After Lucy Letby was sentenced to 15 whole-life terms for murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others, an inquiry was launched to ensure lessons were learnt.
The Thirlwall Inquiry is examining three broad themes – the experiences of all victims’ parents, how the concerns of clinicians were handled, and to ensure lessons are learnt from the case of the most prolific child serial killer in modern British history.
About 133 witnesses, including parents who lost their children, hospital executives, and Letby’s former colleagues at the Countess of Chester Hospital, have provided live evidence to the inquiry since September, with a further 396 giving written statements.
Inquiry chair Lady Justice Thirlwall is expected to publish her official report in the autumn, outlining the detailed findings and recommendations based on the evidence that has been heard.
This week, the Thirlwall Inquiry is hearing closing submissions from the various interested parties. Here’s what has been said during the key testimonies so far.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:34
From September 2024: Letby public inquiry set to begin
Why is it called the Thirwall inquiry and why are there calls for it to be suspended?
Opening the inquiry at Liverpool Town Hall on 10 September last year, Lady Justice Thirlwall said the probe bears her surname so that the parents do not repeatedly see the name of the person convicted of harming their babies.
She said the babies who died or were injured would be at the “heart of the inquiry” and condemned comments at the time that questioned the validity of Letby’s convictions – which the nurse tried and failed to challenge at the Court of Appeal – and some of the evidence used at trial.
The inquiry also remains separate to a 14-member expert panel, led by retired neonatologist Dr Shoo Lee and senior Conservative MP David Davis, which in February said it had analysed medical evidence considered during Letby’s trial and claimed there was no medical evidence that the nurse murdered or attempted to murder 14 premature babies.
Letby’s lawyers have since applied for a review of her case as a “potential miscarriage of justice” by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) after two failed bids at the Court of Appeal.
On Monday, the judge said she had received a request last month from lawyers representing former executives at the Countess of Chester Hospital asking for the public inquiry to be suspended.
Lady Justice Thirlwall also said she had recently received a written request from solicitors representing Letby for her to pause the inquiry.
In the letter to the judge, which Sky News has seen, Letby’s lawyers warned Lady Justice Thirlwall that her final report would “not only be redundant but likely unreliable” if it was not put on hold until after the conclusion of the former nurse’s CCRC application.
Image: Chair of the inquiry Lady Justice Thirlwall. Pic: PA
Letby couldn’t ‘wait to get first death out of the way’
One of the nurses who started as a newly qualified nurse at the Countess of Chester Hospital on the same day as Letby told the inquiry that the serial killer had told her she “can’t wait for her first death to get it out the way”.
The nurse said she thought the comment was “strange” at the time, but she put it down to Letby just making conversation.
She also recalled Letby being “animated” when telling her she had been involved with resuscitation attempts of a child on the ward in 2012.
“It was kind of like she was excited to tell me about it,” the nurse said.
‘Likely’ Letby murdered or attacked more children
Neonatal clinical lead at the Countess of Chester Hospital, Dr Stephen Brearey, told the inquiry that he thought it was “likely” Letby murdered or started to harm babies prior to June 2015.
He agreed that “on reflection” several unexpected collapses and deaths before that date now “appear suspicious”.
Dr Brearey added he did not have concerns about those incidents at the time, saying that hospital staff “thought we were going through a busy or particularly difficult patch”.
Image: The Countess of Chester Hospital in 2023. Pic: PA
The inquiry was told that the dislodgement of breathing tubes, which was how Letby tried to kill Child K, generally occurs on less than 1% of shifts.
However, it happened on 40% of shifts that Letby worked when she was a trainee at Liverpool Women’s Hospital.
Newborn given potentially fatal morphine overdose
Two years before Letby carried out the murder of Child A, she and another nurse gave a potentially fatal dose of morphine to a newborn baby.
Neonatal unit ward deputy ward manager, Yvonne Griffiths, told the inquiry that the infant received 10 times the correct amount of the painkiller at the end of a night shift in July 2013.
Describing it as a “very serious error”, she said the infant could have died if colleagues had not spotted the error an hour later.
Letby was told she had to stop administering controlled drugs as a result of the error, a decision that she told management she was not happy about.
Letby offered ‘tips’ on how to get away with murder
In a WhatsApp exchange in 2017, Letby and union rep Hayley Griffiths discussed the US legal drama How To Get Away With Murder.
The discussion took place a year after the neonatal nurse was moved to clerical duties following concerns she may have been deliberately harming babies.
In a message to Letby, Ms Griffiths wrote: “I’m currently watching a programme called How To Get Away With Murder. I’m learning some good tips.”
To which Letby replied: “I could have given you some tips x.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:42
From 2023: Former health secretary Steve Barclay on Letby inquiry
Ms Griffiths responded saying she needed “someone to practice on to see if [she] could get away with it”, and Letby replied: “I can think of two people you could practice on and will help you cover it up x.”
The union rep said: “I truly and deeply regret having started that conversation… this is completely unprofessional.”
No support or counselling given to parents
The parents of two triplet boys murdered by Letby told the inquiry they were given no support or counselling after the deaths of their children.
The children died on successive days in June 2016. Letby was their designated nurse and their deaths led to her being removed from the Countess of Chester Hospital’s neonatal unit to a non-patient facing role.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:47
How the police caught Lucy Letby
The triplets’ father said: “Following the deaths of our children, we didn’t receive any support or counselling from anyone. Had we received some support, we might have been in a better position to try and act on what our instincts were telling us, which was that something had gone badly wrong.”
Senior consultant: ‘I should have been braver’
Letby’s trial in 2023 heard that senior paediatrician Dr Ravi Jayaram caught the serial killer “virtually red-handed” after an incident in a nursery room at the hospital in February 2016.
Addressing that incident while giving evidence at the inquiry, Dr Jayaram said he had walked into the nursery after feeling “significant discomfort” that Letby was alone with Child K.
After walking in, he said he saw “a baby clearly deteriorating” and the child’s endotracheal tube (ET) dislodged. Despite his concern over the incident, the consultant did not tell anyone at the hospital, or the police.
Explaining why he said nothing, Dr Jayaram said: “It’s the fear of not being believed. It’s the fear of ridicule. It’s the fear of accusations of bullying.
“I should have been braver and should have had more courage because it was not just an isolated thing. There was already a lot of other information.”
Image: Dr Ravi Jayaram. Pics: Rex/ITV/Shutterstock
Hospital boss: ‘I should’ve done better’
Tony Chambers, the former chief executive of the Countess of Chester Hospital, was a key witness to give evidence during the inquiry.
During his evidence, Mr Chambers offered an apology to the families who had fallen victim to Letby and said his language had been “clumsy” in telling the killer nurse the hospital had “her back”.
“I absolutely acknowledged that we hadn’t got that right. We could have done better, we should have done better. I should have done better,” he said.
When pressed on if he tried to “stall and obstruct the police being called or this being made public”, he added: “Had that been what I had done then it would be. But I think it’s an outrageous statement and I do not believe it represents my actions.”
Image: Lady Justice Thirlwall at Liverpool Town Hall. Pic: PA
Jeremy Hunt: ‘Terrible tragedy happened on my watch’
Jeremy Hunt appeared at the inquiry in January where he apologised to the victims’ families, saying he was sorry “for anything that didn’t happen that could potentially have prevented such an appalling crime”.
Mr Hunt was health secretary at the time Letby committed her crimes in 2015 and 2016.
Image: Hunt arrives at Thirlwall Inquiry. Pic: PA
The MP told the inquiry the former nurse’s crimes were “a terrible tragedy” which “happened on my watch” and “although he doesn’t bear direct personal responsibility for everything that happens in every ward in the NHS” he does have “ultimate responsibility for the NHS”.
He recommended that medical examiners should be trained to see the signs or patterns of malicious harm in the work of a healthcare professional.
Nigel Farage has said he would take the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) if Reform win the next election.
The party’s leader also reaffirmed his pledge to repeal the Human Rights Act and disapply three other international treaties acting as “roadblocks” to deporting anyone entering the UK illegally.
In a speech about tackling illegal migration, he said a Reform government would detain and deport any migrants arriving illegally, including women and children, and they would “never, ever be allowed to stay”.
Sky News looks at what the ECHR is, how the UK could leave, and what could happen to human rights protections if it does.
What is the ECHR?
On 4 November 1950, the 12 member states of the newly formed Council of Europe (different to the EU) signed the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – otherwise known as the ECHR.
It came into force on 3 September 1953 and has since been signed by an additional 34 Council of Europe members who have joined, bringing the total to 46 signatories.
The treaty was drafted in the aftermath of the Second World War and the Holocaust to protect people from the most serious human rights violations. It was also in response to the growth of Stalinism in central and Eastern Europe to protect members from communist subversion.
The treaty was the first time fundamental human rights were guaranteed in law.
Sir Winston Churchill helped establish the Council of Europe and was a driving force behind the ECHR, which came from the Charter of Human Rights that he championed and was drafted by British lawyers.
Image: Sir Winston Churchill was a driving force behind the ECHR
To be a signatory of the ECHR, a state has to be a member of the Council of Europe – and they must “respect pluralist democracy, the rule of law and human rights”.
There are 18 sections, including the most well-known: Article 1 (the right to life), Article 3 (prohibition of torture), Article 6 (right to a fair trial), Article 8 (right to private and family life) and Article 10 (right to freedom of expression).
The ECHR has been used to halt the deportation of migrants in 13 out of 29 UK cases since 1980.
ECHR protections are enforced in the UK through the Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporates most ECHR rights into domestic law. This means individuals can bring cases to UK courts to argue their ECHR rights have been violated, instead of having to take their case to the European Court of Human Rights.
Article 8 is the main section that has been used to stop illegal migrant deportations, but Article 3 has also been successfully used.
Image: The ECHR is interpreted by judges at this court in Strasbourg, France. File pic: AP
How is it actually used?
The ECHR is interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) – you’ll have to bear with us on the confusingly similar acronyms.
The convention is interpreted under the “living instrument doctrine”, meaning it must be considered in the light of present-day conditions.
The number of full-time judges corresponds to the number of ECHR signatories, so there are currently 46 – each nominated by their state for a non-renewable nine-year term. But they are prohibited from having any institutional ties with the state they come from.
An individual, group of individuals, or one or more of the signatory states can lodge an application alleging one of the signatory states has breached their human rights. Anyone who have exhausted their human rights case in UK courts can apply to the ECtHR to have their case heard in Strasbourg.
All ECtHR hearings must be heard in public, unless there are exceptional circumstances to be heard in private, which happens most of the time following written pleadings.
The court may award damages, typically no more than £1,000 plus legal costs, but it lacks enforcement powers, so some states have ignored verdicts and continued practices judged to be human rights violations.
Image: Inside the European Court of Human Rights. File pic: AP
How could the UK leave?
A country can leave the convention by formally denouncing it, but it would likely have to also leave the Council of Europe as the two are dependent on each other.
At the international level, a state must formally notify the Council of Europe of its intention to withdraw with six months’ notice, when the UK would still have to implement any ECtHR rulings and abide by ECHR laws.
The UK government would have to seek parliament’s approval before notifying the ECtHR, and would have to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 – which would also require parliamentary approval.
Would the UK leaving breach any other agreements?
Leaving the ECHR would breach the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, a deal between the British and Irish governments on how Northern Ireland should be governed, which could threaten the peace settlement.
It would also put the UK’s relationship with the EU under pressure as the Brexit deal commits both to the ECHR.
The EU has said if the UK leaves the ECHR it would terminate part of the agreement, halting the extradition of criminal suspects from the EU to face trial in the UK.
Image: Keir Starmer has previously ruled out taking Britain out of the ECHR
How would the UK’s human rights protections change?
Certain rights under the ECHR are also recognised in British common law, but the ECHR has a more extensive protection of human rights.
For example, it was the ECHR that offered redress to victims of the Hillsborough disaster and the victims of “black cab rapist” John Worboys after state investigations failed.
Before cases were taken to the ECtHR and the Human Rights Act came into force, the common law did not prevent teachers from hitting children or protect gay people from being banned from serving in the armed forces.
Repealing the ECHR would also mean people in the UK would no longer be able to take their case to the ECtHR if the UK courts do not remedy a violation of their rights.
The UK’s human rights record would then not be subject to the same scrutiny as it is under the ECHR, where states review each other’s actions.
Image: Two victims of John Worboys sued the Met Police for failing to effectively investigate his crimes using Article 3 of the ECHR. Pic: PA
How human rights in the UK would be impacted depends partly on what would replace the Human Rights Act.
Mr Farage has said he would introduce a British Bill of Rights, which would apply only to UK citizens and lawful British citizens.
He has said it would not mention “human rights” but would include “the freedom to do everything, unless there’s a law that says you can’t” – which is how common law works.
Legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg said this would simply confirm the rights to which people are already entitled, but would also remove rights enjoyed by people visiting the UK.
Labour has sunk to its lowest approval rating for this parliament, according to a fresh YouGov poll for Sky News.
Sir Keir Starmer’s party is currently on 20% of the vote – the lowest level since last year’s general election and just three points ahead of the Conservatives. on 17% of the vote.
Asked about the polling, Nick Thomas-Symonds, the EU relations minister, told Sky News’ Anna Jones that the government had been forced to take “very difficult decisions to stabilise the public finances early in this parliament”.
He said Labour had acted in the “national interest” by securing a reset deal with the EU which lowers costs for supermarkets and shoppers, and which the government hopes to extend.
“That is acting in the national interest, that is not about particular opinion polls you are showing me today,” he said.
“That is about work the prime minister asked me to do and to prepare for before this government came into office and that is what this government does. It does the hard yards of delivery for the British people.”
He added: “What Nigel Farage does is to stoke problems and offer empty promises for their solution.”
Mr Thomas-Symonds, who represents Torfaen, took the fight to Mr Farage in a speech today, where he accused the Reform UK leader of wanting to “reverse our progress” and of “dividing communities and stoking anger”.
The government wants to get a permanent deal with the EU on food and drink agreed in the next 18 months.
The current temporary agreement, which was put in place in June, stopped checks on some fruit and vegetables imported from the EU, which meant no border checks or fees would be paid, and is due to expire in January 2027.
Mr Farage has previously called for the agreement between the UK and EU to be torn up, saying in May that the SPS [sanitary and phytosanitary] provisions agreed that month would push the UK “back into the orbit of Brussels, giving away vast amounts of our sovereignty for very little in return”.
In his speech, Mr Thomas-Symonds said the Tories and Reform UK only offer “easy answers and snake oil” over the UK’s relationship with the EU.
“Some will hysterically cry even treason,” he said. “Some will say we’re surrendering sovereignty or freedoms, but that is nonsense.
“We are determined to plug the gaps, to rebuild Britain, protect our borders, bring down bills in every part of the country and secure good jobs, a new relationship of mutual benefit, one that brings freedom back to our businesses and exercises our sovereignty.
“And it needs pragmatism. When you’re tough, decisive and collaborative. That cannot rest on easy answers and snake oil. The Tories [are] completely 2D, stuck with a ghost of Brexit past. And then Nigel Farage, who has pledged to reverse our progress.”
A Reform UK spokesperson said: “No one has done more damage to British businesses than this Labour government.
“With 157,000 fewer people on payroll since Labour took office, their jobs tax is stifling success and hitting small and medium-sized businesses across the country.
“Cosying up to the EU and leaving us entangled in reams of retained EU law which Kemi Badenoch failed to scrap will not resuscitate Britain’s struggling economy.”
More than six million new cancer cases could be diagnosed in England between now and 2040, according to leading charities.
This would equate to a diagnosis every two minutes, which is up from one every four minutes in the 1970s.
A coalition of more than 60 cancercharities, known as One Cancer Voice, is warning the government must take urgent steps to tackle cancer care in England – including faster diagnosis targets and better prevention policies.
The analysis carried out by the charities is based largely on pre-pandemic data and suggests cases will increase by 14.2% over the next 15 years, with diagnoses of some of the most common cancers reaching all-time highs.
This includes over a million new prostate cancer diagnoses, and more than 900,000 for breast cancer by 2040.
The research also finds regional variations:
• South East – over a million diagnoses
• North East – 865,000
• East of England and the South West – 722,000
• London – 714,000
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:56
Man loses voice box after late cancer diagnosis
Six key demands
These figures starkly set out the need for change, and the timing of their release is significant.
Later this autumn, the government is expected to publish its long-awaited National Cancer Plan.
These leading charities have combined forces to put pressure on ministers ahead of its publication, demanding six measures which they say must be implemented if cancer outcomes are to improve:
• A pledge to meet all cancer waiting times by the end of parliament in 2029
• A new earlier diagnosis target, with improved screening programmes
• The introduction of strong cancer prevention policies
• Addressing inequalities in patient care
• Improving access to clinical trials for cancer patients
• Better support for people to live well with and beyond cancer
‘A defining moment’
The pandemic had a huge impact on cancer care in the country, and an ageing population adds further pressures.
But the most recently available data, which is around a decade old, suggests the NHS is still lagging behind many comparable countries.
The chief executive of Cancer Research UK, Michelle Mitchell, described the national plan as a “defining moment”.
“If the UK government delivers an ambitious fully funded strategy, we could save more lives and transform cancer outcomes, propelling England from world lagging to among world leading when it comes to tackling this disease,” she said.
A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “This government is prioritising cancer care as we turn around more than a decade of neglect of our NHS.
“We’re already making an impact, with 95,000 more people having cancer diagnosed or ruled out within 28 days between July 2024 and May 2025, compared to the same period the previous year.
“This will soon be supported by our new National Cancer Plan, setting out how cancer care will improve over the coming years.
“We’re also making it easier for people to get tests, checks, and scans with DIY screening kits for cervical cancer, new radiotherapy machines in every region, and by creating the first smoke-free generation.”