Lucy Letby trial: Nurse attacked babies after parents left, jury told

Murder-accused nurse Lucy Letby allegedly attacked nine babies soon after their visiting parents had left their cotsides, her trial has heard.

The 33-year-old has been accused of taking the "opportunity" to "sabotage" premature babies when she could.

Ms Letby denies murdering seven babies and attempting to kill 10 others at Countess of Chester Hospital from 2015 to 2016.

She was being cross-examined for a fifth day at Manchester Crown Court.

Prosecutor Nick Johnson KC asked about her recollections of a baby girl, referred to as Child H, who was allegedly deliberately harmed by the nurse on two occasions in September 2015.

The jury has heard the girl needed resuscitating in the early hours of 26 and 27 September.

Mr Johnson quoted a statement from her father.

He said his daughter "was OK during the Saturday day and then quite late on, I remember going to the parents' bedroom on the ward to get some sleep.

"Shortly after she had deteriorated and needed medical attention".

Mr Johnson said this was another example of an "incident happening just after the parents or parent had left".

He said Child H's father leaving the infant's cot side gave Ms Letby "the opportunity to sabotage" her - but the nurse rejected this.

Mr Johnson put it to her that "just as in the cases" of eight other children, this was "something you do".

She replied: "No, I've never attacked any child."

Mr Johnson went on to ask Ms Letby if she was "bored" and had "time on her hands" while on her night shift on 26 into 27 September, to which she replied "no".

The barrister pointed out that just minutes before Child H's second crash at 00:55 on 27 September, Ms Letby was "liking" pictures of friends on Facebook.

Ms Letby said she "may have been on my break at that point".

Mr Johnson put it to Ms Letby that she had caused Child H's collapse, which she rejected.

The prosecutor quoted the evidence of a doctor, Dr Neame, who said he responded to a crash bleep shortly after 01:00 and found Ms Letby treating Child H alone.

Asked if this was correct, Ms Letby said: "I can't say from memory."

The nurse denied making an "alibi" at 01:00 with an entry on a fluid balance chart for another baby.

"That's me giving care to the baby I was allocated," she said.

Mr Johnson later asked Ms Letby about her recollection of Child I, a baby girl who the nurse is alleged to have murdered in the early hours of 23 October 2015.

It was said to be her fourth attempt to deliberately harm the baby after earlier bids on 30 September, and 13 and 14 October.

Focusing on the 13 October crash, Mr Johnson reminded the jury of what nurse Ashleigh Hudson, Child I's designated nurse, had said.

Ms Hudson previously told the court that she had asked Ms Letby or the nursing shift leader to keep an eye on the infant as she was required to help a colleague with a routine procedure elsewhere.

She said the procedure took about 15 minutes and she then walked to a store room to collect Child I's milk.

When she returned, she said Ms Letby was "standing in the doorway" and pointed out that Child I was "pale" and needed attention.

Mr Johnson asked Ms Letby how quickly she had noticed Child I needed assistance to which she replied "very quickly".

Asked why she was at nursery two, she said there was "nothing sinister" about that and nurses often moved around the unit.

Mr Johnson asked Ms Letby if the lights were off in the nursery. She said she was unable to say.

The nurse has previously said in evidence that the lights were on low on a dimmer switch.

Mr Johnson quoted Ms Letby's police interview, in which she said that she and Ms Hudson "put the light on".

Ms Hudson, in evidence, also said the lights were switched off in the nursery.

Asked why she did not refer to a dimmer switch in her police interview, Ms Letby said: "I don't know."

"Are you trying to massage the evidence by now saying the lights were on low?", Mr Johnson said.

"No", she replied.

Mr Johnson then asked Ms Letby how she got to the doorway of nursery two. She told the court she could not recall, but gave various routes from the nursing station and other nurseries.

Mr Johnson suggests all those routes involved going via the corridor, and she agreed.

The prosecutor then asked her if the corridor was lit, which the nurse also agreed with.

Mr Johnson said: "What effect does going from a bright corridor into a dark or dimly-lit room have on your eyesight?"

Ms Letby said: "I don't know."

After being pressed, Ms Letby said: "Yes, you wouldn't be able to see as well."

Mr Johnson put it to Ms Letby that she could see Child I was pale because she had "caused what you purported to notice". She denied this.

He went on to ask Ms Letby why she could spot something Ms Hudson could not, as mentioned from her police interview.

"I had more experience so I knew what I was looking for", Ms Letby said.

"What do you mean 'looking for'?", Mr Johnson said.

Ms Letby said she did not "mean it like that".

The nurse then became tearful and said she was finding it "hard to concentrate", before judge Mr Justice James Goss intervened to cut short the hearing.

He said: "Having observed the witness and given that it's been a long day in the witness box, we will stop proceedings there."

The trial continues.

Why not follow BBC North West on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter? You can also send story ideas to [email protected]