Child Q told she ‘might be arrested' during strip-search incident
A black schoolgirl who was strip-searched by Metropolitan Police officers was told she "might be arrested" if she refused to comply, a misconduct panel has heard.The girl, known as Child Q, was strip-searched at her school by officers in Hackney, east London, on 3 December 2020 after her teachers wrongly suspected her of carrying cannabis.This involved the removal of the 15-year-old's clothing including underwear, her bending over and having to expose intimate parts of her body while she was menstruating, the panel has heard.Trainee Det Con Kristina Linge, PC Victoria Wray and PC Rafal Szmydynski, who were all constables at the time, deny gross misconduct over their treatment of the girl.
'Frightened?'
On Thursday, Det Con Linge, who conducted the strip-search alongside PC Wray, told the misconduct panel in south-east London she informed Child Q she "might be arrested" when the girl asked what could happen if she refused to be searched - but claimed there had been "no threat of arrest".Elliot Gold, for the Independent Office for Police Conduct, asked: "Will you accept you were giving Child Q the option of being strip-searched or arrested?" "There were no options given like that," the officer replied."Do you accept that saying that to a 15-year-old might make them feel frightened?" Mr Gold said."Yes," Det Con Linge responded.The panel heard that when asked previously what the officer had proposed to do if she found cannabis on Child Q, Det Con Linge had answered: "As per legislation, a juvenile found in possession must be arrested and brought to custody."Det Con Linge previously said Child Q had consented to the search, but admitted under cross-examination by Mr Gold that this was not accurate.
Det Con Linge joined the Met Police in 2018 and was still in her probationary period when the search took place.The officer confirmed she had completed equality training, including on unconscious bias and discriminatory stereotypes, and said she was aware of stereotypes relating to black people.She told the hearing she did not "see the relevance" of the fact Child Q was being questioned by two white police officers.Mr Gold asked whether she would accept that "a stereotype of black people is they may more likely be stopped and searched" and if she would accept that they are more likely to be "in receipt of use of force by police".Det Con Linge replied "no" to both questions.The 46-year-old agreed there was no adult present in the room where the search happened who could have offered the child advice, assisted her in communication with police or ensured her rights were respected.Det Con Linge also denied she "did not recognise Child Q as a child" and was, in effect, "treating her as older than she was".The hearing continues.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
39 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Paloma Faith reveals she nearly died in violent attack by an ex who tried to run her off the road before smashing her car window and pulling her out
Paloma Faith has revealed that she 'nearly died' during a violent attack at the hands of an ex when she was younger. The singer, 43, opened up about the horrifying ordeal on her podcast Mad Sad Bad on Tuesday, where she was joined by Ruby Wax. Paloma shared that she was left with a black eye and 'smashed up' face after an ex-partner tried to run her off the run in a high-speed car chase before smashing her window and pulling her out of it. The star got an injunction out against the man following the 'very violent' attack - but she ran into him seven years in a bizarre twist of fate. Making her way to work at an underwear shop, Paloma saw her ex waving at her and she agreed to go for a last drink - but as she discussed 'taking back the power' following an assault, Paloma said she left him stunned when she said she found his chat boring and walked out. Paloma said the moment made her feel as though she had 'conquered' something as she healed from the ordeal. Recalling the attack, Paloma said: 'This guy, when I was younger, attacked me very, very, very violently, and I nearly died. 'It was a high speed car chase, and he tried to run me off the road. He's an ex, and I nearly died. 'He drove his car into the front of somebody's house, and he came and smashed my driver's side window in and pulled me out, but I got a black eye and a smashed up face, and then I got an injunction against him.' Paloma continued: 'Seven years later, I saw him. I was going to my job when I worked in the knicker shop, dressed all like, you know, knickery in the little pink outfit - feeling quite confident in the uniform. 'And I see this man drive past, and he goes, and then he gets out, and then he says, "Can I take you for a drink after work? I feel like we need to clear it up." I said, "Yeah, I'd like to go." 'So I went for a drink and I let him speak. I didn't say very much, and I asked him some questions. His answers were kind of boring. 'And then I just said, "I'm gonna go now." And he said, "why?" I said, "I find you quite boring".' It comes after Paloma opened up about her 'posh' new boyfriend after Vogue Williams confronted her for calling Spencer Matthews 'posh'. The exchange happened on the Mad, Sad and Bad podcast when Paloma asked Vogue, 39, what attracted her to 'the multimillionaire hunk'. Vogue then revealed that her husband Spencer, 36, told her that Paloma ' kept slagging him for being posh.' Paloma said: 'Yeah, but I've now got a posh boyfriend. Now I'm dating one - I'm sleeping with the enemy.' The singer, who has spoken candidly about her working-class upbringing in Hackney, London, then apologised to listeners about her choice of lover. She joked: 'I'm thinking of it more like a social experiment.' Vogue, from Portmarnock, Dublin, went on to explain that she is 'considered posh'. She then answered the question and said that her now-husband was great fun, so much so that he managed to convince her it was better to be with him than be single, which is what she wanted at the time. She said: 'He was great craic. He really was. 'All my gay friends were like, "Vogue, you better sleep with him."' While she was reluctant at first, she said the pair, who are celebrating their seventh anniversary, 'kept coming back together'. Paloma went public with her new man Stevie Thomas, the director of a music venue in Birmingham, in March of this year at Sony's Brit Award's afterparty at Nobu Portman Square.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE I was branded Britain's most hated woman for buying twin babies online for £8k in 'cash for babies scandal'... here's what happened next
She was branded the most hated woman in Britain after paying more than £8,000 to buy twin babies from the US on the internet. Judith Kilshaw found herself at the centre of an international scandal after adopting the six-month old girls who had already been sold to a childless couple in America. More than 20 years on, Judith admits her life had been 'plagued' by the global controversy which ended with her losing the children - along with her home and her marriage. But defiant Judith, 71, insists she has 'no regrets' and told how she has not given up hope of being reunited with the twins. Speaking exclusively to MailOnline from her home in Wrexham, Judith told MailOnline: 'I have thought a lot about the case over the years and asked myself if I regretted doing it. 'To a certain extent it has plagued my life - it never goes away. 'It was a nightmare to start with but time heals things. There's bigger things to think about. 'But I have no regrets. I thought I could give the girls a better life and give them opportunities in life. Alan and Judith Kelshaw (pictured) sparked a 'cash-for babies' outcry in 2001 after they paid £8,200 to adopt Kiara and Keyara Wecker 'I would still love to talk to the girls to make sure they are OK and answer any questions they might have. 'I am open to speaking to them but I have never spoken to them. But if they wanted to, I would love to get in touch.' Judith and her solicitor husband Alan sparked a 'cash-for babies' outcry in 2001 after they paid £8,200 to adopt Kiara and Keyara Wecker. They brought the twins, who they renamed Belinda and Kimberley, to Britain hoping to start a new life as a family at their seven-bedroom farmhouse in Buckley, north Wales. But things did not go according to plan. Then-prime minister Tony Blair called the adoption deal 'disgusting' and the twins were seized by social services and taken into emergency protection. They were returned to the US after a High Court judge annulled the adoption. Since then, Judith settled back into relative obscurity but much has happened in the intervening years, which can be revealed for the first time by MailOnline. In the aftermath of the scandal, things were never quite the same for the couple and, saddled with debts over the affair, they were evicted from their farmhouse months later. They moved into a bungalow in Chester but their 14-year marriage ended after Judith met a man 13 years her junior in a nightclub. Despite the split, she remained close to Alan and was at his bedside when he died aged 63 in January 2019. At the time she told of her sadness that he had never fulfilled his dream of meeting the girls again. She said: 'He told me he had always regarded the twins as ours and his last wish was for me to go to America and try to make contact with them. 'I don't know if this will be possible but I will do everything I can to honour his dying request.' Before the baby storm erupted, the couple had lived an anonymous, if somewhat eccentric, middle-class life in rural north Wales. They already had two sons and Judith had two grown up children from her first marriage. The couple wanted to have a daughter together but Judith was too old to conceive. They had spent £4,000 on unsuccessful IVF treatment and had looked into surrogacy before they turned to an online adoption agency in desperation. The US-based agency called A Caring Heart was run by Tina Johnson who was acting on behalf of the mother of the mixed race twins, Tranda Wecker, who was aged 28 at the time. Tranda, a hotel receptionist from Missouri, had fallen pregnant as her second marriage was coming to an end and had decided to part with her children. Unbeknown to Judith and Alan, the broker had already arranged the adoption of the twins with Californian couple Richard and Vickie Allen. They had paid £4,000 for the adoption and had cared for them for two months. Tranda reportedly had a change of heart and, while the couple were in the process of finalising legal paperwork, she was given permission to say a final farewell to her daughters. The American couple were told that Tranda wanted to spend two days with the twins - but instead they were handed to Judith and Alan. They set off with the twins to get their birth certificates before making a gruelling 1,500-mile car journey to Little Rock Arkansas, where adoption is relatively easy, with the Allens in hot pursuit. After a five-minute hearing the couple return to Britain with the twins and their adoption papers. But the FBI were called in to probe the case amid a bitter transatlantic war of words and a legal battle over the girls' future. The children were returned to the US in April 2001 where they were placed in foster care before a third set of parents eventually raised them. Judith has always insisted she did nothing wrong or illegal and believed the adoption would be in the best interests of the twins. But, in the aftermath of the affair, the couple racked up debts of £70,000. They were forced to quit the farmhouse where they lived with three of Judith's children along with six dogs, more than a dozen cats, two ferrets, a horse, a pony and two pot-bellied pigs. In the wake of her fight, Judith tried to get elected as an MP in 2005 after standing as an independent candidate in her local Alyn and Deeside constituency insisting she wanted to 'stand up for the little people'. She split with Alan in 2006 and three years later she married Stephen Sillett, who was described at the time as a busker. In the aftermath of the split, Judith was investigated for alleged benefits fraud arising from her living arrangements following the break-up. In a bizarre twist, Alan gave his ex-wife away when she married Stephen at Wrexham Register Office in 2009. She had a volatile relationship with her third husband and in 2012, Judith pleaded guilty at Wrexham Magistrates Court to assaulting Stephen after hitting over the head with a Christmas bauble following a row. Stephen had accused Judith, who now goes by her married name Sillett, of having an affair, she says. Judith told MailOnline: 'It was hardly crime of the century. He probably deserved it. 'However we stayed together. We are still legally married but have split up. 'We're still friends and speak all the time.' Meanwhile Alan had been struck down with pulmonary fibrosis, a serious lung disease, which left him in hospital for months before his death. Judith told how Stephen became jealous as she nursed her ex husband through his illness which led to her giving up her job as a cleaner in the Co-op. She told MailOnline: 'There were three of us in the relationship and men can't really handle that can they? 'I think he didn't like the attention I was giving Alan.' Of her life now she added: 'I now live with my son. I don't work as I have retired but I'm a bit of an agony aunt to all my friends.' Speaking from his terraced home in a village near Wrexham, Stephen, now 58, said: 'We're still legally married but are not together anymore. 'I don't think we can afford to get divorced.' Judith heard nothing more about the fate of the twins until 2018 when it was revealed they were starting university after being brought up by a loving churchgoing family in Missouri. Their adoptive mother said at the time: 'They have grown into fine young women, each with their own dreams and ambitions.' Since then two TV documentaries have been made about the case - one called Three Mothers, two Babies and a Scandal, which was shown on Amazon Prime in 2022 while a second named The Baby Scandal That Shocked The World was screened on Channel 5 last year. Judith told MailOnline: 'The case and furore of it all, never really goes away. 'In fact I was recognised by a woman in the supermarket the other day. 'She kept on staring at me, trying to work out who I was. Then she spoke to me asking if I was the woman from the babies case. 'She recognised me from being on telly a few years ago, but it was positive. She said I came across really well.'
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Nigel Farage casts doubts over Lucy Letby's murder convictions as he becomes latest MP to wade into debate
NIGEL Farage has revealed he has "doubts" over the Lucy Letby case as he becomes the latest MP to join the debate. Letby, 35, from Hereford, is serving 15 whole-life orders after she was convicted across two trials at Manchester Crown Court of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others. 6 6 6 Letby lost two attempts to challenge her convictions at the Court of Appeal last year. The Reform UK leader spoke about the case off the back of Jeremy Hunt's comment piece in the Mail last week. The former health secretary called for an "urgent re-examination" of Letby after "serious and credible" questions were raised by experts. The MP urged Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, to "speed up their normally painfully slow process". Speaking on GB News, Mr Farage agreed that he was also beginning to have 'doubts' about the case. He said: 'I have a feeling, actually, Jeremy Hunt might be right about the Lucy Letby case. "I'm just beginning to get more and more doubts about that issue." Cheshire Constabulary is still conducting a review of deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the neonatal units of the Countess of Chester and Liverpool Women's Hospital during Letby's time as a nurse from 2012 to 2016. The force have also launched another probe into allegations of corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter at the Countess of Chester Hospital. Meanwhile Lady Justice Thirlwall is due to publish in November the findings from the public inquiry into how the former nurse was able to commit her crimes. Argentina's Lucy Letby' in court after murdering 5 newborns & trying to kill 8 more in chillingly similar case to UK's baby killer The Sun revealed earlier this year what Letby's own parents, Jonathan, 79, and Susan Letby, 65, said about the case. In one correspondence, seen by The Sun, Letby's parents reveal they "firmly believe" their daughter's convictions will be "the biggest miscarriage of justice in British history". They also said they're pleased "public opinion is beginning to sway" in her favour "at last". 'FRESH' EVIDENCE This all comes after Letby's lawyers say they have a bombshell report that reveals "fresh" evidence she didn't kill any babies. Mark McDonald told reporters the convicted child serial killer has "a new hope" as he visited the Birmingham offices of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC). He said the new evidence "blows the case out the water". He was there to deliver the full findings of a 14-strong international panel of neonatologists and paediatric specialists who say poor medical care and natural causes were the reasons for babies collapsing at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit. Also passed to the CCRC, which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, was a separate report from seven medics which claims the results of insulin tests on two infants, which a jury concluded Letby poisoned, were unreliable. Mr McDonald said in April: "Today I've put in 23 expert reports from 24 experts from across the realm covering eight separate countries," he said. "Those expert reports completely demolish the prosecution's case that was put before the jury. "It is now hoped that the CCRC will not take long to look at this evidence and refer it back to the Court of Appeal. "These reports show that no crime was committed... This blows the case out the water. The charges Letby was convicted on in full Child A, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby injected air intravenously into the bloodstream of the baby boy. COUNT 1 GUILTY. Child B, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby attempted to murder the baby girl, the twin sister of Child A, by injecting air into her bloodstream. COUNT 2 GUILTY. Child C, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said Letby forced air down a feeding tube and into the stomach of the baby boy. COUNT 3 GUILTY. Child D, allegation of murder. The Crown said air was injected intravenously into the baby girl. COUNT 4 GUILTY. Child E, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby murdered the twin baby boy with an injection of air into the bloodstream and also deliberately caused bleeding to the infant. COUNT 5 GUILTY. Child F, allegation of attempted murder. Letby was said by prosecutors to have poisoned the twin brother of Child E with insulin. COUNT 6 GUILTY. Child G, three allegations of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby targeted the baby girl by overfeeding her with milk and pushing air down her feeding tube. COUNT 7 GUILTY, COUNT 8 GUILTY, COUNT 9 NOT GUILTY. Child H, two allegations of attempted murder. Prosecutors said Letby sabotaged the care of the baby girl in some way which led to two profound oxygen desaturations. COUNT 10 NOT GUILTY, COUNT 11 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child I, allegation of murder. The prosecution said Letby killed the baby girl at the fourth attempt and had given her air and overfed her with milk. COUNT 12 GUILTY. Child J, allegation of attempted murder. No specific form of harm was identified by the prosecution but they said Letby did something to cause the collapse of the baby girl. COUNT 13 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child K, allegation of attempted murder. The prosecution said Letby compromised the baby girl as she deliberately dislodged a breathing tube. COUNT 14 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child L, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said the nurse poisoned the twin baby boy with insulin. COUNT 15 GUILTY. Child M, allegation of attempted murder. Prosecutors said Letby injected air into the bloodstream of Child L's twin brother. COUNT 16 GUILTY. Child N, three allegations of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby inflicted trauma in the baby boy's throat and also injected him with air in the bloodstream. COUNT 17 GUILTY, COUNT 18 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT, COUNT 19 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child O, allegation of murder. Prosecutors say Letby attacked the triplet boy by injecting him with air, overfeeding him with milk and inflicting trauma to his liver with "severe force". COUNT 20 GUILTY. Child P, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said the nurse targeted the triplet brother of Child O by overfeeding him with milk, injecting air and dislodging his breathing tube. COUNT 21 GUILTY. Child Q, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby injected the baby boy with liquid, and possibly air, down his feeding tube. COUNT 22 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. "I'm absolutely confident that the expert evidence that has appeared post-conviction totally undermines the safety of the conviction. "I'm very confident that we're going to get back to the Court of Appeal." Asked how Letby "is doing", he said: "I don't talk about Lucy herself as a person but to say this: She's read all the reports, she's seen the reports, we have a new hope now. "A new hope that, in fact, the truth will come out. So yes, she has a new hope." Last month, lawyers for the families of Letby's victims rubbished the international panel's findings as "full of analytical holes" and "a rehash" of the defence case heard at trial. Mr McDonald also gave the CCRC a separate report on the insulin cases of Child F and Child L from seven experts including two consultant neonatalogists, a retired professor in forensic toxicology and a paediatric endocrinologist. Their report summary concluded the jury was misled in a number of "important areas" including medical and evidential facts, and that key information on the insulin testing procedure was not submitted. It added that the biomechanical test used in both cases "can give rise to falsely high insulin results" due to the presence of antibodies which can interfere with the outcome. On Thursday, Mr McDonald released the independent panel's case summaries of all 17 babies that were said by trial prosecutors to have been deliberately harmed on the Countess of Chester Hospital's neonatal unit. The 14-strong panel concluded that no criminal offences had been committed at the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2015 and 2016 and instead provided alternative causes of deterioration. Among the findings of the panel, working pro bono for Letby's defence team, was that baby boy Child C died following ineffective resuscitation from a collapse after an "acute small bowel obstruction" that went unrecognised, rather than from a deliberate administration of air. Child P, a triplet boy, was also found by the jury to have been fatally injected with air but the panel ruled he died from a collapsed lung that was "suboptimally managed". Letby's experts said there was no evidence of air embolism - in which bubbles form and block the blood supply - in Child E, a twin boy, and that bleeding was not caused by inflicted trauma but from either a lack of oxygen pre-birth or a congenital blood vessel condition. The panel said insulin-related levels for Child E's brother, Child F, insulin were within the norm for preterm infants and it did not prove that synthetic insulin was administered. The same conclusion was reached for Child L, another twin boy that Letby was convicted of attempting to murder by insulin poisoning, and both cases were said to have involved sub-standard medical management of hypoglycaemia. BOMBSHELL EMAIL Meanwhile, an explosive email has also been found which appears to cast more doubt on the prosecution claims that Letby was caught "red-handed". A new email - sent on May 4 2017 to colleagues at the Countess of Chester Hospital - suggests there could be discrepancies over the chronology of events. The memo, revealed in April, is a significant boost to Letby's legal fight to overturn her convictions. Dr Ravi Jayaram is the only hospital staff member to have claimed to see Letby act suspiciously and link her behaviour directly to babies' deaths. Medical experts provided case summaries on all 17 babies from the Letby trial An international panel of medical experts has provided case summaries on all 17 babies who featured in the 10-month trial of Lucy Letby. The 14-strong panel concluded that no criminal offences had been committed at the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2015 and 2016 and instead provided alternative causes of deterioration: - Baby 1 (known as Child A in the trial): The prosecution said the boy was murdered by an injection of air into the bloodstream which caused an air embolism where bubbles form and block the blood supply. The panel found no evidence of air embolism and said the child had died from thrombosis, where a blood clot forms in a vessel. - Baby 2 (Child B): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder Child A's twin sister by also injecting air into her bloodstream. The panel found no evidence of air embolism and said the child had collapsed from thrombosis. - Baby 3 (Child C): The prosecution said the boy was murdered with air forced down his feeding tube and into his stomach. The panel said the child died following ineffective resuscitation from a collapse after an "acute small bowel obstruction" that went unrecognised. - Baby 4 (Child D): The prosecution said the girl was murdered by an injection of air into the bloodstream. The panel found no evidence of air embolism and ruled the child died of systemic sepsis, pneumonia and disseminated intravascular coagulation (blood clotting). Issues with failures to give relevant antibiotics were also identified. - Baby 5 (Child E): The Crown said Letby murdered the twin boy with an injection of air into the bloodstream and she also deliberately caused bleeding to the infant. The panel said there was no evidence of air embolism and bleeding was caused either by a lack of oxygen pre-birth or a congenital blood vessel condition. - Baby 6 (Child F): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder Child E's twin brother by administering insulin. The panel ruled that the child's insulin levels and insulin/C-peptide ratio did not prove that exogenous insulin was used and were within the norm for pre-term infants. It added that there was poor medical management of the child's prolonged hypoglycaemia. - Baby 7 (Child G): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder the girl by overfeeding her with milk and forcing air down her feeding tube. The panel said there was no evidence to support air injection into the stomach or overfeeding. The infant's vomiting and clinical deterioration was due to infection, it found. - Baby 8 (Child H): Jurors cleared Letby of one count of attempted murder and failed to reach a verdict on a second count. Prosecutors said the nurse sabotaged the girl's care in some way which led to two profound oxygen desaturations. The panel said the deteriorations were due to medical mismanagement of a tension pneumothorax where air is trapped between the lung and chest wall. - Baby 9 (Child I): The prosecution said Letby murdered the infant by injecting air into her bloodstream and stomach. The panel said it found no evidence of air injections and that the baby died of breathing complications caused by respiratory distress syndrome and chronic lung disease. - Baby 10 (Child J): Jurors could not reach a verdict on an allegation of attempted murder. No specific form of harm was identified by the prosecution but they said Letby did something to cause the collapse of the girl. The panel said the deterioration was caused by sepsis and there was no evidence to support malicious airway obstruction. - Baby 11 (Child K): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder the girl by deliberately dislodging her breathing tube. Among its findings the panel said there was no evidence to support a dislodged endotracheal tube (ETT) and the clinical deterioration was caused by use of an undersized ETT. - Baby 12 (Child L): The Crown said the nurse poisoned the boy with insulin. The panel said the infant's insulin-related levels were within the norm for pre-term infants and there was no evidence of deliberate administration. - Baby 13 (Child M): Prosecutors said Letby attempted to murder Child L's twin brother by injecting air into his bloodstream. The panel said there was no evidence of air embolism and his collapse was caused by sepsis or a heart problem. - Baby 14 (Child N): The Crown said the boy was the victim of attempted murder by inflicted trauma in his throat and an air injection into his bloodstream. The panel said there was no air embolism and it was likely his blood oxygen levels dropped due to his haemophilia condition or routine cares, which was "exacerbated" by repeated attempts to insert a breathing tube. - Baby 15 (Child O): The prosecution said Letby murdered the triplet boy by injecting air into his bloodstream and inflicting trauma to his liver. The panel said he died from liver damage caused by traumatic delivery, resulting in bleeding in the abdomen and profound shock. - Baby 16 (Child P): Prosecutors said Letby murdered Child O's brother by injecting him with air. The panel said there was no evidence to support that mechanism and that he died from a collapsed lung that was "suboptimally managed". - Baby 17 (Child Q): Jurors could not reach a verdict on an allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby attempted to murder the boy by injecting liquid, and possibly air, down his feeding tube. The panel said there was no evidence to support air injection into the stomach and the child deteriorated because he had early symptoms of a serious gastrointestinal problem, or sepsis. He testified that the nurse was seen standing over Baby K's cot as the infant's condition deteriorated. Taking the stand, the doctor said Letby failed to call for help as the newborn's condition declined, insisting the nurse had virtually been caught "red handed". But prior to the start of the police investigation, Dr Jayaram wrote in an email to colleagues: "At time of deterioration ... Staff nurse Letby at incubator and called Dr Jayaram to inform of low saturations." The revelatory memo appears to contradict previous testimony, with the evidence not making it into documents handed to cops before the start of the investigation. In the newly released email, Dr Jayaram also suggested Baby K's fragile premature condition was instead the cause of death, saying: "Baby subsequently deteriorated and eventually died, but events around this would fit with explainable events associated with extreme prematurity." The note sees him suggest that the baby's death was explained by issues associated with extreme prematurity. Appearing at the 2024 trial, the doctor framed her behaviour as suspicious, telling the court: "Lucy Letby was stood next to the incubator. "She wasn't looking at me. She didn't have her hands in the incubator." Asked by prosecutor Nick Johnson KC whether he had "any call for help from Lucy Letby?", he replied: "No, not at all. "I was surprised that the alarm was not going off, although my priority was (Baby K) and I didn't question it at the time.'In retrospect, I was surprised that help was not called, given (Baby K) was a 25-week gestation baby and her saturations were dropping." However, at the recent Thirlwall Inquiry, the doctor expressed regret at not raising the alarm over the nurse's behaviour sooner He explained: "I lie awake thinking about this ... I should have been braver." 6 6
