Connect with us

Published

on

A hospital nurse accused of murdering seven babies was interrupted by one of her victim’s mothers as she was fatally attacking her newborn son, prosecutors say.

Lucy Letby allegedly killed Child E by an injection of air into the bloodstream while working at the neo-natal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, Manchester Crown Court heard.

Prosecutor Nick Johnson KC said that on the evening of 3 August 2015, Child E’s mother visited her son in the unit.

Mr Johnson said: “We say that she interrupted Lucy Letby who was attacking (Child E), although she did not realise it at the time.”

When the mother arrived, her son was “distressed” and bleeding from the mouth, the court heard.

The mother recalled Letby tried to reassure her, he said, and told her a registrar would review the youngster’s condition and she should leave the unit.

“‘Trust me, I’m a nurse’. That’s what she told (the mother),” said Mr Johnson.

“We suggest she was fobbed off by Lucy Letby.”

Pic: Shutterstock
Image:
Pic: Shutterstock

Child E went on to suffer significant blood loss, say the Crown, later in the evening, with a treating registrar saying he had never encountered such a large bleed in a small baby.

Following Child E’s death in the early hours of 4 August, the Crown said Letby made “fraudulent” nursing notes which were “false, misleading and designed to cover her tracks”.

Letby, 32, denies seven counts of murder and 10 counts of attempted murder.

The second day of the prosecution opening at court also heard how Letby went on to show “very unusual interest” in Child E’s family and the families of her other alleged victims.

Mr Johnson said she carried out social media searches on Child E’s family two days after the youngster’s death and again on numerous occasions in the following months, including “even on Christmas Day”.

Jurors heard how the day after allegedly murdering Child E, Letby allegedly used insulin for the first time to poison a baby by trying to murder child E’s twin brother, child F.

Child F was prescribed a TPN (total parenteral nutrition) bag of fluids and later suffered an unexpected drop in his blood sugar levels and surge in heart rate. Checks on his insulin levels were carried out which showed, “conclusive evidence” someone had given child F insulin to poison him.

Mr Johnson said no other baby on the neo-natal unit was prescribed insulin so child F could not have received the drug intended for some other child by negligence.

Mr Johnson said the prosecution allege Letby had injected insulin into the TPN bag before it was hung up to give to the child.

He added: “You know who was in the room and you know from the records, who hung the bag.

“It can’t have been an accident.”

Prosecutors earlier alleged Letby murdered a five-day-old baby by injecting air into his stomach through a nose tube.

She allegedly killed the baby boy, Child C, just six days after murdering for the first time, when she killed another baby boy, Child A, and days later attacked Child B.

Child C died because the air injected into his stomach made him unable to breathe and he suffered a cardiac arrest, Mr Johnson told the jury.

The boy had been born prematurely at 30 weeks on 10 June 2015 weighing only 800 grams, but despite going into intensive care was in good condition.

Five days later, on the nightshift of 14 June, Letby was supposed to be looking after another, more poorly baby, in another room.

But she was the only person in the room when Child C suddenly and unexpectedly collapsed.

Mr Johnson said an independent pathologist – when reviewing the case – concluded Child C died because his breathing became compromised and he suffered a cardiac arrest.

The prosecutor told jurors: “If you are trying to murder a child in a neo-natal unit, it is a fairly effective way of doing it. It doesn’t really leave much trace.”

Lucy Letby van arrives
Image:
Lucy Letby arrives on day one of the trial

He said on the afternoon of 14 June, 2015 – hours after Child C died – the defendant searched on Facebook for the youngster’s parents.

Mr Johnson suggested from the timings that this was “one of the first things she did when waking up” after she had earlier finished her shift at about 8am.

He then moved on to detailing the death of Child D, who the Crown say was murdered by Letby with an intentional injection of air into the bloodstream.

Letby sent “many messages” to friends in the wake of Child D’s death and the preceding deaths and collapses in which she suggested they could all clearly be explained as natural causes.

The defendant later told police she could not explain why she had searched on Facebook for Child D’s parents in the aftermath of her death.

She was also asked about another message in which she had referred to an “element of fate” being involved.

Mr Johnson told the jury: “We say, tragically for (Child D) her bad luck or fate was the fact that Lucy Letby was working in the neo-natal unit that night.”

The trial continues on Wednesday.

Continue Reading

UK

Feminists ‘feel braver about speaking out’ after gender ruling – but critics say it ‘stokes culture war’

Published

on

By

Feminists 'feel braver about speaking out' after gender ruling - but critics say it 'stokes culture war'

A former Labour MP who quit the party over Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership has welcomed the landmark Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman as a “victory for feminists”.

Rosie Duffield, now the independent MP for Canterbury, said the judgment helped resolve the “lack of clarity” that has existed in the politics around the issue “for years”.

She was speaking to Ali Fortescue on the Politics Hub on the same day the UK’s highest court delivered its verdict on one of the most contentious debates in politics.

Politics latest: MPs respond to Supreme Court ruling on gender

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

How do you define a woman in law?

The judges were asked to rule on how “sex” is defined in the 2010 Equality Act – whether that means biological sex or “certificated” sex, as legally defined by the 2004 Gender Recognition Act.

Their unanimous decision was that the definition of a “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refers to “a biological woman and biological sex”.

Asked what she made about comments by fellow independent MP John McDonnell – who said the court “failed to hear the voice of a single trans person” and that the decision “lacked humanity and fairness” as a result, she said: “This ruling doesn’t affect trans people in the slightest.

“It’s about women’s rights – women’s rights to single sex spaces, women’s rights, not to be discriminated against.

“It literally doesn’t change a single thing for trans rights and that lack of understanding from a senior politician about the law is a bit worrying, actually.”

However, Maggie Chapman, a Scottish Green MSP, disagreed with Ms Duffield and said she was “concerned” about the impact the ruling would have on trans people “and for the services and facilities they have been using and have had access to for decades now”.

Susan Smith and Marion Calder give a statement, as the Supreme Court rules on an appeal by For Women Scotland about whether a person with a full gender recognition certificate which recognises that their gender is female is a woman under British equality laws, outside the Supreme Court in London, Britain, April 16, 2025. REUTERS/Maja Smiejkowska
Image:
Susan Smith and Marion Calder, directors of For Women Scotland celebrate after the ruling. Pic: Reuters

“One of the grave concerns that we have with this ruling is that it will embolden people to challenge trans people who have every right to access services,” she said.

“We know that over the last few years… their [trans people’s] lives have become increasingly difficult, they have been blocked from accessing services they need.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Today’s ruling only stokes the culture war further’

Delivering the ruling at the London court on Wednesday, Lord Hodge said: “But we counsel against reading this judgment as a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another. It is not.

Campaigners for For Women Scotland (FWS) celebrate outside the Supreme Court in London after terms "woman" and "sex" in the Equality Act refer to a biological woman and biological sex, the Supreme Court has ruled. Picture date: Wednesday April 16, 2025.
Image:
Campaigners celebrate outside the Supreme Court. Pic: PA

“The Equality Act 2010 gives transgender people protection, not only against discrimination through the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, but also against direct discrimination, indirect discrimination and harassment in substance in their acquired gender.

“This is the application of the principle of discrimination by association. Those statutory protections are available to transgender people, whether or not they possess a gender recognition certificate.”

Read more:
Supreme Court decision has immediate real-world consequences
Prisons across England and Wales now 98.9% full

Asked whether she believed the judgment could “draw a line” under the culture war, Ms Chapman told Fortescue: “Today’s judgment only stokes that culture war further.”

And she said that while Lord Hodge was correct to say there were protections in law for trans people in the 2020 Equality Act, the judgment “doesn’t prevent things happening”.

“It may offer protections once bad things have happened, once harassment, once discrimination, once bigotry, once assaults have happened,” she said.

She also warned some groups “aren’t going to be satisfied with today’s ruling”.

“We know that there are individuals and there are groups who actually want to roll back even further – they want to get rid of the Gender Recognition Act from 2004,” she said.

“I think today’s ruling just emboldens those views.”

Continue Reading

UK

Arsenal reach Champions League semi-final with dramatic win over Real Madrid

Published

on

By

Arsenal reach Champions League semi-final with dramatic win over Real Madrid

Arsenal have reached the semi-finals of the Champions League after a dramatic victory over holders Real Madrid in Spain.

The north London side, who became the first English team to win twice at the Bernabeu following their triumph there 19 years ago, will face Paris Saint-Germain in the last four after the French side beat Aston Villa on Tuesday.

It is the third time the Gunners have made it through to the semis of the top club football tournament in Europe, and the first since 2009.

Arsenal went into the second leg of their quarter-final clash on Wednesday with a 3-0 lead.

Backed by a raucous home crowd, Madrid tried to get off to a strong start and Kylian Mbappe scored after two minutes. However, the goal was disallowed for a clear offside.

Arsenal had the chance to go ahead in the 13th minute but winger Bukayo Saka missed a penalty.

The Spanish hosts were awarded a penalty of their own about 10 minutes later when Mbappe stumbled under pressure from Declan Rice in the box – but the decision was overturned by VAR.

More on Arsenal

Saka atoned for his tepid penalty as he chipped the ball past Madrid’s keeper Thibaut Courtois when put through on goal by auxiliary striker Mikel Merino in the 65th minute.

But Arsenal were pegged back just two minutes later as Vinicius Junior caught William Saliba dawdling on the ball and fired Real Madrid level.

Arsenal’s resolute defending kept the home side at bay until Gabriel Martinelli made a late break through the home side’s defence to put his side 2-1 ahead three minutes into injury time, as the Gunners made it 5-1 on aggregate.

(L-R) Arsenal's Declan Rice and Mikel Merino celebrate after the defeat against Real Madrid. Pic: AP
Image:
(L-R) Arsenal’s Declan Rice and Mikel Merino celebrate after the defeat against Real Madrid. Pic: AP

‘We knew we were going to win’, says Rice

Arsenal midfielder Declan Rice has insisted his team are intent on winning the Champions League after their victory in Madrid.

Speaking to TNT Sport, Rice, who was named player of the match, said: “It’s such a special night, a historic one for the club. We have the objective of playing the best and winning the competition.

“We had so much belief and confidence from that first leg and came here to win the game. We knew we were going to suffer but we knew we were going to win. We had it in our minds, then we did it [in] real life. What a night.

“I knew when I signed, this club was on an upward trajectory. It’s been tough in the Premier League but in this competition we’ve done amazingly well.

“It’s PSG next, who are an amazing team.”

‘We have to be very proud of ourselves’, says Arteta

Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta told TNT Sport: “One of the best nights in my football career.

“We played against a team with the biggest history.

“To be able to win the tie in the manner we have done, I think we have to be very proud of ourselves.”

He added: “The history we have in this competition is so short. The third time in our history of what we have just done and we have to build on that. All this experience is going to help us, for sure.”

Real Madrid were seeking their third Champions League title in four seasons.

Mbappe twisted ankle

Their forward Mbappe twisted his right ankle during the game and was jeered by part of the crowd when his substitution was announced after a lacklustre performance.

The French star, who is still looking for his first Champions League title, was replaced by Brahim Diaz in the 75th minute following his injury. He was able to walk off the pitch by himself, but was limping slightly.

The other semi-final will be between Barcelona and Inter Milan.

The first legs are set to be played on 29 and 30 April, with the second legs on 6 and 7 May.

The final will be on 31 May.

Continue Reading

UK

Labour’s policy on China under the spotlight

Published

on

By

Labour's policy on China under the spotlight

After a dramatic weekend with ministers passing legislation to wrest control of British Steel from its Chinese owners, Labour’s China policy is under the spotlight.

Sir Keir Starmer’s government came in, promising a “strategic and long term” relationship with Beijing, after years of “inconsistency” under the Conservatives.

David Lammy went on the first trip by a foreign secretary in six years. Sir Keir met Xi Jinping in the margins of the G20 in November and floated a UK-China visit.

Rachel Reeves went to the Chinese capital in January, saying her trip had secured £600m of growth for the UK economy.

Politics latest: Record number of migrants cross the English Channel

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds appeared to turn the tables this weekend, suggesting Chinese parent company Jingye had neglected or even sabotaged British Steel after buying it five years ago. He told Sky News he would not personally “bring a Chinese company into our steel sector”.

He changed his tune on Tuesday, while visiting Scunthorpe to oversee the delivery of a shipment of materials, saying the row was just with one company.

It’s now emerged he is expected to travel to China later this year, to restart a joint economic and trade commission which has been on ice since 2018.

But this is no return to the golden age of some years back.

Tensions in government over China may well emerge in the coming months – as the Treasury’s drive for investment and growth jars with concerns over security.

Ministers are discussing whether parts of the Chinese state should be designated a national security threat, under new rules on foreign influence, due to come in this summer.

Russia and Iran will be covered by the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme – but ministers are yet to say anything about China.

Applying it even in a limited way would be controversial with large companies and within government – seen as a barrier to doing business.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Reynolds rows back on China comments

The Treasury’s view is that engagement with the world’s second largest economy is essential to economic growth.

Ed Miliband’s energy department is pursuing big clean energy projects, many of them backed by Chinese investment.

Wholly state-owned companies already own stakes in Heathrow Airport and Thames Water.

While Huawei was dramatically banned from the UK’s 5G network back in 2020, Chinese companies fund nuclear power, and the National Grid network.

Senior Conservatives, some sanctioned by the Chinese government, have been vocal about what they see as national security risks from this approach.

A report by parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee in 2023 said China had penetrated “every sector” of the UK economy. It warned that “Chinese money was readily accepted by HM Government with few questions asked”.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

Some Labour MPs view this with growing concern. One senior MP, speaking privately, said: “The problem is it costs billions of pounds to build reservoirs and nuclear reactors, and we’re not raising that from taxes, so China is where we get that investment.

“There are significant concerns in the party – whether it’s about the security of critical sectors, espionage, or concerns about the use of slave labour in their products.”

Liam Byrne, the Labour chair of the business and trade committee, said there needed to be clearer ground rules on Chinese investment.

Read more:
‘Likely’ British Steel will be nationalised
Was Reynolds nobbled by Number 10 over China?

If we want to stay ahead of our adversaries, we’ve got to make sure that we’re not handing the most advanced technology to our adversaries,” he said.

“We need a clear definition of economic security from the government, we need a clear threat assessment, and we need a clear way in which business and government are going to work hand in hand to keep our country safe in what are now very different and more dangerous times.”

After a rebuke from the Chinese embassy, which defended the actions of Jingye, the government insists nothing has changed in the relationship.

China is now embroiled in a trade war with the US, and the global trade rules are changing.

The tension emerging is whether economic growth overrides security concerns.

Continue Reading

Trending