Why are there new Letby baby deaths inquests
Executive summary
New inquests into baby deaths linked to former neonatal nurse Lucy Letby are being opened because the coroner is legally obliged to investigate deaths that were linked to criminal proceedings even after prosecutors decided not to bring further charges; the openings are also timed to sit alongside the wider public inquiry and other legal reviews into the case [1] [2] [3]. The coroner’s process will be restricted and partly closed to the public as reporting injunctions, ongoing inquiry work and victims’ privacy remain active considerations [1] [4].
1. Why the coroner is opening inquests now: legal and procedural drivers
Cheshire Coroner’s Court has scheduled the opening of inquests touching on babies who died at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women’s Hospital for 4 February 2026, a step distinct from criminal prosecution and prompted by the coroner’s duty to investigate causes of death linked to criminal proceedings and submitted evidence from police investigations [1] [5]. The openings follow the Crown Prosecution Service’s decision in January 2026 not to bring further charges in respect of additional deaths and non-fatal collapses, a prosecutorial decision that does not remove the coroner’s responsibility to consider those deaths in the civil investigative forum of an inquest [2] [6].
2. How the CPS decision interacts with coronial work and the public inquiry
The CPS said the additional evidence did not meet the test for fresh criminal charges after Cheshire Police submitted a file covering incidents extending back to 2012; prosecutors nonetheless confirmed that this decision does not undermine the convictions already secured against Letby [2] [4]. The coroner has been working to open inquests “pending the outcome” of the independent public inquiry chaired by Lady Justice Thirlwall and other legal processes such as applications to the Criminal Cases Review Commission — meaning inquests are being timed to run in parallel with, and not pre-empt, those broader reviews [7] [3].
3. What the inquests will — and will not — do
Inquests aim to establish who the deceased were and how, when and where they died; they are fact-finding rather than punitive proceedings and will not impose criminal liability or undo jury verdicts from Letby’s criminal trials [1] [8]. The coroner’s court has expressly maintained reporting restrictions and lifetime injunctions to protect infants’ identities and family privacy, and has said pre-inquest review hearings will be closed to the public and press — limiting what the public will immediately learn from the process [1] [4].
4. Competing narratives and legal manoeuvres around representation and review
Letby’s legal team has argued she should be treated as an interested party and be permitted to participate or be represented in the inquests, framing participation as part of an effort to challenge or contextualise the findings against her [7]. Conversely, victims’ families, prosecutors and campaigners continue to treat the criminal convictions as robust, even while police and inquiry work keep examining the full span of events; MPs and some commentators have used the CPS decision to call for further judicial review of convictions, highlighting a political dimension to how outcomes are perceived [2] [9].
5. The broader context: public inquiry, CCRC and institutional scrutiny
An independent public inquiry into how Letby was able to work and harm infants has been delayed into early 2026 and will publish findings that may overlap with issues examined at inquests, such as hospital staffing, oversight and systemic failures — matters raised by both critics of the convictions and by families seeking accountability [10] [3]. The Criminal Cases Review Commission is also reported to be examining material submitted by Letby’s supporters, including international expert reports arguing for non-criminal explanations; those materials are part of a layered legal ecosystem that the coroner must navigate without duplicating or pre-judging the inquiry’s final report [3] [11].
6. Stakes and likely trajectory
Expect the coroner’s hearings to be tightly managed, partly closed, and focused on establishing medical and factual sequences rather than assigning criminal blame; their findings could nonetheless inform public and institutional responses and may feed into further legal challenges or into the public inquiry’s recommendations about patient safety and neonatal care [1] [3]. Because the CPS has explicitly stood by the convictions while declining new charges, the inquests sit at an uneasy intersection of retained criminal verdicts, ongoing institutional review and vigorous defence challenges — a configuration that guarantees intense public scrutiny even as many details remain legally shielded [2] [7].