A hospital manager has denied telling a police officer she thought it “unjust” that Lucy Letby was being investigated as a murder suspect, a public inquiry has heard.
Ruth Millward, ex-head of risk and patient safety at the Countess of Chester Hospital, told the Thirlwall Inquiry into the events surrounding Letby’s crimes that she did not recall making the comment.
The child serial killer nurse was redeployed to her department in July 2016 after all the consultants at the hospital’s neonatal unit demanded her removal, over fears she was deliberately harming babies after a series of unexpected and unexplained deaths and collapses.
Letby remained in the clerical role until she was first arrested in July 2018 by Cheshire Police, who were not brought in by the hospital to investigate until May 2017.
Last month the inquiry heard that Letby worked in a complaints office next to the risk and patient safety team, but a former employee believed she could have accessed patient notes and baby death reports.
Giving evidence on Monday, Ms Millward said “in retrospect” it would have been more appropriate to redeploy Letby to another service.
She said: “Lucy was brought into the complaints team, not into the risk and patient safety leads. She was in a different room, she was in a smaller room with my administrative staff and it was always, always expected to be a temporary thing for around eight weeks. That was my understanding.”
She said though that “events took over”, with an external review of the increased mortality rate taking longer than expected, and Letby then launching a grievance complaint against her redeployment.
Ms Millward said: “At that point to be honest I really should have said I think we need to move her now because there was no end in sight.”
She denied she took part in overheard conversations in the corridors of her department, that Letby was being made a scapegoat for poor medical care and a lack of teamworking.
Counsel to the inquiry Nicholas de la Poer KC asked: “Did you think Letby was a scapegoat?”
Ms Millward said: “No, there wasn’t sufficient information for me to make that comment. I generally thought that the unit was being run poorly, that was my view.
“I didn’t think she was necessarily being made a scapegoat. I was waiting for the invited (external) review to say what else is happening here.”
Mr de la Poer went on: “In a discussion with Cheshire Police in 2019 there is a record made by a police officer that you said you felt it was unjust that Letby was being investigated as a person of possible interest given the evidence presented by the consultants. Was that something you said to the police?”
Ms Millward replied: “I don’t believe so, no. Stating something is unjust is not words I would use. I don’t even remember having a conversation around my view of Lucy at all.”
She also told the inquiry that she thought the consultants’ opinions about Letby were not thought to have been valid because they failed to address their concerns through recognised governance routes within the hospital.
She said: “Because they bypassed all of that system and went directly to have informal conversations with the executive team through email, there is no traceability, there is no transparency, there is no critical challenge that you get from having those conversations in a wider group meeting.”
Letby, 34, from Hereford, is serving 15 whole-life orders after she was convicted at Manchester Crown Court of murdering seven infants and attempting to murder seven others, with two attempts on one of her victims, between June 2015 and June 2016.
The inquiry is expected to sit until early 2025, with findings published by late autumn of that year.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel