The public inquiry into Lucy Letby’s crimes will not be halted, its chairwoman has ruled, despite requests from hospital executives to do so.
On Wednesday, Lady Justice Thirlwall refused the application from the senior hospital managers to pause the inquiry, pending the outcome of Letby’s latest challenge to her multiple convictions for murder and attempted murder.
Since September, the Thirlwall Inquiry has been examining how the former neonatal nurse was able to murder or attack 14 babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
Evidence was completed last month and the final report is due to be published in November.
In closing submissions on Tuesday, Kate Blackwell QC, representing former chief executive Tony Chambers, former medical director Ian Harvey, former director of nursing Alison Kelly and former HR director Sue Hodkinson, said there was a “real possibility” that Letby‘s convictions may be overturned, and to continue the report work would be unfair to her clients.
The former senior managers have also made a parallel request to the health secretary, Wes Streeting, to suspend the inquiry on similar grounds.
Richard Baker KC, representing the families of Letby’s victims, said the applications to stop the inquiry were motivated by a desire from the UK’s most prolific child serial killer to “attempt to control the narrative” and for the executives “to avoid criticism”.
Families of Lucy Letby victims hit out at calls to suspend public inquiry
Lucy Letby’s lawyers call for baby deaths inquiry to be suspended
Lucy Letby: Police investigation into hospital widened to include gross negligence manslaughter
Letby’s latest legal challenge to her multiple convictions is based on recent medical evidence presented by an international panel of neonatologists and paediatric specialists, working pro bono for Letby’s defence team, which found that bad medical care and natural causes were the reasons for the collapses and deaths attributed to the 35-year-old nurse.
Those findings will be passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, and Letby’s legal team hopes her case will eventually be referred back to the Court of Appeal after two failed bids.
Sitting at Liverpool Town Hall, Lady Justice Thirlwall said: “I’m not satisfied that there is any unfairness in the current situation. I am satisfied that the process has been fair.
“As I have said before, it is not the actions of Lucy Letby that I am scrutinising, it is the actions of all those who were in the hospital… and what they did at the time, in the light of what they knew at the time and in the light of what they should have known at the time.”
Read more:
Why are there calls to suspend Letby inquiry?
Hospital chief ‘concerned about wrongful Letby conviction’
Senior Tory MP calls for Letby retrial
She continued: “There are already large numbers of concessions about what was not done and what should have been done. Those significant concessions come from the organisations and the hospital including the doctors and the managers.
“Perhaps principle, and most obvious, among the concessions made by just about everyone is the acknowledgement that there was a total failure of safeguarding at every level, and that will not change.
“It is a matter which has been debated at some length in the course of the inquiry and one that it seems to me will inevitably feature in any report.”
Be the first to get Breaking News
Install the Sky News app for free
Follow our channel and never miss an update
Letby, 35, from Hereford, is serving 15 whole-life orders after she was convicted across two trials at Manchester Crown Court of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others, with two attempts on one of her victims, between June 2015 and June 2016.
Letby’s barrister Mark McDonald said today’s decision was “a great shame”.
“Sadly, despite the millions of pounds that have been spent, any report and recommendations will one day be seen as unreliable and redundant.
“I will continue to represent Ms Letby without fear or favour and ensure the many flaws in the case are put before the Court of Appeal. If the numerous experts who have come forward are right, a young innocent woman is in prison for crimes she has not committed.”
