Some of the victims’ families, campaigners and the prime minister have described her behaviour as “cowardly” and a “slap in the face”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
10:55
Court hears traumatic testimony
What are the rules?
The rules around defendants appearing in court are laid out in guidance from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
There are no laws that make it a legal obligation – but the default is that they are expected to attend.
Some of the families in the Letby case along with Cheryl Korbel – the mother of nine-year-old Olivia Pratt-Korbel who was shot dead by Thomas Cashman – are calling for a new law that would close the loophole.
According to the CPS, there may be a good reason for the defendant not to attend court – for example if they are unwell or claim to be unwell.
Felicity Gerry KC, an international barrister and professor of legal practice, tells Sky News often young people do not attend court for fear that they won’t get bail and will therefore lose their homes and be sent straight to prison.
Advertisement
But when there is deemed to be no good reason, the judge can make an order to compel them to attend.
If they are on bail this will mean a warrant for their arrest so they can be brought to court. If they are already in custody, they can order the prison governor where they are being held to get their officers to “use force to secure attendance”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:11
Judge sentences killer nurse
What happens when force is used?
If both the judge and the prison governor have agreed the prisoner should attend, a team of typically three prison officers will be sent to their cell door, according to Ian Acheson, a former prison governor and Home Office official.
Once they explain the judge has made the order, most people comply, he says.
“If it’s made clear to the offender that they’ll be going to court, you exclude the possibility of refusal for around 95% of them. You get a bit of a feedback loop where they accept it’s going to happen.
“And guilty people who experience and express remorse usually want the opportunity to be able to see or speak to their victims or their families.”
But if “persuasion fails”, Mr Acheson explains: “That person would be physically restrained with the purpose of putting them in handcuffs.”
He adds: “Force is a very tightly governed thing. But prison officers have all the same powers as a police constable at that point and can use the same force as they can.”
In the face of violence, officers are dressed in personal protective equipment and can also use leg restraints.
They then take the prisoner in handcuffs to a prison van so they can be driven to court and placed in cells inside the court building.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:52
Letby sentencing no-show ‘disgusting’
Why might a prisoner still not come to the dock?
Even once prison staff have driven the defendant to court, they can still refuse to leave the cells.
“The judge would be informed the prisoner has resisted,” Mr Acheson says. “But then in theory it’s for the judge to then say: ‘I care’ or ‘I don’t care – bring them to court’.”
Reasons for not forcing them to the dock include the risk they could use the opportunity to “retraumatise victims” or “turn it into a circus”, which can often be the case among terrorists, according to Mr Acheson.
Wendy Joseph, a former Old Bailey judge, tells Sky News judges try to avoid these situations at all costs as they can be “devastating” for victims’ families.
But Mr Acheson believes that current guidance allows defendants to manipulate the system.
“As far I understand the discretion rests with the offender, which is morally wrong. The principle needs to belong to the judge – not the perpetrator”.
He adds while some argue forcing people to appear is “uncivilised”, in the case of Letby, he believes: “It’s more uncivilised to murder babies.”
“The occasions where it would be inappropriate are tiny in my opinion – and in Letby’s case there’s nothing significant that speaks to that.”
Professor Gerry, however, says the system needs to keep a sense of humanity for defendants – as well as victims.
“We’re not a country that shackles people and drags them to court as some kind of medieval practice. Reasons for refusal can be very complicated. I think it’s very dangerous to start calling for people to be forced to court.”
Why is sentencing so important?
Guidance on compelling people to come to court varies according to the offence and point in proceedings.
Mr Acheson says that in line with fair justice principles – judges should only be able to demand attendance once someone has been convicted, which means they wouldn’t have to be there for the verdicts being delivered.
Sentencing hearings are among the “most significant” for victims and their loved ones, because recently introduced impact statements allow them to show the perpetrator the effect their crimes have had on them.
And in the Letby case, this form of restorative justice is particularly important, Mr Acheson adds.
“People have been so grievously harmed by her – they deserve to look her in the eye and say ‘this is what you’ve done to me’.”
Judge Mr Justice Goss said in his sentencing remarks Letby will be given a transcript of them – along with the victim impact statements.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
9:02
Minister calls for sentencing change
So what could be changed?
In recent years a trend has emerged of criminals refusing to attend court – despite the serious nature of their crimes.
Examples include Koci Selamaj, who did not attend his sentencing for the murder of Sabina Nessa in London, and Cashman, who refused to appear after killing Olivia Pratt-Korbel in Liverpool.
Her mother’s Face The Family campaign is calling for the legal loophole to be closed.
Children’s minister Claire Coutinho has told Sky News “more law is probably required”. “The justice secretary [Alex Chalk] said he’s very committed to making sure these laws are in place,” she said.
Former Justice Secretary Robert Buckland said the new Victims and Prisoners Bill – which is going through parliament – could provide the answer.
He suggested this could include forcing defendants to watch proceedings via video link from their cells – something Mr Acheson describes as a “silly distraction”.
Legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg said the only options available are dragging people by force – or threatening them with longer prison sentences – neither of which he agrees with.
“There’s no point in imposing a prison sentence on someone who’s going to be in prison for the rest of their lives,” he told Sky News.
MasterChef host Gregg Wallace has stepped down over allegations he made a series of inappropriate sexual comments on a range of programmes over 17 years.
Broadcaster Kirsty Wark is among 13 people who have made claims, with Wallace being investigated by MasterChef’s production company Banijay UK.
In an interview with the BBC, the Newsnight presenter, who was a celebrity contestant on MasterChef in 2011, claimed Wallace used “sexualised language”.
“There were two occasions in particular where he used sexualised language in front of a number of people and it wasn’t as if it was anyone engaged with this,” Wark said.
“It was completely one-way traffic. I think people were uncomfortable and something that I really didn’t expect to happen.”
Sky News has contacted Wallace’s representative for comment.
‘Fully cooperating’
Banijay UK said the complaints were made to the BBC this week by “individuals in relation to historical allegations of misconduct while working with Gregg Wallace on one of our shows”.
The company said the 60-year-old, who has been a co-presenter and judge of the popular cooking show since 2005, was “committed to fully cooperating throughout the process”.
“Whilst these complainants have not raised the allegations directly with our show producers or parent company Banijay UK, we feel that it is appropriate to conduct an immediate, external review to fully and impartially investigate,” the company said.
“While this review is under way, Gregg Wallace will be stepping away from his role on MasterChef and is committed to fully co-operating throughout the process.
“Banijay UK’s duty of care to staff is always a priority and our expectations regarding behaviour are made clear to both cast and crew on all productions, with multiple ways of raising concerns, including anonymously, clearly promoted on set.
“Whilst these are historical allegations, incidences brought to our attention where these expectations are not met, are thoroughly investigated and addressed appropriately.”
A BBC spokesman said: “We take any issues that are raised with us seriously and we have robust processes in place to deal with them.
“We are always clear that any behaviour which falls below the standards expected by the BBC will not be tolerated.
“Where an individual is contracted directly by an external production company we share any complaints or concerns with that company and we will always support them when addressing them.”
Previous investigation
Last month, Wallace responded to reports that a previous BBC review had found he could continue working at the corporation following reports of an alleged incident in 2018 when he appeared on Impossible Celebrities.
Wallace said those claims had been investigated “promptly” at the time and said he had not said “anything sexual” while appearing on the game show more than half a decade ago.
In an Instagram post following an article in The Sun newspaper, he wrote: “The story that’s hitting the newspapers was investigated promptly when it happened six years ago by the BBC.
“And the outcome of that was that I hadn’t said anything sexual. I’ll need to repeat this again. I didn’t say anything sexual.”
Alongside MasterChef, Wallace presented Inside The Factory for BBC Two from 2015.
Wallace has featured on various BBC shows over the years, including Saturday Kitchen, Eat Well For Less, Supermarket Secrets, Celebrity MasterChef and MasterChef: The Professionals, as well as being a Strictly Come Dancing contestant in 2014.
He was made an MBE for services to food and charity last year.
Recorded episodes of MasterChef: The Professionals featuring Wallace will be transmitted as planned, the PA news agency understands.
The Scottish government has announced that all pensioners in Scotland will receive a winter fuel payment in 2025/26.
The devolved benefit is expected to come into force by next winter and will help the estimated 900,000 people north of the border who were cut off from accessing the winter fuel payment which used to be universal.
Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville announced the news in a statement to the Scottish parliament on Thursday.
It comes after both the UK and Scottish governments earlier this year axed the universal winter fuel payment, except for those in receipt of pension credit or other means-tested benefits.
At Westminster, Chancellor Rachel Reeves claimed the decision was made due to financial woes inherited from the previous Conservative government.
Ms Reeves said the restriction would save the Treasury around £1.4bn this financial year.
The decision led to the Scottish government – which was due to take control over a similar payment through the devolved Social Security Scotland but has since announced a delay – to follow suit.
More on Benefits
Related Topics:
The payment is a devolved matter in Scotland and Northern Ireland, however the SNP government said Labour’s approach would cause up to a £160m cut to Scottish funding in 2024-25.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.
Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
You can receive Breaking News alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News App. You can also follow @SkyNews on X or subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.
Two police officers have been served with misconduct notices after a teenager with autism escaped from a police car and died on the M5.
Tamzin Hall, from Wellington, was hit by a car on the M5 between junction 25 at Taunton and 24 at Bridgwater shortly after 11pm on 11 November and sustained fatal injuries.
She had been under arrest at the time and was travelling in an Avon and Somerset Police car which had stopped on the motorway, an inquest at Wells Town Hall heard on Tuesday.
Tamzin was being taken to custody when officers pulled over for “safety reasons”, the Independent Office for Police Conduct said.
She had been handcuffed with her hands in front of her and had an officer sat beside her, the IOPC added.
She fled the stationary marked police car on the northbound carriageway and died after she was hit by a car on the southbound carriageway.
In a statement the IOPC said the two officers from Avon and Somerset Police had been served misconduct notices for a “potential breach of their duties and responsibilities”.
Such notices advise officers their conduct is subject to an investigation, but does not necessarily mean any disciplinary proceedings will follow.
IOPC regional director David Ford said: “My thoughts and sympathies remain with Tamzin’s family and friends, and everyone affected by the tragic events of that evening.
“We have met with Tamzin’s family to offer our condolences and to outline how our investigation will progress. We will provide them with regular updates as our inquiries continue.
“Our investigation is in the early stages and we are working hard to establish the exact circumstances of what took place, from the time of Tamzin’s arrest, to how events unfolded a short time later on the M5.”
The IOPC began its investigation earlier this month and is looking into what contact the police had with Tamzin prior to her death, including their actions, decision-making and risk assessments of the situation, and whether these followed the relevant training and policies.