Case summary
Convictions and verdicts
The charges, verdicts and current legal status — count by count — and the difference between conviction, appeal, retrial, CCRC review and public inquiry.
Original trial (2022–23)
Indictment of 17 counts across 17 babies (Child A–Q). Seven counts of murder and seven counts of attempted murder returned guilty verdicts. Other counts returned not-guilty verdicts or no agreed verdict.
Retrial (2024)
Retrial in 2024 returned a guilty verdict on one further count of attempted murder (Child K).
Sentence
Fifteen whole-life orders.
Direct appeal
Refused at the single-judge and full-court stages in 2024.
Verdicts by count
Each row links to the per-child page where the trial evidence, jury direction, post-conviction expert review and primary sources are laid out.
| Child / count | Allegation | Verdict / outcome | Source strength |
|---|---|---|---|
| Child A Twin 2, male; 31+2 weeks, 1.66 kg | Air embolism injected intravenously. | Convicted Court findingMurder — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child B Twin 1, female; 31+2 weeks, 1.69 kg (twin sister of Child A) | Air embolism attempt. | Convicted Court findingAttempted murder — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child C 30+1 weeks, 800 g, severe intrauterine growth restriction | Air pushed into stomach via NG tube. | Convicted Court findingMurder — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child D Term; 37+1 weeks, 3.13 kg, female | Air embolism. | Convicted Court findingMurder — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child E Twin 1, male; 29+5 weeks, 1.327 kg (twin brother of Child F) | Air embolism / deliberate bleeding from NG tube. | Convicted Court findingMurder — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child F Twin 2, male; 29+5 weeks, 1.434 kg, borderline IUGR | Exogenous insulin added to TPN bag. | Convicted Court findingAttempted murder (insulin) — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child G 23+6 weeks, 535 g, female | Deliberate over-feeding causing aspiration. | Convicted Court findingAttempted murder x2 — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child H 34+4 weeks, 2.33 kg, female | Air embolism / airway interference. | No verdict Court findingAttempted murder — not guilty on one count, jury failed to agree on another | 1Court/official |
| Child I 27 weeks, 970 g, female, intrauterine growth restriction | Repeated air-in-stomach attacks. | Convicted Court findingMurder — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child J Twin, female; 32+2 weeks, 1.709 kg | Unspecified act. | No verdict Court findingAttempted murder — jury failed to agree | 1Court/official |
| Child K 25 weeks, 692 g, female (footling breech) | Dislodged ET tube; Dr Jayaram's eyewitness account. | Convicted Court findingAttempted murder — convicted at retrial (2024) | 1Court/official |
| Child L Twin 1; 33+2 weeks, 1.465 kg, severe intrauterine growth restriction | Insulin in feeds. | Convicted Court findingAttempted murder (insulin) — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child M Twin 2, male; 33+2 weeks, 1.703 kg, severe intrauterine growth restriction | Air embolism. | Convicted Court findingAttempted murder — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child N Twin 2, male; 34+4 weeks, 1.67 kg, severe IUGR; moderate haemophilia (factor VIII 3%) | Airway interference / injection. | No verdict Court findingAttempted murder — jury failed to agree | 1Court/official |
| Child O Triplet 2, male; 33+2 weeks, 2.02 kg (preterm) | Air into stomach, liver trauma. | Convicted Court findingMurder — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child P Triplet 1, male; 33+2 weeks, 2.066 kg (preterm) | Air into stomach. | Convicted Court findingMurder — convicted (2023) | 1Court/official |
| Child Q 31+3 weeks, 2.076 kg, male | Air into stomach. | No verdict Court findingAttempted murder — jury failed to agree | 1Court/official |
Sources: trial sentencing remarks (Mr Justice Goss, August 2023); 2024 retrial sentencing remarks; Court of Appeal record. The Court of Appeal record is the authoritative public statement of which counts resulted in conviction.
Conviction, appeal, retrial, CCRC, inquiry — what is the difference?
These terms are often used interchangeably. They are not the same. Each has its own statutory basis, its own threshold and its own remedies.
- Conviction
- A jury finding of guilt that stands unless overturned on appeal or referred back by the CCRC.
- Direct appeal
- An appeal to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division within statutory time limits. Refused at the single-judge and full-court stages in 2024.
- Retrial
- A re-hearing ordered when a jury cannot agree on a verdict. The 2024 retrial returned a guilty verdict on one further count of attempted murder (Child K).
- CCRC review
- An independent review by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The test is whether there is a real possibility that the Court of Appeal would overturn the conviction. The CCRC does not itself decide guilt or innocence.
- Unsafe conviction
- The legal threshold the Court of Appeal applies on a referral: would the verdict be unsafe if the new material had been available at trial?
- Public inquiry
- The Thirlwall Inquiry examines the institutional response. It can find facts about hospital governance and regulator conduct; it cannot itself overturn convictions.
- Fresh evidence
- Evidence not available at trial that the Court of Appeal admits under the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 s.23 if it appears capable of belief and could have affected the verdict.
Court findings vs disputed expert criticism
The convictions themselves are court findings — labelled on this site as Court finding and source-level 1Court/official. Statements from the February 2025 Shoo Lee International Expert Panel and other post-conviction experts are post-conviction expert claims — labelled as Post-conviction expert claim and source-level 2Expert/professional. The two are not interchangeable. Expert disagreement does not by itself overturn a verdict; it is one of the things the CCRC weighs against the real-possibility test.