Unfair to accuse Letby without proof - inquiry

Lucy Letby being arrested at home by police in 2018

A senior nurse has told the inquiry into Lucy Letby’s crimes it would not have been fair to accuse the nurse of harming babies without proof, even though consultants had already raised concerns.

An inquiry led by Lady Justice Thirlwall is looking into how Letby was able to murder and harm babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2015 and 2016.

Letby, originally from Hereford, was convicted of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others - including one baby she attempted to kill twice. She is serving 15 whole-life prison terms.

The Liverpool hearing was told that concerns had already been raised about the nurse as early as October 2015.

Anne Murphy, the lead nurse for children’s services at the time, was asked whether she had any concerns regarding Letby when she first heard that a consultant was worried when he learned Letby was on shift when the unexpected deaths occurred.

Mrs Murphy said she did not have concerns because there was nothing to indicate Letby was causing harm to the babies.

She told the inquiry: “I don’t think we felt, as nurses, that we could accuse her of doing actual harm without evidence.”

The nurse said different causes had been attributed to the babies' deaths, and no issues had been spotted during post-mortem examinations held at the time.

Mrs Murphy was asked by Nicholas de la Poer, a lawyer for the inquiry if, when it came to keeping babies safe, clear proof was needed before taking action - given the circumstances.

Letby is serving 15 whole-life prison terms for her crimes

Mrs Murphy said: “When a person is potentially accused of some wrongdoing, in that case, yes, I do think we should have had proof.”

The inquiry heard Mrs Murphy was shown a table, drawn up by a colleague, which showed Letby was on duty when the unexpected deaths took place.

In January 2016, the table was then updated revealing Letby was on duty when another two deaths occurred since October 2015.

She was asked for her thoughts were when she saw the table.

Mrs Murphy said: “At that stage, it was generally thought that everything had to be reviewed - not just the fact that there was a nurse they felt was potentially involved [but] all the other elements - the care practices, the standards that were there, infection control issues.

"There still wasn’t any evidence that she had done any wrong.”

The inquiry continues.