- 4 minutes ago
This programme explores the views of a team of international scientists who say that the prosecution case against nurse Lucy Letby doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Hello, Lucy, is this? Yes. Hello, my name's from Cheshire, please.
00:03Let me step in two seconds. Oh, yes. Yeah, thank you.
00:08Two years ago, Britain's worst child serial killer was convicted.
00:14Have you to take a seat in there for me, Lucy?
00:16A nurse trusted with the lives of tiny babies
00:19was found guilty of murdering seven of them
00:22and attempting to kill seven more.
00:25This has been a long and emotional journey.
00:28All of the families involved in this case.
00:31You could really feel the destruction that it caused in their lives.
00:36You know, it broke families apart.
00:39It took the police five years to build the case against her.
00:42Lucy let be who weaponised her craft to inflict harm, grief and death.
00:49She was sentenced to spend the rest of her life in prison.
00:53There are simply no words to describe the evil of the crimes
00:57that she committed.
01:01Free Lucy Leppi! Free Lucy Leppi! Free Lucy Leppi!
01:05Now, even as further charges are being considered,
01:09a growing number of expert voices have been questioning
01:12the evidence used to convict her.
01:14That kind of test, it's not good enough to fire somebody.
01:19How can it be good enough to put someone in prison?
01:21So why do they doubt the science that was used?
01:26This is a summary that's so crude
01:28that it can only be described as grossly misleading.
01:31And is Lucy Leppi guilty beyond reasonable doubt?
01:35It's been deeply disturbing that one can have
01:38such a tremendously important trial
01:41that seems to have been conducted with so many flaws.
01:45So here is the Countess of Chester Hospital site.
01:59And this is where I spent most of my career, nearly 40 years.
02:06This is where it all started.
02:09We're just coming up to the Women's and Children's Building now.
02:15This houses the neonatal unit.
02:18And this is where Lucy Leppi worked.
02:26You could call it an intensive care unit for premature babies.
02:31And that requires a specialist skill set from the nursing team
02:35to care for these, the tiny, tiny little babies.
02:41You know, I loved working here.
02:44It was a good hospital.
02:48Karen Rees was the head of urgent care nursing
02:51at the Countess of Chester.
02:53She was Lucy Letby's senior manager.
02:56This is the first time Karen's gone on camera
02:58to talk about her involvement in the case.
03:01How do you feel about one of your nurses
03:06deliberately causing harm to babies?
03:11We were all shocked.
03:15Really shocked.
03:17When I look back to when it all started,
03:21I don't think any of us thought
03:24that this storyline would ride out the way it has.
03:29No.
03:31Between 2015 and 2016,
03:35something was going terribly wrong at this unit.
03:39Nearly three times as many newborn babies
03:42had died in that period than was normal.
03:44I was made aware that the mortality rates
03:50appeared to be higher than they had been in the previous years.
03:54It was tough.
03:56Because everybody was trying, thinking,
03:58please let us find a reason for this.
04:00This used to be nursery one, also coined the hot room.
04:10This is where the sickest patients were brought.
04:13It became apparent that Lucy Letby had been present
04:19at a number of those babies' deaths,
04:23which I think was the first red flag that was, you know, raised.
04:28Lucy Letby joined the neonatal unit in 2012.
04:31She was one of more than a dozen nurses.
04:34As well as other staff,
04:36a group of seven consultants also worked on the unit at that time.
04:40It was two of those consultants,
04:45Dr Ravi Jayram, the head paediatrician,
04:48and Dr Stephen Breary, the clinical boss of the unit,
04:51who first began to develop suspicions about her.
04:54Things came to a head in June 2016,
04:56with the deaths of two triplets.
04:59Steve Breary, one of the consultants,
05:02demanded that I take her off the unit.
05:05And I do recall him saying,
05:07it's a good feeling I've got.
05:11I then went back to the neonatal unit
05:13and spoke to one of the deputies.
05:16I said, both consultants are raising concerns
05:19about Lucy Letby.
05:21And she was absolutely shocked.
05:24She looked at me and she said,
05:26I've got no concerns, Karen.
05:28Her clinical practice is second to none.
05:31She does everything by the book.
05:33No.
05:36This is nursery two.
05:41I came home here
05:43and I received a phone call from Steve Breary.
05:48He was aware that Lucy Letby was on duty that weekend.
05:52And he did actually tell me that another baby had died.
05:57You know, there were concerns about a clinical practice,
06:01but it was greater than that.
06:04I think the word was purposely harming babies,
06:07was the term used at the time.
06:12It's a massive allegation.
06:14And at the end of the day,
06:16there were babies in that unit
06:18that we all have a responsibility to care for.
06:21Between April 2015 and June 2016,
06:27there were 18 deaths of babies cared for on the neonatal unit.
06:32Most had post-mortems.
06:35For only one baby was the cause of death unascertained.
06:39This room here was the manager's office.
06:46At the beginning of July, Letby went on holiday.
06:49On the day she returned, having previously refused,
06:53it fell to Karen to remove Letby from the unit.
06:56I was told just to say that concerns had been raised
07:00and that this was seen as a neutral act.
07:04So she wasn't being accused of anything at this point,
07:07but it deemed safer to take her off clinical practice
07:10to protect herself,
07:12as well as the babies on that neonatal unit.
07:17She wasn't even questioning me.
07:19She was just looking at me.
07:20I had to then walk her across the hospital grounds
07:25and I was the only one making conversation.
07:28She wasn't asking me why.
07:30She wasn't crying.
07:32She was just shocked.
07:37When Letby was removed in July 2016,
07:41the neonatal unit was downgraded,
07:43no longer taking the most critically ill babies.
07:47The hospital commissioned a series of external reviews
07:50to better understand what was going on.
07:53A team from the Royal College of Pediatrics
07:56was invited in.
07:58It identified a shortage of nurses
08:00and a lack of consultant cover
08:02risking patient safety,
08:04but could find no definitive reason
08:06for the rise in mortality.
08:09It came up with the same answers, I think, predominantly,
08:13that had been internally investigated,
08:16you know, and they thought that might pacify
08:18the consultants or clearly it didn't.
08:25By now, all seven of the unit's senior doctors
08:28were unhappy with the outcome of the reviews.
08:31They wrote to hospital bosses
08:33doubting that the deaths and collapses
08:35could be explained by natural causes.
08:38In March 2017, the police were called in.
08:42Over a year later, Lucy Letby was arrested
08:46for the first time.
08:51Hello, Lucy, is this?
08:53Yes. Hello, my name's from Cheshire Police.
08:54Okay, step in, two seconds.
08:56Oh, yes? Yeah, thank you.
09:03I remember it was during summer 2018,
09:07quite late in the day,
09:08Cheshire Police put out a statement.
09:10Could you take a seat in there for me, Lucy?
09:13It just said,
09:14a healthcare professional has been arrested
09:16on suspicion of murdering a number of babies
09:19and attempting to murder several others.
09:21It was obviously like,
09:22what?
09:24This is absolutely massive.
09:26I mean, if she was found guilty,
09:28it would make her Britain's most prolific
09:29child serial killer.
09:31She would be up there, you know,
09:32with the likes of Myra Hindley.
09:34Did you have any concerns
09:36that there was a rise in the mortality rate?
09:39Yes.
09:41Okay, so tell me about that.
09:42What concerns did you have?
09:45I think we don't just notice
09:47as a team in general,
09:48the nursing staff,
09:49that this was a rise
09:52compared to previous years.
09:53There's definitely lots of holiday snaps
10:03and birthdays.
10:06There's holidays I've forgotten we even had.
10:10The wedding photos are definitely my favourite.
10:12Yeah, there's Lucy at my wedding.
10:17I'm just so glad that she could be there
10:19because, yeah, it was while she was on bail,
10:21she had to get special sort of permission
10:23to be allowed to come from the police.
10:25I watched it all unfold
10:29and I just, at every step of the way,
10:30I couldn't believe it.
10:31It just, it was beyond belief
10:33that that could be happening.
10:35So, yeah.
10:39Dawn and Lucy met as teenagers,
10:41becoming the closest of friends.
10:43My assumption when all of this happened
10:46was that perhaps, you know,
10:50she had inadvertently, like,
10:52forgotten bits of procedure
10:53or that she'd made mistakes.
10:55There were those dark moments
10:57where I thought,
10:57well, perhaps has she inadvertently caused harm
10:59because she's so newly qualified
11:01in such a high-pressure environment.
11:03And, you know, perhaps that was why
11:05she was sort of being targeted
11:07for these sort of accusations.
11:11Shortly after this,
11:11she was held in custody.
11:14So, yeah,
11:16I don't think Lucy's seen these.
11:20Arriving in a prison van
11:22for trial at Manchester Crown Court,
11:24the nurse who stands accused
11:26of murdering five baby boys
11:28and two baby girls
11:30and attempting to murder
11:32ten more newborns under her care.
11:38The first thing you do
11:39when you walk in court
11:40is to stare directly at the dock.
11:42You want to set eyes on the defendant
11:45and you're thinking,
11:47is this person a killer?
11:50The prosecution never shied away
11:52from the fact that it was mostly
11:53a circumstantial case.
11:54But that's not to say
11:56it's a flimsy case.
11:59Circumstantial evidence
11:59can often be extremely powerful.
12:01Think of it as
12:02there's like a wall of evidence,
12:05things that have mounted up
12:07that tend to prove
12:10someone is guilty.
12:13Lucy Letby took home medical notes.
12:15She searched for parents
12:18of these babies on Facebook,
12:20which seemed unusual.
12:21And I remember
12:22as the opening went on,
12:24it felt like,
12:26OK, this is quite a powerful case.
12:29It's not just any other trial.
12:32It's about the deaths of babies.
12:35There are families
12:36that are still grieving.
12:37That's absolutely enormous.
12:40And she presented
12:42completely dispassionately
12:44throughout most of the trial.
12:46She was expressionless.
12:48She didn't react
12:49in any visible way
12:50to the vast majority
12:52of the evidence.
12:55There were only
12:56a couple of moments
12:57where she showed some emotion.
12:59But it's these
12:59really personal,
13:01human moments
13:02that often
13:04seem to figure quite heavily
13:06in jury's minds.
13:09The prosecution's case
13:10rested on a few central pillars.
13:13A shift chart
13:14showing Letby
13:15was always on duty
13:16when something terrible happened.
13:19Handwritten notes
13:20presented as confessions.
13:23Blood tests
13:24suggesting babies
13:25had been poisoned.
13:27And medical evidence
13:28taken from the babies' notes
13:30to support theories
13:31of how Letby
13:32had attacked them.
13:35The person who developed
13:37most of those theories
13:38was a retired paediatrician,
13:40Dr Dowie Evans.
13:42He led a group
13:43of eight expert witnesses
13:45for the prosecution.
13:47He'd introduced himself
13:48to the police
13:49when he heard
13:49they were investigating,
13:51saying,
13:52sounds like my kind of case.
13:57In a podcast interview,
13:59he confidently described
14:00the key moment
14:01when he first looked
14:02at the baby's medical notes
14:03and saw something
14:05nobody else had.
14:07Immediately,
14:08I think within 10 minutes
14:09or so of having a look
14:11at these notes,
14:12I felt,
14:13oh my God,
14:13this baby
14:14is the victim
14:16of inflicted injury.
14:18So it took you
14:1810 minutes to decide
14:19that this baby
14:20had been put in harm's way?
14:22Yes, yes.
14:23As far as I could tell,
14:24straight away.
14:27Dowie Evans
14:27was the prosecution's
14:29main expert.
14:30He was there
14:31to lead the jury
14:32through the bulk
14:33of the charges.
14:35He was often
14:35the first expert
14:36they would hear from.
14:37So what he said
14:39mattered hugely.
14:44The trial would be
14:45one of the longest
14:46in British history.
14:49Most of the prosecution's
14:50efforts were focused
14:51on the medical evidence
14:52and Dr Evans'
14:54theories of harm.
14:57Eight months in,
14:59Letby herself
14:59took to the stand.
15:01Her cross-examination
15:03lasted nearly three weeks.
15:06Then it was the turn
15:07of Letby's defence
15:08to try and pull apart
15:09the prosecution's case.
15:11You had eight months
15:12of prosecution evidence,
15:15a series of prosecution witnesses.
15:17Lucy Letby finished
15:18her defence,
15:19then that's the moment
15:21where we expect
15:21the medical experts
15:22to start giving evidence
15:24and undermining
15:25all of the prosecution's experts.
15:27The next witness was called
15:29and he was the
15:30hospital plumber.
15:33And then that was it.
15:35It was surreal.
15:37That moment in court
15:39of knowing
15:41there wouldn't be
15:42any defence experts
15:43was just so shocking
15:46and unexpected
15:47that it's one of the most
15:49surprising things
15:51I've ever seen in court.
15:54Letby's defence team
15:56did instruct
15:57their own experts.
15:58It's not known why,
15:59but they were never called
16:00to give evidence.
16:02Her barrister argued
16:03the prosecution's evidence
16:04was tenuous in the extreme
16:06and said Dr Evans' theories
16:08were guesswork.
16:11After nearly ten months,
16:12the jury was sent out
16:13to consider its verdict.
16:15They deliberated
16:16for more than four weeks.
16:18Guilty.
16:22Nurse Lucy Letby
16:24murdered
16:25seven babies.
16:27Britain's most
16:28prolific
16:29child killer,
16:30Lucy Letby,
16:31a nurse
16:32trusted
16:32with the lives
16:33of newborn babies.
16:35There were gasps
16:36in the courtroom
16:37as some of those families
16:38heard that their children
16:40indeed
16:40had been attacked
16:41and killed
16:42by former neonatal nurse
16:44Lucy Letby.
16:45In an instant,
16:47the stories change
16:48from a nurse
16:49accused of murdering
16:50to a nurse
16:53murdered babies.
16:59And then you have
17:01the police mugshot,
17:02which is released
17:03for the first time.
17:04Here's what an NHS nurse
17:06baby serial killer
17:07looks like.
17:08There are simply
17:20no words
17:21to describe
17:21the evil
17:22of the crimes
17:23that she committed.
17:25She was a pure evil,
17:27sadistic psychopath.
17:30I mean,
17:31I have no problem
17:32with the death penalty.
17:33I'd pull the lever
17:34myself with this one.
17:36Even as the country
17:37reflected on the horror,
17:38of Letby's crimes,
17:40there had already
17:41been concerns raised
17:42about the evidence
17:43used to convict her.
17:46I didn't just wake up
17:47one morning
17:48and think,
17:48oh, I'm going to go
17:50and represent Lucy Letby.
17:52I've been involved
17:53in miscarriages
17:55of justice now
17:56for the last 20 years.
17:58And I knew
17:58that there were
17:58fundamental flaws
18:00in the way
18:02that the prosecution
18:02were approaching
18:03these types of cases.
18:05Mark MacDonald
18:08is Lucy Letby's
18:09new barrister.
18:11He was instructed
18:12last September
18:13after two failed
18:14attempts
18:15to appeal
18:15her convictions.
18:18In the trial,
18:19they started
18:20from the starting point,
18:22she has done harm.
18:24Now we have to
18:25show how she
18:27has harmed each child.
18:28there's no direct evidence.
18:32No one saw her
18:33do anything wrong.
18:34But we're going to go
18:35through the medical notes,
18:36we're going to go
18:37through the x-rays,
18:38and we're just going
18:38to put together
18:39a theory.
18:40And she was convicted
18:42on that theory.
18:44I'm dealing with
18:45an educated guess,
18:46but an educated guess
18:48that convinced
18:49the jury.
18:50people started
18:54contacting me
18:55almost from day one.
18:57Medically qualified
18:58people,
18:59scientifically
19:00qualified people,
19:02statisticians,
19:03saying,
19:04we think
19:05something's
19:05gone wrong here.
19:08One of those
19:09was Professor
19:10Nina Modi,
19:11one of the country's
19:12most senior
19:13neonatal doctors.
19:15My anxieties
19:16were aroused
19:17when I was
19:18contacted
19:18by a number
19:20of highly
19:20respected journalists
19:22who asked me
19:23for my opinion
19:24about particular
19:25cases that were
19:26being discussed.
19:28The evidence
19:29that was being put
19:29to the jury
19:31was not necessarily
19:32complete,
19:33and the prosecution
19:34expert witnesses
19:36were coming to
19:37conclusions
19:37which appeared
19:39inappropriate.
19:42It's been
19:43deeply disturbing
19:44that one can
19:45have such
19:46a high profile
19:47and tremendously
19:48important trial
19:49that seems
19:50to have been
19:51conducted
19:52with so many
19:53flaws.
19:56As well as
19:58medical evidence,
19:59the prosecution
19:59used statistics
20:01to convict Letby.
20:02Most important
20:04was this chart,
20:06presented to the jury
20:07at the start
20:07of the trial,
20:09showing which nurses
20:10were on duty
20:10when events happened
20:12that were described
20:12as suspicious.
20:14According to the chart,
20:16Letby was always
20:17there.
20:20Professor Jane Hutton
20:22regularly acts
20:23as an expert witness
20:24in trials
20:24and is among
20:26the UK's leading
20:27medical statisticians.
20:29She thinks the data
20:30on the chart
20:31has been carefully
20:32chosen to create
20:33an impression.
20:34closely related.
20:36This has influenced
20:36a lot of people
20:37into thinking
20:39she must have
20:40done it because
20:40she was always
20:41there and nobody
20:42else was.
20:42It has a very
20:43strong visual impact,
20:45but it doesn't
20:46tell you how the
20:47data has been
20:48selected.
20:49You know,
20:49it's clear that
20:50this is aimed
20:51to present
20:53a conclusion.
20:56The concern
20:57is this
20:58left-hand
20:58column.
21:00Each entry
21:00represents a
21:01death or
21:02life-threatening
21:02event.
21:03But these are
21:04not all the
21:05deaths or
21:05life-threatening
21:06events in that
21:07period.
21:08The prosecution
21:09has made a
21:10selection.
21:16As was pointed
21:17out in court,
21:18Dr. Dowie Evans'
21:19early reports
21:20for the police
21:21identified other
21:23events that he
21:24said were
21:24attacks on
21:25babies.
21:27But these
21:28happened when
21:28Letby wasn't
21:29on duty,
21:30and those events
21:31don't appear on
21:32the chart.
21:34So the way
21:35you would
21:35approach this
21:36kind of thing
21:37is you get
21:37all of what
21:38we call the
21:38cases, so
21:39that we can
21:39see, was
21:42Letby present
21:42for all of
21:43them?
21:44There is no
21:45explanation for
21:46the events that
21:46were left out.
21:48So really, all
21:48this is telling
21:49us is that
21:50Letby was
21:51there for
21:53some events.
21:54This is a
21:56summary that's
21:57so crude that
21:58can only be
21:59described as
22:00grossly
22:00misleading.
22:05According to
22:06the prosecution,
22:07Letby used
22:08various methods
22:09to try and
22:10kill.
22:11In one case,
22:12she was accused
22:12of attempting
22:13to kill an
22:13extremely premature
22:15baby by
22:16dislodging its
22:17breathing tube.
22:18One of Letby's
22:20accusers, Dr.
22:21Ravi Jayram,
22:22the head of
22:22paediatrics on
22:23the unit,
22:24told the court
22:25that he'd never
22:25known the
22:26breathing tube
22:27of a baby
22:27born at
22:2825 weeks
22:29to become
22:30accidentally
22:30dislodged,
22:32something he
22:32went into
22:33detail about
22:34in an ITV
22:35interview.
22:36This was a
22:3725-week
22:37gestation baby
22:39who wasn't
22:40kicking around,
22:41who wasn't
22:42vigorous.
22:43The only
22:43possibility
22:44was that
22:46that tube
22:46had to have
22:46been dislodged
22:47deliberately.
22:49Dr.
22:50Jayram is a
22:51paediatrician
22:51and not a
22:52neonatologist,
22:54a specialist
22:54in newborn
22:55babies.
22:55Dr.
22:59Richard Taylor
23:00is a
23:00neonatologist
23:01with over
23:0230 years
23:02of experience.
23:04For him
23:04and some
23:05of his
23:05colleagues,
23:06Dr.
23:06Jayram's
23:07claim that
23:07the breathing
23:08tube couldn't
23:08have been
23:09accidentally
23:09dislodged
23:10didn't add
23:11up.
23:13So this
23:13mannequin
23:14is a
23:15full-term
23:15baby that
23:16is 3.5
23:18to 4
23:19kilograms.
23:20This
23:20baby is
23:21roughly 700
23:22grams,
23:23which is a
23:23very similar
23:24weight to
23:25to the
23:25baby in
23:26the Lucy
23:26Letby
23:27case.
23:28And soon
23:29after birth,
23:30the baby
23:30was intubated.
23:32So I'm
23:34just going
23:34to hold
23:34the tube
23:35in place
23:35and I'm
23:36going to
23:36hook up
23:36the bag.
23:39And then
23:39just with
23:40gentle breaths,
23:41you can see
23:41that the
23:42chest is
23:43rising.
23:46So the
23:46prosecution
23:47allege
23:48that the
23:49tube was
23:50intentionally
23:51dislodged.
23:52and the
23:52first thing
23:53I would
23:53say is
23:53that
23:54accidental
23:55dislodgement
23:56is extremely
23:57common.
23:58And it
23:58can be
23:59dislodged
23:59quite easily
24:00by the
24:01operator
24:01and it
24:02can also
24:03be dislodged
24:03by the
24:03baby
24:04themselves
24:05just by
24:05moving their
24:06head or
24:07thrusting their
24:08tongue.
24:09And suddenly
24:10it's not in
24:11anymore.
24:13Now the
24:13issue with
24:14very small
24:14babies is
24:15that the
24:15movement
24:16only has to
24:17be relatively
24:18small,
24:19say one
24:19centimeter.
24:20If you're
24:20out by
24:21one centimeter
24:21then suddenly
24:22the baby
24:22is extubated.
24:24How surprised
24:25were you then
24:25to hear the
24:26consultant say
24:28that it would
24:28be very,
24:29very unusual
24:29for a baby
24:30of this size
24:30to dislodge
24:31its own
24:32tube and
24:33that he had
24:33never seen
24:34that before?
24:35It doesn't
24:36make sense
24:36to me.
24:37I mean,
24:37we've all
24:38seen it
24:38frequently.
24:40Well,
24:41it rather
24:41suggests he
24:42hasn't seen
24:42many tiny
24:43babies.
24:44Tubes
24:45can be
24:45dislodged
24:45for a whole
24:46variety of
24:47reasons.
24:48To say,
24:48well,
24:49it got
24:49dislodged
24:50therefore
24:51it must
24:51have been
24:52the nurse
24:52did it
24:53for malignant
24:54reasons
24:55is not
24:56logical.
25:03The jury
25:04couldn't decide
25:05if Letby
25:05was guilty
25:06of attempting
25:07to murder
25:07this baby
25:08known as
25:08Baby K
25:09by dislodging
25:10its breathing
25:11tube.
25:12That single
25:13case went
25:14to a retrial.
25:15Dr. Jaram
25:16was the
25:17star witness.
25:18Ultimately,
25:20this case
25:20may come
25:21down to
25:21a single
25:22issue.
25:23Do you
25:23believe what
25:24Dr. Jaram
25:24says he
25:25saw?
25:26Will you
25:26be sure
25:27that he
25:27is telling
25:28you the
25:29truth about
25:29what he
25:30saw?
25:31Lucy Letby
25:32has been
25:32found guilty
25:33of the
25:34attempted
25:34murder of
25:35her baby.
25:35The prosecution
25:36saying she
25:36was caught
25:37virtually red-handed
25:38when a
25:39consultant
25:39paediatrician,
25:40Dr. Ravi
25:40Jaram,
25:41went into
25:42that room,
25:43saw that the
25:43baby's blood
25:44oxygen levels
25:45were dropping
25:45to dangerously
25:46low levels
25:47and saw
25:47Lucy Letby
25:48doing nothing.
25:52Dr. Jaram's
25:53account of
25:54this event
25:54was some
25:55of the
25:55strongest
25:55eyewitness
25:56evidence
25:57of either
25:57trial.
25:58He elaborated
25:59on it
26:00in his
26:00ITV
26:01interview.
26:02That is
26:03a night
26:04that is
26:05etched
26:05on my
26:06memory
26:06and will
26:07be in
26:08my nightmares
26:09forever.
26:10Part of me
26:11was saying
26:11you better
26:12go in and
26:12just check
26:13everything's
26:13okay because
26:14you know
26:15what's
26:15happened
26:15before
26:15when Lucy's
26:16been on
26:17duty.
26:18As I
26:18walked
26:18towards
26:19the
26:20incubator
26:20I could
26:21see on
26:21the monitors
26:22that the
26:22oxygen
26:23saturations
26:24were dropping
26:24and they
26:25dropped to
26:25a level
26:26that
26:26ordinarily
26:29number one
26:30the alarms
26:30would have
26:30been going
26:30off
26:31but number
26:33two
26:33the nurse
26:34would have
26:35called for
26:35help
26:36and Lucy
26:37Letby was
26:38standing by
26:38the top
26:38of the
26:38incubator
26:39she didn't
26:39have her
26:39hands in
26:40the
26:40incubator.
26:41What was
26:41she doing
26:41then?
26:42She was
26:42just standing
26:43there.
26:44In his
26:45evidence
26:46Dr.
26:46J.
26:47Ram
26:47was
26:47explicit
26:47that no
26:48one had
26:49been called
26:49to save
26:50the baby.
26:53Did you
26:54hear while
26:55you were
26:56either sitting
26:56at the
26:57nurse's
26:57station
26:57or on
26:58your
26:59progress
26:59into
26:59nursery
27:00one
27:00any
27:01call
27:01for
27:01help
27:02from
27:02Lucy
27:03Letby?
27:04No,
27:05not at
27:06all.
27:06But
27:10in the
27:10last
27:10few
27:11months
27:11an
27:11email
27:12from
27:12Dr.
27:12J.
27:13Ram
27:13himself
27:13has
27:14come
27:14to
27:14light
27:14that
27:15directly
27:15contradicts
27:16his
27:16own
27:17testimony.
27:18He's
27:18writing
27:19to
27:19colleagues
27:19in
27:192017
27:20describing
27:21the
27:21event.
27:23According
27:23to this
27:23email,
27:24Dr.
27:24J.
27:25Ram
27:25was
27:25only
27:25in
27:26the
27:26room
27:26because
27:27Letby
27:27herself
27:27had
27:28called
27:28him
27:28in
27:28as
27:29the
27:29baby
27:29was
27:29collapsing.
27:31The
27:31jury
27:31was
27:32never
27:32told
27:32about
27:33this
27:33email.
27:33Right,
27:38we all
27:39ready to
27:39go?
27:39Mm-hmm.
27:44In
27:44fighting
27:45Letby's
27:45conviction,
27:46Mark
27:46McDonald,
27:47her new
27:47lawyer,
27:48says he
27:48finds himself
27:49taking on
27:50the medical
27:50and legal
27:51establishment.
27:54The
27:55problem
27:55sometimes
27:56that happens
27:57is that
27:57we feel
27:58that,
27:59particularly
27:59with medics
28:00and doctors,
28:01we put
28:01them on
28:01a bit
28:01of a
28:02pedestal
28:02and
28:02they
28:04say,
28:04well,
28:04you know,
28:05this is
28:05what
28:05happened.
28:06People
28:06believe
28:07it.
28:08And
28:08what
28:08we've
28:08been
28:09building
28:09up
28:09is
28:10powerful
28:11contradictory
28:12evidence
28:12that
28:14in essence
28:16says that
28:16the people
28:17that gave
28:17evidence
28:18before the
28:18trial
28:19didn't know
28:20what they're
28:21talking about.
28:25Dr.
28:26J.
28:26Ram
28:26isn't the
28:27only medic
28:27who appears
28:28to have
28:28contradicted
28:29his own
28:29testimony.
28:31Lucy Letby
28:32was convicted
28:32of murdering
28:33one baby,
28:34baby C,
28:35by forcing
28:36air into
28:36its stomach.
28:38It was a
28:39novel theory
28:40of murder
28:40devised entirely
28:42by Dr.
28:43Dowie Evans.
28:44He had said
28:45that this
28:46child had
28:47died from
28:47air being
28:48forcibly put
28:49down a
28:50nasal
28:50gastric tube,
28:51a tube that
28:51goes through
28:52the nose
28:53down into
28:53the stomach.
28:55And that
28:55had caused
28:56the baby
28:56to suffocate
28:57and die.
29:00This is a
29:00video to
29:01demonstrate the
29:01process of a
29:02baby in an
29:03incubator having
29:04an X-ray.
29:04Dr. Evans
29:05based his
29:05theory on an
29:06X-ray taken
29:07on the 12th
29:08of June 2015,
29:09which did show
29:10air in the
29:11baby's stomach.
29:13But Letby had
29:14been off work
29:15that day.
29:16She hadn't even
29:17met baby C
29:17when the X-ray
29:18was taken.
29:20When challenged
29:21on this at
29:22trial, Dr. Evans
29:23couldn't rule out
29:24that air may have
29:25been injected
29:26into the veins,
29:27but the
29:28prosecution still
29:29insisted Letby
29:30had killed
29:30baby C
29:31with this
29:32method.
29:35It's as
29:36plain as
29:37the nose
29:37on your
29:38face that
29:39Lucy Letby
29:39must have
29:40injected air
29:41down the
29:41nasal gastric
29:42tube into
29:43baby C's
29:44stomach.
29:45It was,
29:46after all,
29:46one of her
29:47favourite ways
29:47of killing.
29:50As questions
29:51about Dr.
29:52Evans'
29:52evidence
29:53mounted
29:53following the
29:54trial,
29:55he publicly
29:55changed his
29:56mind.
29:58He told
29:58journalists he
29:59no longer
29:59believed any
30:00babies were
30:01killed as a
30:01direct result of
30:02air being
30:03injected into
30:04their stomachs,
30:05though it may
30:05have caused
30:06them to
30:06collapse.
30:08But Letby had
30:08been convicted
30:09of killing
30:10baby C and
30:11two others
30:11using this
30:12method.
30:13I went back
30:15through the
30:15transcript and
30:16I looked at
30:17it and I
30:17kept on going
30:18back and
30:18referring to
30:19what he's
30:19saying now
30:20and it was
30:21clear that
30:24he has
30:24changed his
30:24mind.
30:25But then he
30:25went further.
30:28He said,
30:29I'm now going
30:29to draft a
30:30new report,
30:32which he's
30:32been convicted
30:33of murder.
30:34And not only
30:35is he now
30:36saying that
30:37the baby did
30:38not die as
30:40a result of
30:40air going
30:41down the
30:42nasal gusset
30:42tube, but
30:43he's now
30:44going to
30:44write a
30:44new report
30:45and give
30:45it to the
30:47police.
30:48I have
30:48never known
30:49anything like
30:50it.
30:56Now Dr.
30:57Dowie Evans
30:58has committed
30:58to his
30:59alternative
30:59theory.
31:01He says
31:01let be
31:02killed baby
31:02C a day
31:03later by
31:04injecting air
31:05into the
31:05veins, causing
31:07something called
31:08an air
31:08embolism.
31:10She was on
31:12duty.
31:13It was
31:13coming up
31:14to midnight.
31:15She injected
31:16him
31:17intravenously
31:18with air.
31:20That caused
31:21immediate
31:22collapse and
31:23also explains
31:24why
31:25resuscitation
31:27failed.
31:28That is what
31:29I am now
31:30confident
31:31happened to
31:32this particular
31:33baby.
31:38Hello
31:39and welcome
31:40to this
31:41press conference.
31:43In relation
31:45to baby
31:45C, Dr.
31:47Evans had
31:49said to
31:50the jury
31:50that Lucy
31:52Letby had
31:53injected air
31:54down a
31:55nasal
31:55gastric
31:56tube.
31:57Remarkably,
31:58Dr. Evans
31:59has now
32:00changed his
32:01mind on
32:02the cause
32:03of death
32:03and has
32:04written a
32:05new report.
32:07Despite
32:08numerous
32:08requests,
32:10the
32:10prosecution
32:10have yet
32:11to give
32:12this report
32:12to the
32:13defence.
32:14Dr.
32:15Evans
32:15is not
32:17a reliable
32:18expert
32:19and given
32:20that he
32:20was the
32:21lead expert
32:22for the
32:22prosecution,
32:24we say
32:24that all
32:25the convictions
32:26are unsafe.
32:28After I
32:42removed Lucy
32:43Letby from
32:44a clinical
32:44practice,
32:46then the
32:46next management
32:46instruction I
32:47got was to
32:48meet her
32:48on a weekly
32:48basis.
32:50Firstly,
32:50to give her
32:50feedback about
32:51the investigations
32:52that were
32:52going on
32:53internally
32:54and externally
32:55and to
32:55also check
32:56on her
32:56health and
32:57well-being.
32:58So it was
32:58myself,
32:59the head
33:00of occupational
33:01health and
33:01a union
33:02rep.
33:03We were
33:03responsible
33:04for
33:05supporting
33:06her
33:06throughout.
33:12Obviously,
33:13this is
33:13early days,
33:1427th of
33:15March,
33:152018,
33:16and she
33:17was still
33:17hopeful.
33:18We kept,
33:18you know,
33:18look at her,
33:19she's smiling,
33:20she's open.
33:21Hadn't been
33:22arrested at this
33:23point,
33:23had she?
33:23None of us
33:24knew what
33:24was coming.
33:25After being
33:28removed from
33:29the unit,
33:30Lucy Letby
33:31was put on
33:31a desk job
33:32and advised
33:33not to
33:33communicate
33:34with her
33:34former
33:34colleagues.
33:36Karen
33:36Reese
33:37was one
33:37of the
33:38only
33:38people
33:38to have
33:38any
33:39meaningful
33:39contact
33:40with her
33:40during
33:41that
33:41period.
33:43She
33:44thought
33:45she had
33:45good
33:46working
33:46relationships
33:47with both
33:47those
33:48consultants
33:48and she
33:50was
33:50devastated
33:51that they
33:52thought
33:52what they
33:54thought.
33:54absolutely
33:56devastated.
33:58She was
33:58broken,
34:00cried
34:00regularly
34:01in my
34:01arms
34:02and in
34:02my
34:02office
34:03and her
34:05mantra to
34:05me was
34:06why are they
34:10doing this
34:11to me?
34:12I've done
34:12nothing wrong,
34:13Karen.
34:14The police
34:20investigation
34:21into Letby
34:21went on
34:22for three
34:22and a
34:22half years
34:23before she
34:24was charged.
34:26During
34:26one of the
34:26searches
34:27of her
34:27home,
34:28some notes
34:29were found
34:29that appeared
34:30incriminating.
34:34The post-it notes,
34:35they were presented
34:36as proof
34:37that Lucy Letby
34:39has done this
34:40and not only
34:41has she done
34:42it,
34:42she's admitted
34:42to it.
34:47She said,
34:48I did
34:49right,
34:50I did
34:50this.
34:50She didn't
34:51deny that
34:51but she
34:51said she
34:52was in
34:53such mental
34:53anguish
34:54at the
34:54time,
34:55she was
34:55just scribbling
34:56down whatever
34:57she could
34:58to get it
34:59off her
34:59chest,
34:59basically,
35:00get it out
35:00of her
35:00head onto
35:01paper.
35:01She said
35:02it's what
35:02she'd
35:02always done
35:03as a
35:03kind of
35:04form of
35:04therapy.
35:05When we
35:07were in
35:07college,
35:08Lucy and
35:09I did
35:09all of
35:09our
35:09peer
35:10support
35:10counselling
35:11training
35:11together
35:12and at
35:13all of
35:14these
35:14training
35:14sessions
35:15it was
35:15recommended
35:15to us
35:16that if
35:17you're
35:17feeling
35:17overwhelmed
35:18you write
35:19down
35:19everything
35:19that's
35:19going
35:20through
35:20your
35:20mind
35:21that
35:21is
35:21troubling
35:22you.
35:23So all
35:24of the
35:24dark
35:25thoughts,
35:25all of
35:25those
35:26inner
35:26voices
35:26that
35:26you
35:26can't
35:27silence,
35:27you
35:27just
35:28write
35:28it
35:28all
35:28down
35:28on
35:28a
35:29piece
35:29of
35:29paper
35:29to
35:29get
35:29it
35:30off
35:30your
35:30mind.
35:33The
35:33hospital
35:33had
35:34provided
35:34a
35:34therapist
35:35to
35:35support
35:36Letby
35:36during
35:36the
35:37investigations.
35:38Her
35:39name
35:39appears
35:39several
35:40times
35:40on
35:41the
35:41notes.
35:43It's
35:44since
35:44been
35:44reported
35:45that
35:45it
35:45was
35:45this
35:46therapist
35:46who
35:46suggested
35:47Letby
35:47express
35:48her
35:48feelings
35:49in
35:49this
35:49way,
35:50as
35:50part
35:51of
35:51her
35:51treatment.
35:52I
35:53understand
35:53how
35:54people
35:54can
35:54take
35:55that
35:55note
35:55out
35:55of
35:56context
35:56and
35:56make
35:56it
35:56seem
35:57really
35:57sinister,
35:58but
35:58knowing
35:59Lucy,
35:59I
35:59think
36:00she
36:00would
36:00have
36:00written
36:00it
36:00down
36:01as
36:03the
36:03concern
36:04that
36:04she
36:04was
36:04feeling.
36:12Nearly
36:13a year
36:13after
36:14the
36:14police
36:14began
36:14investigating
36:15Letby,
36:16they
36:16made
36:16a
36:16breakthrough
36:17discovery.
36:19Blood
36:20tests
36:20for two
36:20babies
36:21which
36:21showed
36:22very
36:22high
36:22insulin
36:23levels
36:23and
36:24low
36:24levels
36:25of
36:25a
36:25molecule
36:25called
36:26C-peptide,
36:27which is
36:28created
36:28in the
36:28body
36:29as
36:29insulin
36:29is
36:30produced.
36:33The
36:33prosecution
36:34said
36:34the
36:34striking
36:35imbalance
36:35between
36:36high
36:36insulin
36:37and
36:37low
36:38C-peptide
36:38was
36:39proof
36:40that
36:40insulin
36:40had
36:41been
36:41given
36:41externally
36:42and
36:43must
36:43therefore
36:43have
36:43been
36:44an
36:44attempt
36:44to
36:45poison.
36:49The
36:50prosecution
36:50evidence
36:50is
36:51effectively
36:52like a
36:52wall
36:52made up
36:53of
36:53multiple
36:53different
36:54bricks.
36:55But
36:55the
36:55insulin
36:55cases
36:56in
36:56this
36:56trial
36:57were
36:57the
36:58foundation.
37:00The
37:01prosecution
37:01told the
37:02jury,
37:03two of
37:03these
37:03babies
37:04had
37:04been
37:04deliberately
37:05poisoned
37:05with
37:06insulin
37:06and
37:07that
37:08they
37:08had
37:08a
37:08test
37:08result
37:09that
37:09proved
37:09it.
37:12It was
37:12the
37:12closest
37:12the
37:13prosecution
37:13had
37:13to
37:13a
37:14smoking
37:14gun.
37:16Professor
37:16Matt
37:17Joll is
37:17a
37:17forensic
37:18scientist
37:18who's
37:19worked
37:19with
37:19US
37:20authorities
37:20in
37:21criminal
37:21investigations.
37:23Through
37:23his
37:24work,
37:24he's
37:24very
37:24familiar
37:25with
37:25the
37:25kind
37:26of
37:26medical
37:26tests
37:27used
37:27to
37:27convict
37:27let
37:28be,
37:28known
37:29as
37:29immunoassays,
37:30which
37:32a
37:34medical
37:35laboratory
37:35is
37:36about
37:36quick,
37:37fast,
37:38cheap,
37:38fairly
37:39good
37:39tests.
37:41It is
37:42used
37:43because
37:43the
37:43doctor
37:44has a
37:44very
37:44short
37:45window
37:45to
37:45make
37:46a
37:46diagnosis,
37:47but
37:47they're
37:47not
37:48perfect.
37:49In
37:50the
37:50forensic
37:51setting,
37:52we would
37:53take
37:54samples
37:54and we
37:55would
37:56have
37:56them
37:56identified.
37:57We
37:58would
37:58know
37:58exactly
37:59the
37:59chemical
38:00components
38:01inside
38:02the
38:02sample.
38:03That
38:04is not
38:04done
38:04in the
38:05medical
38:05settings,
38:06it was
38:06not
38:06done
38:06here,
38:08and yet
38:08those
38:09results
38:10were not
38:10presented
38:11to the
38:12jury as
38:13having
38:13any risk
38:14of false
38:15positives.
38:18The
38:19laboratory
38:19in
38:19Liverpool
38:20that did
38:20those
38:20tests
38:21says
38:21clearly
38:22on its
38:22website
38:23that its
38:23insulin
38:24assays
38:24shouldn't
38:25be used
38:25in
38:25investigations.
38:26And
38:27any
38:27unusual
38:28results
38:28should
38:29be
38:29further
38:29analysed.
38:31In
38:31both
38:32cases,
38:32the
38:33babies
38:33recovered
38:33and
38:34the
38:34results
38:34weren't
38:35looked
38:35at
38:35in
38:35more
38:35detail.
38:37It
38:38wasn't
38:38until
38:38police
38:39were
38:39investigating
38:39Letby
38:40that
38:41the
38:41test
38:41results
38:41were
38:42looked
38:42at
38:42again.
38:44That
38:45kind
38:45of
38:45test
38:46was
38:46never
38:46meant
38:47to
38:48put
38:48somebody
38:49in
38:50prison.
38:51You
38:51would
38:51not
38:52strip
38:52a
38:52gold
38:53medal
38:53from
38:53an
38:54international
38:55athlete
38:55on
38:56an
38:56immunoassay.
38:57It's
38:58not
38:58good
38:58enough
38:58for
38:59drug
39:00testing
39:00for
39:01pilots
39:02or
39:02anyone
39:03who
39:03has
39:03mandatory
39:04drug
39:04testing.
39:05So
39:05if
39:06it's
39:06not
39:06good
39:06enough
39:07to
39:08fire
39:08them,
39:09how
39:09can
39:09it
39:09be
39:09good
39:10enough
39:10to
39:10put
39:10someone
39:11in
39:11prison?
39:14To
39:14tie
39:15Letby
39:15to the
39:15suspicious
39:16test
39:16results,
39:17the
39:17prosecution
39:18said
39:18that she
39:19had
39:19injected
39:19insulin
39:20into
39:20feed
39:21bags
39:21that
39:22were
39:22then
39:22given
39:22to
39:23the
39:23two
39:23babies.
39:24It said
39:26that one
39:27of the
39:27baby's
39:28low
39:28blood
39:28sugar
39:28levels
39:29showed
39:29the
39:29poisoning
39:30continued
39:30even
39:31when
39:31Letby
39:32was no
39:32longer
39:33on
39:33shift.
39:34It was
39:35claimed in
39:35court that
39:36Letby must
39:37have spiked a
39:37feed bag
39:38bag and
39:38left it
39:39for another
39:39nurse to
39:40unwittingly
39:41administer
39:41to the
39:42baby.
39:43The
39:44prosecution
39:45says,
39:46well,
39:47she must
39:47have pulled
39:48one out,
39:49tampered
39:50with it,
39:50and then
39:51put it
39:51back in,
39:53and then
39:53the next
39:54shift nurse
39:55would go
39:57into that
39:57supply
39:57cupboard,
39:59happen to
40:00grab the
40:01one fluid
40:02bag that
40:03they allege
40:04that she
40:04would have
40:05tampered
40:05with,
40:06and then
40:07given it
40:07to the
40:07same
40:08exact
40:08child.
40:10We're
40:11going into
40:12the point
40:12of being
40:12absurd
40:13here to
40:14try and
40:14make these
40:15points
40:16connect.
40:20Although
40:20this theory
40:21was challenged
40:22by the
40:22defense,
40:23they didn't
40:23produce any
40:24expert witnesses
40:25to challenge
40:26the tests
40:26themselves,
40:28meaning that
40:28when she was
40:29on the
40:29stand,
40:30Letby had
40:31little choice
40:31but to
40:32accept the
40:32prosecution's
40:33claim that
40:34the test
40:35results
40:35proved
40:35poisoning.
40:38The prosecution
40:39had told
40:40the jury
40:40that there
40:41could be
40:41no doubt
40:41that these
40:42were
40:42poisonings
40:43and Letby
40:44was asked
40:44what's your
40:46answer to
40:46that?
40:47And she
40:48just said
40:48well,
40:49if that's
40:50what the
40:51evidence
40:51says,
40:52then that's
40:53the evidence.
40:54These babies
40:54must have
40:55been poisoned.
40:56They sort
40:57of had it
40:57really in
40:58black and
40:59white.
40:59I remember
41:00writing the
41:01news story
41:01that day
41:02thinking
41:03Lucy Letby
41:06has admitted
41:06that babies
41:08have been
41:09poisoned with
41:09insulin
41:09on an
41:11A and
41:11A and
41:11A unit.
41:15This is the
41:16insulin model
41:17that I'm
41:17opening.
41:19This is the
41:20visual representation
41:21of a lot of
41:22maths.
41:24Over the last
41:25nine months,
41:26a team of
41:26scientists has
41:27been instructed
41:28by Letby's
41:29new defence.
41:31Helen Shannon
41:32is a chemical
41:33engineer based
41:33in Chester.
41:36And Professor
41:36Geoff Chase
41:37runs a research
41:38unit in New
41:39Zealand that
41:40has one of
41:40the world's
41:41most extensive
41:41collections of
41:42data on
41:43insulin and
41:44newborn babies.
41:47Hi, Helen.
41:48How are you?
41:49Hi.
41:49They've been
41:50given access to
41:51the baby's
41:51medical notes and
41:52asked to look
41:53again at the
41:54insulin test
41:55results.
41:55So I could
41:57add this to
41:58the bottom and
41:58modify it
41:59slightly?
42:00We've spent
42:01hundreds of
42:02hours investigating
42:04every facet
42:06of the science
42:08and there is
42:12a completely
42:13obvious solution
42:14that does not
42:16involve poisoning.
42:18Those equations
42:19don't lie.
42:21According to
42:21the two
42:22scientists,
42:22to understand
42:23the insulin
42:24cases,
42:24it's essential
42:26to recognise
42:26the differences
42:27between newborn
42:29babies and
42:30adults.
42:32The insulin
42:32cases applied
42:34basic clinical
42:35guidance for
42:36healthy adults
42:38to tiny
42:40preterm
42:41compromised
42:41neonates.
42:43The poor
42:43samples, it's
42:44hard to rely
42:45on that.
42:46So...
42:46Agreed.
42:47They say
42:49they've established
42:49something important
42:50which suggests
42:52that even if
42:52the insulin
42:53readings were
42:54accurate, they
42:55still didn't
42:56prove poisoning.
42:59Many newborn
43:00babies or neonates
43:01are born with a
43:03specific type of
43:04antibody in their
43:05blood.
43:07The team say
43:09they can show
43:09that insulin,
43:11produced naturally
43:11by the babies,
43:13can stick to
43:13these antibodies,
43:15staying longer in
43:16the bloodstream
43:16and giving a high
43:17reading, while
43:18C-peptide continues
43:20used to be cleared.
43:22Something that is
43:23unique to neonates
43:25is that they have
43:27quite a high level
43:28of antibodies
43:29in their blood.
43:31It comes from
43:31their mums.
43:33So, because the
43:34antibody binds
43:35to the insulin,
43:36the insulin doesn't
43:37remove from the body
43:38and the level of
43:40insulin bound
43:41to the antibody
43:42goes up and up
43:43and up and up
43:44in the bloodstream.
43:45It doesn't have any
43:46effect on the child
43:47at all.
43:48It just floats
43:49around.
43:50And as a result,
43:52it gives a very
43:53high reading
43:54on the particular
43:56test that was used
43:57at the Liverpool
43:58Laboratory.
44:00So, what was
44:00presented in court
44:01as this is
44:03smoking gun
44:04evidence of
44:05poisoning
44:05actually looks
44:07pretty typical
44:08for a preterm
44:09neonate.
44:10And we can't see
44:11any justification
44:12whatsoever for
44:13the prosecution's
44:14statement that it
44:15could only be
44:16poisoning.
44:17I've got no
44:29doubt that
44:31today is a
44:32very important
44:32day when it
44:33comes to
44:34Lucy Letby's
44:35conviction.
44:36Can we have
44:36enough room to
44:37shift these chairs
44:37very slightly
44:38backwards in front of
44:38your cameras?
44:39Is that OK?
44:40Today, Mark
44:41McDonald, Letby's
44:43new lawyer,
44:44has summoned the
44:45press and politicians
44:46to a press conference
44:47at Westminster.
44:50He's presenting
44:51the findings of
44:52some of the work
44:53from his network
44:54of experts.
44:56Perhaps the most
44:57senior medic
44:58is Professor
44:59Shu Li from
45:00Canada,
45:00an internationally
45:02respected expert
45:03in neonatal care.
45:04in this case,
45:06because they had
45:07used my paper,
45:08I was curious
45:09about what
45:09they had said.
45:10Professor Li
45:11became involved
45:12early on when
45:13he realised a
45:14paper he'd
45:14written had
45:15been used by
45:16the prosecution's
45:17lead expert
45:17witness,
45:18Dr.
45:18Dowie Evans.
45:19He thought
45:20Dr.
45:21Evans had
45:21misunderstood
45:22it.
45:22What the
45:24prosecution
45:25expert witnesses
45:26had said
45:27wasn't what I
45:28wrote about
45:28and that
45:29that was wrong.
45:30If the
45:31medical evidence
45:31was wrong,
45:32then the
45:33conviction
45:33might be
45:34unsafe
45:35and that
45:35might be
45:36a problem.
45:37He is the
45:37ultimate expert
45:38on neonatology.
45:40So what he
45:41wanted to do
45:42was create
45:43a panel
45:43of 14
45:44experts
45:45to look
45:46at the
45:46medical
45:47records.
45:50But he
45:51said this
45:51to me
45:52and it's
45:52important.
45:53He said
45:54if we
45:55are of the
45:56view
45:56that Lucy
45:58Letby
45:58has harmed
45:59any of
46:00these
46:00children,
46:01we're
46:02going to
46:02say it
46:02publicly.
46:04So the
46:04ultimate
46:04decision
46:05was
46:05hers
46:06to
46:06take
46:06this
46:06forward.
46:08Instruct
46:09him,
46:09she said,
46:10and give
46:10him
46:10everything
46:11he
46:11needs
46:12and
46:13that's
46:13what
46:13he
46:13got.
46:15Professor
46:16Lee
46:16presented
46:17the
46:17panel's
46:17findings
46:18from a
46:18selection
46:19of
46:19seven
46:19cases
46:20which
46:20covered
46:21all the
46:21ways
46:22Letby
46:22was
46:22meant
46:22to
46:23have
46:23harmed
46:23babies.
46:25He
46:26started
46:26with his
46:27particular
46:27area
46:28of
46:28expertise,
46:29air
46:29in
46:30babies'
46:30blood
46:30systems,
46:31or air
46:32embolism.
46:34The
46:34allegation
46:35was that
46:35baby one
46:37died from
46:37injection of
46:38air into
46:39the intravenous
46:40line,
46:40causing air
46:41embolism and
46:42resulting in
46:43collapse,
46:44patchy discoloration
46:45of the skin
46:45and eventually
46:47death.
46:48The prosecution
46:48expert witness,
46:50Dr. Dowie
46:50Evans,
46:51has been clear
46:52that he used
46:53Professor Lee's
46:53work to help
46:54diagnose air
46:55embolism,
46:57the method he
46:57says let
46:58be used
46:58to kill
46:59six
46:59babies.
47:03At that
47:03time,
47:03I did not
47:04distinguish
47:04between
47:05arterial
47:06and venous
47:06air
47:07embolism.
47:08Dr.
47:08Evans
47:09diagnosed
47:09air
47:10embolism,
47:11partly because
47:11the babies
47:12had strange
47:13marks on
47:13their skin.
47:16But Professor
47:16Lee says
47:17Evans missed
47:17a basic
47:18point and
47:19didn't realise
47:20that air
47:21only causes
47:21these kind
47:22of marks
47:22when it's
47:23put into
47:24the arteries,
47:25not the
47:25veins.
47:28Air
47:28embolism by
47:28the venous
47:29system does
47:30not produce
47:30these kinds
47:31of skin
47:31discolourations.
47:32So we feel
47:33that this
47:34diagnosis is
47:35wrong.
47:36Professor
47:37Lee went
47:37on to
47:38deconstruct
47:38each of
47:39the other
47:39cases.
47:40Preterm
47:41babies have
47:42a lot
47:42of antibodies
47:43and these
47:44antibodies
47:45bind
47:46insulin.
47:48As he
47:49went through
47:49the babies,
47:51you could
47:51see
47:52logically
47:52what had
47:55gone wrong
47:56at that
47:56trial.
47:57There's
47:58actually no
47:58proof that
47:59the tube
47:59was even
47:59dislodged.
48:00It was
48:00probably in
48:00the right
48:01place.
48:01It's just
48:02that the
48:02consultant
48:02didn't know
48:03what he
48:03was doing.
48:05There were
48:05serious
48:05problems
48:06related to
48:07medical care
48:07of patients
48:08at this
48:09hospital.
48:10In summary,
48:11ladies and
48:11gentlemen,
48:12we did not
48:13find any
48:13murders.
48:15In all
48:15cases,
48:16death or
48:17injury were
48:18due to
48:18natural
48:18causes
48:19or just
48:20bad medical
48:21care.
48:22the one
48:24thing that
48:24I did
48:25not realize
48:26until the
48:26end of
48:27it was
48:28the impact
48:29that it
48:30had.
48:32I'll be
48:33happy to
48:33take any
48:33questions.
48:34I'll start.
48:35I'll go right
48:35across from
48:36right to
48:37left.
48:37Sir,
48:37you.
48:38Hi,
48:39Josh Halliday
48:39from Guardian.
48:40Can I just
48:41ask how many
48:42seven deaths
48:43do you think
48:44were
48:44preventable?
48:46I was one
48:46of the only
48:47people inside
48:49that room who
48:49actually covered
48:51the original
48:52trial.
48:53Hearing the two
48:55versions of
48:55events, the
48:56prosecution case
48:57and this
48:58international panel
48:59of experts,
49:00it was like two
49:02worlds colliding.
49:03It was just
49:04jaw-dropping.
49:05It was a game
49:07changer on
49:09everything.
49:11But she's
49:12still in prison.
49:13Ah, right.
49:35So what were the
49:35TV cameras
49:36outside?
49:38Hello.
49:39I'm looking at
49:40the TV cameras
49:41and I'm about
49:4210 seconds
49:43away.
49:45Today,
49:46Lucy Letby's
49:47lawyer, Mark
49:47MacDonald, is
49:49delivering the
49:49expert panel
49:50report to the
49:51Criminal Cases
49:52Review
49:53Commission.
49:56So, um,
49:58go in,
50:00hand it in,
50:01come out,
50:02make a
50:02statement,
50:03questions.
50:03Yeah.
50:04OK.
50:09However
50:10powerful Mark
50:11believes his
50:11expert reports
50:12are, he also
50:14knows they might
50:15not be enough
50:15for the CCRC.
50:19So, this is the
50:21international panel
50:22report.
50:22This is a separate
50:23report on top.
50:25To send cases back
50:27to the Court of
50:27Appeal, the CCRC
50:29usually insists on
50:30new evidence that
50:32wasn't available to
50:33the original defence.
50:35I'm afraid it was
50:36going to say,
50:38well, this could have
50:38all happened at trial.
50:41Morning.
50:41Morning, hello.
50:42You know that the
50:44first question that the
50:45CCRC and the Court of
50:46Appeal will ask you is,
50:48why did Lucy Letby not
50:48call this evidence in her
50:50defence at the trial?
50:51What do you say to that?
50:52It's a completely
50:53proper question.
50:55As you know, I was
50:56instructed afterwards,
50:58I was not the defence
50:59team at trial.
51:01If they dismiss this
51:02evidence to say, well,
51:03it could have been
51:04called at trial.
51:06She's innocent, but
51:08we're not going to let
51:09this evidence before
51:10the jury, we're not
51:11going to take any
51:11notice of it because
51:12they could have done
51:13that.
51:14So, we'll let the
51:15innocent person stay
51:16in prison.
51:17What is the logic of
51:19that?
51:20Can I just kind of
51:20that?
51:21Appeals have been
51:22thrown out over and
51:23over again twice before
51:24and families say that
51:26it's causing them
51:27distress.
51:28Obviously, they've been
51:29through a lot over the
51:30last couple of years
51:31through the initial case
51:32and now they might
51:33have to do this all
51:34over again.
51:35Yeah, and look, I
51:36represent my clients,
51:38all right?
51:40Without fear or favour,
51:41that's my job, okay?
51:44But these families have
51:45been through hell and
51:46back.
51:47I have said if they
51:49want to look at these
51:50reports, then they can
51:51look at them because
51:53what I'm after is the
51:54truth.
51:55That's what I'm doing
51:56and that's what these
51:57reports are.
51:59All right, okay,
52:00thank you for coming
52:01to the long today.
52:02To re-look at the
52:08cause of the baby's
52:09deaths, the expert
52:11panel was given
52:11access to all of the
52:13infant's medical records.
52:16To Professor Nina
52:17Modi, those records
52:19told an awful story of
52:21failure by the hospital
52:22and by the doctors.
52:25On reading through the
52:27detailed medical notes,
52:29what was harrowing was
52:30seeing a story unfold
52:32where possibly things
52:35could have been
52:35recognised earlier and
52:37interventions could have
52:38been put in place
52:39sooner.
52:39And perhaps for some of
52:41the babies, the outcomes
52:42might not have been what
52:43they were.
52:44This was deeply distressing.
52:47We now know that the
52:49increase in deaths
52:50coincided with the unit
52:51having to take babies
52:53that were more unwell
52:54than it was equipped
52:56or staffed for.
52:58This was a neonatal unit
52:59that was being required
53:01to look after babies
53:02who should not have been
53:03cared for there.
53:04The babies that we're
53:08referring to were all
53:09extremely vulnerable.
53:11Some of them were
53:12demonstrably and recognisably
53:14on an eye phage.
53:17Others could have been
53:18recognised to have been
53:19on an eye phage,
53:20but they were not
53:22monitored appropriately
53:23and they were not
53:23treated appropriately.
53:26Problems went unrecognised
53:28until the point at which
53:30a baby deteriorated
53:31very abruptly.
53:32So the babies might
53:35not have died
53:36had their difficulties
53:38been addressed earlier.
53:45So we're just coming
53:46round to the
53:47Sixth Horn College now.
53:50This is where I went
53:51with Lucy.
53:52It's just over here.
53:55This is where we spent
53:56most of our adolescence.
53:59It was at this point here
54:00where we were choosing
54:01which sort of
54:02A-levels we were going
54:03to do and Lucy was clear
54:05that she wanted to go
54:05and be a nurse and deal
54:07with, you know,
54:08really poorly babies.
54:10She was the only one
54:10with a clear sort of
54:12career path ahead of her
54:13that she wanted to do.
54:15We were here and then
54:16university and then a few
54:18years after university
54:19I think is when she's
54:20supposed to have gone off
54:21on this killing spree.
54:22I was at work when I heard
54:27that they were sort of
54:27returning the verdicts
54:28and sort of tuned in
54:29and I think I just
54:30sat there dumbfounded
54:32for a while
54:32not really knowing
54:33how to process
54:34what I was hearing.
54:35I didn't think it was real.
54:37I immediately switched
54:38to thinking,
54:39well, what's next?
54:39You know,
54:40what happens next?
54:40This can't be it.
54:41Like, you know,
54:42she can't just spend
54:42the rest of her life
54:43in prison.
54:45I'm living a life
54:46that Lucy should be
54:47living beside me
54:48in parallel.
54:48Like, we should both
54:49be having families
54:50and, you know,
54:52we both bought
54:53our houses
54:53and we were looking
54:54forward to the next
54:55chapters of our lives
54:56and then all this
54:56happened.
54:57It's just, yeah,
54:59there's so much guilt
54:59that I'm sort of
55:00living a life
55:01that Lucy should
55:01also be living.
55:09I do remember
55:10Lucy saying to me,
55:12Karen, you're the
55:12only person that
55:13hasn't asked me
55:14have I purposely
55:16harmed anybody.
55:17and I remember
55:19her looking at me
55:19and the reasons
55:21why I've never
55:22asked her is that
55:23I never thought
55:26she had.
55:30No, I just,
55:33I don't believe it.
55:35the centre of this trial
55:45was babies who died
55:46and almost died.
55:49Finally, at the verdict
55:51and after the sentencing,
55:53you had this burst
55:55of emotions.
55:56It was impossible
55:57to contain.
55:58the parents finally
56:01got their chance
56:01to talk about
56:03the absolutely
56:04harrowing ordeal.
56:06A mum who was
56:07desperate to hold
56:08her baby
56:09and couldn't get
56:09anywhere near
56:10because of all the
56:11doctors trying to
56:12save their life.
56:14Another of the babies
56:15was buried wearing
56:17a gown that Lucy
56:18Letby had
56:18dressed them in.
56:20You know,
56:22the empty car seats,
56:24the unpacked
56:25hospital bags,
56:26the nurseries
56:27at home
56:27that would never
56:28get slept in.
56:29One boy kept asking
56:33where his two
56:34triplet brothers are.
56:38You could really
56:39feel the anguish
56:41and the sort of
56:43destruction that it
56:44caused in their lives.
56:46You know,
56:46it broke families
56:47apart.
56:48It was,
56:49it's just awful,
56:50just shocking and awful.
56:59It's just awful.
Comments