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)
·Alexandra Mancini; Thirlwall Inquiry

Alexandra Mancini — external neonatal reviewer (Thirlwall Inquiry)

Alexandra Mancini, senior neonatal nurse and external reviewer, gave Thirlwall Inquiry evidence on the reviews commissioned at the time of the cluster, the specific operational recommendations that were or were not acted upon, and the nursing-leadership perspective on how a struggling unit should be managed.

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 thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk. See our corrections policy.

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

Original source: thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk

Context

Alexandra Mancini, senior neonatal nurse and external reviewer, gave Thirlwall Inquiry evidence on the reviews commissioned at the time of the cluster, and the specific operational recommendations that were or were not acted upon by the Trust.

Key ground

Ms Mancini, an RCN-nominated nurse member of the RCPCH Invited Review team, confirmed that a note of the team’s interview with Ian Harvey recorded paediatricians’ view of Letby as the “elephant in the room”, and that “Clinicians threatened to go to the police.” She agreed this reflected a very serious level of concern, but rejected any suggestion the team was being pressed to find something to prevent police involvement, saying instead: “We would find what we found.” She corrected her witness statement to confirm she had in fact taken part in the team’s discussion, and that its conclusion was not to recommend contacting the police, pending safeguarding and HR processes.

Read alongside

RCPCH review authors, Dr Subhedar.