Skip to content

July 2026: Government declines to widen the Thirlwall terms of reference (16 July) · new 100-page insulin report to the CCRC challenging the trial evidence (9 July) · Thirlwall report still expected no earlier than September · inquests relisted to 2027 · Shoo Lee Panel: no medical evidence of deliberate harm.

Lucy Letby Facts
Editorial summary (not a verbatim transcript)
November 2020·Crown Prosecution Service

Crown Prosecution Service — charging decision statement (November 2020)

Summary of the Crown Prosecution Service statement accompanying the November 2020 charging decision. Letby was charged with the murder of eight babies and the attempted murder of ten others — charges subsequently amended before trial. The statement sets out the CPS's public framing of why the threshold for charging had been met. This summary places the charging decision in the context of what the CPS at the time had available — which did not include the post-conviction expert evidence that has since accumulated.

XBlueskyFacebookLinkedInWhatsAppRedditMastodonEmail
Last updated

Editorial summary — not a verbatim transcript.

This page is a summary written for this site. It is not a mirror of the primary document, and nothing on it should be quoted as the words of any person. An earlier version of this page carried quotations that could not be verified against the primary record; those have been removed. For the underlying record, consult the primary source at cps.gov.uk. See our corrections policy.

Status: Editorial summary written for this site — not a mirrored document

Publisher: cps.gov.ukThis links the publisher’s site, not the document itself — we have not yet established a direct link to it.

Context

On 11 November 2020, after three years of investigation and three arrests under caution, the Crown Prosecution Service announced that Lucy Letby had been charged with the murder of eight babies and the attempted murder of ten others. The CPS statement accompanying the charging decision set out the public framing of the threshold having been met.

What the charging decision means

The CPS threshold for charging is not proof beyond reasonable doubt. It is whether the evidence provides a realistic prospect of conviction and whether prosecution is in the public interest. The charging decision is therefore not a finding of guilt; it is a finding that the case meets the threshold to be put in front of a jury.

What the CPS had available in November 2020

By November 2020, the investigation had:

  • The Dewi Evans causation opinion on most indicted counts.
  • The shift-rota chart.
  • The Roche Cobas insulin immunoassay result on Baby F.
  • The Post-it notes recovered from Letby’s home.
  • The Facebook and search-history evidence.
  • The three interviews under caution across 2018–2020 in which Letby denied the allegations.

It did not have: the Shoo Lee Panel report (2025), the Joint Insulin Report (2025), the further expert reports filed with the CCRC (2025), the Prof. Richard Gill statistical critique (2023–24 and ongoing), the Prof. Peter Green commentary, the Prof. Geoff Chase physiological modelling, the clinical-psychology expert reports on self-blame notes, the Thirlwall Inquiry evidence record, or the September 2024 Guardian investigation. The CPS charging decision was made on the material available in November 2020. That material is not the material now before the CCRC.

The amendment of charges

Before trial, the charges were amended — not all originally-charged counts were put to the jury. This is routine in complex prosecutions; it reflects the CPS’s continuing assessment of the prospect of conviction on specific counts as the evidence is developed for trial.

Read alongside

Police interviews — summary, Hummingbird scope decisions, Timeline: November 2020 charge.

Share:XBlueskyFacebookLinkedInWhatsAppRedditMastodonEmail