“Unrelenting evil: Is the nurse accused of killing seven babies on trial in Manchester?

Lucy Letby, who worked as a nurse in the neonatal unit of a Chester hospital, denies all allegations.

In Manchester, nurse Lucy Letby is on trial for the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of ten more in the neonatal unit of Chester Hospital. According to witnesses, Letbi killed a premature baby girl on her fourth attempt and then sent her parents a condolence card. “32-year-old nurse denies 22 charges against her.”

The sign of the Countess of Chester’s Hospital, where Lucy Letby worked. The prosecutor, royal advocate Nick Johnson, said that she was a “perennial evil” in the neonatal ward of the hospital. This was an ordinary general hospital, of which there are many throughout the country. The difference, according to the lawyer, was that a poisoner was working in the neonatal ward. “Until January 2015, the infant mortality rate in the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital was comparable to other similar units,” he noted. “However, over the next year and a half, the number of infants who died increased sharply.” This growth was noticed by the hospital’s consultants. In addition, they became concerned that unconscious children were not responding to timely resuscitation, but then some of them unexpectedly and completely recovered. Although the reasons for the unusual deaths, sudden deteriorations, and equally sudden recoveries could not be determined, they had one common denominator: the presence of one of the neonatal nurses. That nurse was Lucy Letby. As a result, hospital authorities called in the police, who conducted a thorough and painstaking investigation.

The Royal Court building in Manchester, where the trial of Lucy Letby is taking place. We explain quickly, simply, and clearly what happened, why it matters, and what happens next. Episodes End of story. Podcast Advertising. Speaking in court, Nick Johnson noted that one of the crimes she is accused of, the murder of a premature baby girl on the fourth attempt, stands out even among the other charges in this unusually gruesome case. The girl, referred to in legal documents as “Child I,” was in serious but stable condition, but as Johnson said, Lucy Letby ultimately succeeded in killing her on the fourth attempt. He said the nurse administered “Child I” air for the first time, but the alarm went off. On the second attempt, another hospital worker noticed her standing in the doorway of a darkened room with an incubator containing a baby girl. Letby calmly said that the child seemed pale for some reason. The nurse on duty turned on the light, saw that the girl was not breathing, but managed to save her. After the third attempt, “Child I” again found excessive air in the stomach. The girl was then temporarily transferred to another hospital, where her condition stabilized, and then brought back to Chester. When the medical alarm went off after the fourth attempt, Letbi found herself back by the incubator. The girl died that morning.

The police van carrying Lucy Letby arrives at Chester Court in 2020. She was arrested three times during the investigation, which began in 2017. The prosecutor said that although the girl was born prematurely and very small, she survived the first two months and was doing well when she was transferred to Letby’s care. Everything Letby did, Johnson said, she did persistently, calculatedly, and calmly. The court also heard how, immediately after the death of “Child I,” her parents were taken to a separate room and asked if the mother wanted to redeem her one last time. Just as the mother was doing it, Sister Letby entered the bathroom. According to the mother, she smiled and started talking about how she had been present at the baby’s first bath and how much the girl had enjoyed it. The jury was also told that Letby later sent a condolence card to the deceased girl’s parents and even took a picture of her, saving the image on her smartphone. When questioned by the police, the nurse agreed that it was not customary to send such cards to parents, but added that hospital staff usually do not get to know patients’ relatives as well as she did the parents of “Child I”.

The building where Letby worked. In court, a case was announced when the actions of Lucy Letby raised suspicions for pediatrician Ravi Jarayama. Dr. Jayaram assisted in the delivery of Baby K, who was born prematurely at 25 weeks. Johnson told the jury that this doctor had previously noticed that unexplained and unexpected infant deaths or sudden declines in health often occurred in Letby’s presence. Upon learning that this nurse happened to be on duty in the ward where “Child K” was, Jaram rushed to the incubator. He found her standing over the baby, and the monitor showed that the level of oxygen saturation in his blood had dropped dangerously, somewhere around 80% (it is considered dangerous when the oxygen level drops below 95%). Theoretically, the medical alarm should have worked, but it can be disabled for a minute somewhere. The pediatrician noticed that the baby’s chest was not rising and asked Letbi what had happened. She replied that the baby’s condition had “just started to get worse. The doctor noticed that the airway was displaced. An actively moving child can move it on its own, but “K” was very premature and under the influence of sedatives. That same morning, Sister Letby again found herself by the crib of “Child K” and began calling for help. She said she had tried to help the child breathe, but for some reason the breathing tube had slipped too far down the child’s throat. This infant was later transferred to another hospital, but his condition did not improve and he died two days later.

The doctors’ suspicions eventually led to a police investigation. Earlier, the prosecutor told the court about the attempted murders of another premature baby girl, referred to in court as “Child X,” which occurred two nights in a row. The girl had serious health problems, but against this background her condition deteriorated sharply and inexplicably twice. He said that the first night it happened, Letbi was the nurse on duty with the girl. After the girl inexplicably lost consciousness, she was transferred to another hospital where she became much better. “This is a remarkable fact,” Johnson observed. “As soon as the children were taken out of the hospital and away from Lucy Letby’s influence, their condition suddenly and markedly improved.” He said that a week after the child lost consciousness, Letby searched Facebook for the parents of that girl and the families of two other children she is accused of attacking. The Court heard another case, also involving a girl, referred to as “Child J”. She was also born prematurely, but after surgery on her intestines, she was doing well. But in November 2015, on a night when Letby was one of six nurses on duty, the girl had serious breathing problems. She was taken to the ICU and at 06:56 GMT she had a seizure. At 07:20 Letbi administered some medication to the child. Within minutes, “Child J” lost consciousness again and the doctors had to resuscitate her. An independent medical examiner who reviewed the case of “Child J” stated that her condition was consistent with airway obstruction, i.e. strangulation. Sister Letby again searched for the child’s parents on Facebook.

The police conducted a thorough search of Letbi’s home, during which they found her diary with notes about which child and what medication she’d administered. The jury also heard about the twin brothers (“Child L” and “Child M”). Letb is accused of attempting to kill them in April 2016. At that time, the hospital had moved her to day shifts only because doctors were concerned about the correlation between her presence and unexpected deaths and life-threatening incidents during night shifts. Prosecutors alleged that Letby tried to kill “Child L” by adding insulin to her formula while injecting air into “Child M’s” vein. As a result, both boys were on the verge of death. When Lucy Letby’s house in Chester was searched two years later, medical records were found detailing what medications had been given to whom. She categorically denies that these recordings were “souvenirs” and that she deliberately intended to harm the children. The process continues.