Lucy Letby would have needed Nostradamus ability to kill, jury told

Lucy Letby would have needed to be like "Nostradamus" in order to predict when a baby could be poisoned, her defence barrister has told her murder trial.

Ms Letby, 33, denies killing seven infants and attempted to murder 10 at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016.

Ben Myers KC told Manchester Crown Court the case against her was built with a "presumption of guilt".

He said it was instead like "a series of Russian dolls of improbability".

Continuing his defence closing speech for a third day, Mr Myers asked the jury to reflect on the point that "not one witness" had seen Ms Letby "doing any of the acts alleged".

He reminded the court of each case in turn, first focused on Child F, who the prosecution have claimed was poisoned with insulin via his feed bag by Ms Letby in August 2015.

The court has heard the boy's blood samples showed an "extremely high" insulin level and a very low C-peptide level.

A medical expert for the prosecution previously told the court that had "only one explanation", which was that the child "received insulin from some outside source".

Mr Myers said the defence cannot dispute the blood test results as the samples have long since been disposed of, but there was nothing in fact to say Ms Letby injected the boy with insulin.

"The evidence has demonstrated that there have been bag changes when Ms Letby wasn't present," he said, before reminding the jury that Child F's bag, which was meant to run for 48 hours, was changed due to cannula issues after Ms Letby had finished her shift.

He said the evidence showed that a stock maintenance bag was subsequently hung by two other nurses, which the prosecution has claimed was also contaminated with insulin.

Ms Letby would need a "Nostradamus-like" ability to foresee Child F's first bag would need changing and then know which "random" stock bag would be chosen by her colleagues, he said.

"Think about how realistic that is," he said.

"These are the most contrived and artificial explanations designed to make up for fact that the evidence does not work."

Mr Myers said what followed from the prosecution's suggestion that Ms Letby had contaminated a random bag was that she had contaminated more than one to ensure it would be used to harm Child F.

He said that suggestion "beggars belief" as "none of those spare bags ended up causing blood sugar crashes on the unit".

"There's no evidence any other baby was affected at this time [and] you can be sure you would be told if there was," he said.

Mr Myers said the allegations against the nurse were like "a series of Russian dolls of improbability".

The barrister then turned to Child G, who the prosecution said Ms Letby overfed with milk on 7 September 2015 and subsequently attempted to kill on 21 September.

The court has previously heard that at around 15:30 BST on 21 September, Child G was cannulated by doctors and placed on a Masimo monitor, a portable device that continually measures oxygen saturations and heart rate levels.

A nurse, who cannot be named for legal reasons, previously told the jury that shortly after the procedure, Ms Letby shouted for help from the nursery where Child G was.

She said she responded and noticed that the monitor had been switched off, which was "not normal protocol".

Mr Myers said the prosecution suggested in their opening that Ms Letby turned the monitor off, but in evidence her colleague had refuted that.

In her evidence, she said Dr John Gibbs and Dr David Harkness had apologised to her, as they had not switched the monitor back on after carrying out a procedure on the infant.

"If it hadn't been for [that nurse], we would be left with the usual wall of denials," Mr Myers said.

He said the claims in the prosecution opening showed a "common theme of blaming Ms Letby" for other peoples' failures.

Mr Myers later revisited what was said in cross examination regarding Child I, who collapsed on 30 September 2015 and again on 13 and 14 October, before a fatal deterioration on 23 October.

Prosecutor Nick Johnson KC had accused Ms Letby of falsifying nursing records in a bid to cover her first attack on Child I on 30 September.

He said the nurse falsely recorded an examination of Child I by "doctors" at 15:00 and wrote that the baby "appeared mottled in colour with distended abdomen and more prominent veins".

Mr Johnson previously said there was no corresponding doctor's note mentioning "mottling" and claimed the nurse's note was "a complete fabrication".

Mr Myers reminded the jury of a statement from Child I's mother, which was not read back to them during cross examination, which he said appeared to corroborate what Ms Letby had logged.

The woman, who cannot be named, recalled Ms Letby going to "get a female doctor" to review Child I at 15:00 as the baby's bowel looked distended.

"That's what happened, [Child I's] mum remembers it and she talks about it in the statement," Mr Myers said.

The trial continues.

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