‘Poisoner.’ ‘Coward.’ ‘The devil.’ ‘The English of death.’ ‘Baby killer.’ These terms appeared on the front pages of English newspapers in capital letters last August. They were directed at British maternity nurse Lucy Letby. She was sentenced to fourteen life terms for killing seven babies in incubators and attempting to kill six others. The 34-year-old was mentioned in the same breath as well-known serial killers from British history. There were even expressions of regret that the death penalty had been abolished sixty years ago.
Almost a year later, the tone has changed. Newspapers and magazines such as The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail and Private detective published articles in which experts expressed doubts about the conviction of the twelve-member jury. Prominent former ministers such as David Davis and Nadine Dorries, a former nurse, also fear that a legal error has occurred. In the online magazine A flock Attorney Adam King wrote that misinterpreted numbers and misdiagnoses are the quicksand behind Letby’s fate.
Insulin
The first well-documented doubts about the guilt of Letby, who has always categorically denied the accusations and did not want to be present at the verdict, were published in May of this year in a thirteen thousand word investigative article in The New Yorker. That was ‘for american eyes only’‘ because the judge had ruled that English media could not report substantially on the case because there was still a trial against Letby for the attempted murder of an eighth baby. When she was also sentenced to life imprisonment a month ago, the publication ban was lifted.
There was no compelling evidence to convict Letby. The prosecutor convinced the jury that Letby was guilty because she was the only one on duty when a baby died during the period from June 2015 to June 2016. Some babies had been given insulin incorrectly, others had been given oxygen or too much milk. Letby was found to have falsified records, and medical documents about the babies were found in her room. It also turned out that Letby, who nearly died after her premature birth, had Googled the names of relatives of the deceased babies.
During the trial, the jury heard only from experts from the judiciary. Letby’s lawyer did not call on any experts, such as statistical scientists, to counter this. He wanted to call on his colleagues, but NHS bosses determined that anyone who wanted to speak well of Letby in court would get into trouble. Opposed The Daily Telegraph An anonymous colleague claimed Letby was an honest nurse. But the work environment, she said, was ruined. Babies were left to fend for themselves and bullying behaviour between colleagues was common.
Survival rate
Increasing attention is being paid to the Countess of Chester Hospital, where Letby worked. The hospital, built in 1974, faced major problems in 2015-2016. Hygiene was poor and there was a shortage of staff and incubators. After Letby was removed from the ward, the mortality rate fell, but around the same time, following a poor inspection report, it was found that the incubator unit was working so poorly that it could no longer admit babies requiring intensive treatment and born within 32 weeks.
Furthermore, the jury was not told that the number of deaths among babies born too young was increasing nationwide in those years. At the time, the department where the introverted Letby worked contained many very weak babies with little chance of survival. Pediatricians have cast doubt on the prosecution’s claim that the babies “killed” by Letby were healthy. It is also striking that the pathologist concluded at the time that none of the babies allegedly killed by Letby had died unnaturally.
In Game
In notes from that time, Letby, the only child of a middle-class family, wrote that she never wanted to marry or have children. “I will never know what it is like to have a family.” That possibility is now much less because, as things stand now, she will never be released. In the spring, her attempt to appeal failed because there was no new (counter)evidence. A striking detail: the first judge to reject the appeal, Robin Spencer, was the prosecutor 25 years ago in the case of Sally Clark, the woman wrongly convicted of the murder of her two young children.
Letby’s only hope is to go to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, an appeals committee set up in 1997 that investigates possible miscarriages of justice. Much depends on how the new Justice Minister, Shabana Mahmood, views this case. At stake is not just Letby’s life and the image of the judiciary, already tarnished by the email scandal, but also the reputation of the NHS, the free healthcare system beloved by many British politicians, especially Labour.
3x Lucy Letby
One of the scientists who has doubts about the reliability of Letby’s conviction is Richard Gill, a professor of statistics at Leiden. He also provided statistical ammunition for the acquittal of nurse Lucia de Berk. For Gill, 72, the Letby case is déjà vu.
At the women’s prison where Letby is held, HMP Bronzefield, she was recently joined by climate activists Cressida Gethin (22) and Lucia Whittaker De Abreu (34). They were sentenced to 4 years in prison for blocking the M25 ring road.
To the anger of relatives, Letby refused to be present when the sentence was announced. Then-Prime Minister Sunak promised to change the law so that convicted people must be present at the time of sentencing.