Share and Follow
COPS have arrested three people who were in senior leadership roles at the Countess of Chester Hospital when babies were killed by Lucy Letby.
The killer nurse is serving 15 whole-life orders for murdering seven babies in a year-long reign of terror.
Letby, 35, also tried to kill seven others – including one baby twice – at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
Cops yesterday arrested three people who worked at the hospital in senior roles between 2015 and 2016.
They were arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter and have been bailed.
The ex-bosses have not been named by police, and cops were clear to say that this does not impact any of the killer nurse’s convictions.
Cheshire Police said their investigations into corporate and gross negligence manslaughter at the hospitals where the killer nurse worked continue.
The probe, launched in 2023, is examining areas such as senior leadership and decision making to “determine whether any criminality has taken place”.
Between 2015 and 2016, two babies on the neo-natal unit were “deliberately” poisoned with insulin, which was “no accident”.
Some of the other babies were killed or harmed when air or milk was injected into their bloodstream or via a tube in their stomachs.
Letby, from Herefordshire, became a prime suspect when the number of baby deaths and catastrophic collapses at the hospital significantly rose.
Consultants grew concerned when they realised the children who died had “deteriorated unexpectedly”.
The monster who became Britain’s most prolific child killer was found to be the “common denominator” among the deaths and collapses.
What is the difference between corporate and gross negligence manslaughter?
CORPORATE manslaughter is a criminal offence in England and Wales used to prosecute companies accused of causing a person or persons death.
Corporate manslaughter is a relatively new offence under English law.
The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act came into force across the UK in April 2008.
Before this companies could be prosecuted for causing death under the offence of gross negligence manslaughter.
But in order for the prosecution to be successful a senior individual in the company would also have to be accountable.
The new act provided that the company itself could be found guilty of the offence.
The Crown Prosecution Service says: “The offence was created to provide a means of accountability for very serious management failings across the organisation.”
Meanwhile, gross negligence manslaughter is a common law offence.
It is committed where the death is a result of a grossly negligent (though otherwise lawful) act or omission on the part of the defendant, The Crown Prosecution says.
The circumstances in which this offence may fall to be considered often involve death following medical treatment or care or death in custody.
Detective Superintendent Paul Hughes, Senior Investigating Officer for Operation Duet, said: “In October 2023 following the lengthy trial and subsequent conviction of Lucy Letby, Cheshire Constabulary launched an investigation into corporate manslaughter at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
“This focuses on senior leadership and their decision making to determine whether any criminality has taken place concerning the response to the increased levels of fatalities.
“In March 2025 the scope of the investigation widened to also include gross negligence manslaughter.
“This is a separate offence to corporate manslaughter and focuses on the grossly negligent action or inaction of individuals.
“It is important to note that this does not impact on the convictions of Lucy Letby for multiple offences of murder and attempted murder.
“As part of our ongoing enquiries, on Monday 30th June three individuals who were part of the senior leadership team at the CoCH in 2015-2016, were arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter.
“All three have subsequently been bailed pending further enquiries.
“Both the corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter elements of the investigation are continuing and there are no set timescales for these.
“Our investigation into the deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the neo-natal units of both the Countess of Chester Hospital and the Liverpool Women’s Hospital between the period of 2012 to 2016 is also ongoing.”
The killer nurse has lost two appeals against her convictions so far.
Letby previously launched an appeal to challenge her guilty verdicts for seven murders and six attempted murders, which was rejected.
The nurse’s latest failed appeal was over her conviction for the attempted murder of a baby girl.
Last year, The Sun reported that the evil nurse was allowed to spend £901,817.45 on barristers and £818,497.92 on solicitors.
In March, Letby called for the public inquiry into events surrounding her crimes to be suspended.
Her solicitors wrote to inquiry chairwoman Lady Justice Thirlwall insisting her final report would be “likely unreliable” unless it was paused pending the outcome of the killer nurse’s battle to prove her innocence.
An international panel of neonatologists and paediatric specialists, working pro bono for her defence team, claimed bad medical care and natural causes were the reasons for the collapses and deaths attributed to Letby.
Those findings will be passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, and Letby’s legal team hope her case will eventually be referred back to the Court of Appeal after two previous failed bids.
With an estimated £10million spent so far on the inquiry, the letter added it would be in the taxpayer’s interest to wait for the outcome of the CCRC review before publishing the report.
But the judge refused to pause the inquiry, and her final report is expected to be published in November.
The charges Letby has been convicted of in full
Child A, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby injected air intravenously into the bloodstream of the baby boy. COUNT 1 GUILTY.
Child B, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby attempted to murder the baby girl, the twin sister of Child A, by injecting air into her bloodstream. COUNT 2 GUILTY.
Child C, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said Letby forced air down a feeding tube and into the stomach of the baby boy. COUNT 3 GUILTY.
Child D, allegation of murder. The Crown said air was injected intravenously into the baby girl. COUNT 4 GUILTY.
Child E, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby murdered the twin baby boy with an injection of air into the bloodstream and also deliberately caused bleeding to the infant. COUNT 5 GUILTY.
Child F, allegation of attempted murder. Letby was said by prosecutors to have poisoned the twin brother of Child E with insulin. COUNT 6 GUILTY.
Child I, allegation of murder. The prosecution said Letby killed the baby girl at the fourth attempt and had given her air and overfed her with milk. COUNT 12 GUILTY.
Child K, allegation of attempted murder. The prosecution said Letby compromised the baby girl as she deliberately dislodged a breathing tube. COUNT 14 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT AT ORIGINAL TRIAL, NOW GUILTY AFTER RETRIAL
Child L, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said the nurse poisoned the twin baby boy with insulin. COUNT 15 GUILTY.
Child M, allegation of attempted murder. Prosecutors said Letby injected air into the bloodstream of Child L’s twin brother. COUNT 16 GUILTY.
Child N, three allegations of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby inflicted trauma in the baby boy’s throat and also injected him with air in the bloodstream. COUNT 17 GUILTY, COUNT 18 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT, COUNT 19 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT.
Child O, allegation of murder. Prosecutors say Letby attacked the triplet boy by injecting him with air, overfeeding him with milk and inflicting trauma to his liver with “severe force”. COUNT 20 GUILTY.
Child P, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said the nurse targeted the triplet brother of Child O by overfeeding him with milk, injecting air and dislodging his breathing tube. COUNT 21 GUILTY.
Child Q, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby injected the baby boy with liquid, and possibly air, down his feeding tube. COUNT 22 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT
