said there was no evidence to support air injection into the stomach or overfeeding. The infant’s vomiting and clinical deterioration was due to infection, it found.

– Baby 8 (Child H): Jurors cleared Letby of one count of attempted murder and failed to reach a verdict on a second count. Prosecutors said the nurse sabotaged the girl’s care in some way which led to two profound oxygen desaturations. The panel said the deteriorations were due to medical mismanagement of a tension pneumothorax where air is trapped between the lung and chest wall.

– Baby 9 (Child I): The prosecution said Letby murdered the infant by injecting air into her bloodstream and stomach. The panel said it found no evidence of air injections and that the baby died of breathing complications caused by respiratory distress syndrome and chronic lung disease.

– Baby 10 (Child J): Jurors could not reach a verdict on an allegation of attempted murder. No specific form of harm was identified by the prosecution but they said Letby did something to cause the collapse of the girl. The panel said the deterioration was caused by sepsis and there was no evidence to support malicious airway obstruction.

– Baby 11 (Child K): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder the girl by deliberately dislodging her breathing tube. Among its findings the panel said there was no evidence to support a dislodged endotracheal tube (ETT) and the clinical deterioration was caused by use of an undersized ETT.

– Baby 12 (Child L): The Crown said the nurse poisoned the boy with insulin. The panel said the infant’s insulin-related levels were within the norm for pre-term infants and there was no evidence of deliberate administration.

– Baby 13 (Child M): Prosecutors said Letby attempted to murder Child L’s twin brother by injecting air into his bloodstream. The panel said there was no evidence of air embolism and his collapse was caused by sepsis or a heart problem.

– Baby 14 (Child N): The Crown said the boy was the victim of attempted murder by inflicted trauma in his throat and an air injection into his bloodstream. The panel said there was no air embolism and it was likely his blood oxygen levels dropped due to his haemophilia condition or routine cares, which was “exacerbated” by repeated attempts to insert a breathing tube.

– Baby 15 (Child O): The prosecution said Letby murdered the triplet boy by injecting air into his bloodstream and inflicting trauma to his liver. The panel said he died from liver damage caused by traumatic delivery, resulting in bleeding in the abdomen and profound shock.

– Baby 16 (Child P): Prosecutors said Letby murdered Child O’s brother by injecting him with air. The panel said there was no evidence to support that mechanism and that he died from a collapsed lung that was “suboptimally managed”.

– Baby 17 (Child Q): Jurors could not reach a verdict on an allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby attempted to murder the boy by injecting liquid, and possibly air, down his feeding tube. The panel said there was no evidence to support air injection into the stomach and the child deteriorated because he had early symptoms of a serious gastrointestinal problem, or sepsis.

Detective Superintendent Paul Hughes, who is the Senior Investigating Officer, said their investigation into her crimes were "thorough" as they hit back at much of the "ill-informed" criticism.

He said: “The investigation into the actions of Lucy Letby, the trial process and medical experts continues to face scrutiny and criticism, much of it ill-informed and based on a very partial knowledge of the facts and totality of evidence presented at court and at the Court of Appeal.

“This case has been rigorously and fairly tested through two juries and subsequently scrutinised by two sets of appeal court judges. Lucy Letby’s trial was one of the longest running murder trials in British criminal history with the jury diligently carrying out their deliberations for more than 100 hours.

“It followed an investigation that had been running for six years – an investigation like no other in scope, complexity and magnitude. It was a detailed and painstaking process by a team of almost 70 police officers and no stone was left unturned. Preparing for the trial was a mammoth task with 32,000 pages of evidence being gathered and medical records running into thousands of pages being sifted through. Around 2,000 people were spoken to and almost 250 were identified as potential witnesses at trial.

“As the case unfolded, multiple medical experts – specialising in areas of paediatric radiology, paediatric pathology, haematology, paediatric neurology and paediatric endocrinology and two main medical experts (consultant paediatricians) – were enlisted to ensure that we carried out as thorough an investigation as possible.

“All are highly regarded in their area of expertise and were cross examined whilst giving their evidence in court. The details of the case are clear and have been widely reported on. Following recent commentary, we have chosen not to enter into the widespread public debate surrounding this case. We remain respectful of the judicial process and mindful of the families who are at the very heart of this.

“In the closing statements of the Thirlwall public inquiry the parents of the babies involved in the trial spoke of the significant impact this case continues to have on them – a decade after experiencing such trauma and grief. Their dignity and composure in the face of intense public discussions with little sensitivity or humanity is remarkable. Their words are incredibly honest and powerful and must not be lost in a sea of noise.

“It is out of a deep sense of respect for the parents of the babies that we have not and will not get drawn into the widespread commentary and speculation online and in the media. They have suffered greatly and continue to do so as this case plays out in a very public forum. There is a significant public interest in the reporting of this case, and everyone is entitled to an opinion however, every story that is published, statement made, or comment posted online that refers to the specific details of a live investigation can impede the course of justice and cause further distress to all those involved.

“Cheshire Constabulary is ready to support the CCRC and any appropriate review processes in order to inform any questions that may arise. Our priority is to maintain the integrity of our ongoing investigations and to continue to support the many families who are affected by this.”