CPS declines new charges against Lucy Letby over additional infant deaths
The CPS declined to bring further charges against Lucy Letby after reviewing evidence, saying the evidential test was not met; families have been offered meetings to explain the decision.
The Crown Prosecution Service declined to bring new charges against convicted neonatal nurse Lucy Letby, concluding that evidence submitted by Cheshire Constabulary did not meet the evidential test for prosecution over two alleged infant deaths and seven non-fatal collapses. The CPS made the decision public on January 20, 2026 after reviewing material handed to prosecutors in July 2025.
Letby remains in custody serving whole-life terms for convictions that include seven murders and multiple attempted murders arising from incidents in 2015-2016. The CPS said its decision applies only to the matters it reviewed and does not alter the standing convictions or existing sentences. Families affected by the reviewed allegations have been written to by the CPS and offered meetings to explain the rationale behind the prosecutorial decision.
Cheshire Constabulary expressed disappointment at the outcome but said it would respect the independent decision of prosecutors. The force and prosecutors are treating the matters as separate from other investigative strands that continue to run independently. Corporate and system-level inquiries into hospital practice and safeguarding remain distinct from the criminal charging process and are continuing.
For the community tracking this case, the CPS explanation highlights how the threshold for prosecution operates in high-profile investigations. Prosecutors must be satisfied that evidence is sufficient to provide a realistic prospect of conviction before charges are authorised. Where that evidential test is not met, even in cases that attract intense public scrutiny, a decision not to charge may follow. That distinction matters to grieving families and to public confidence in how complex healthcare-related deaths are handled.

Practical implications include the offer of meetings to the affected families, which provides a direct channel for explanations and avenues for further questions. The separate corporate and system inquiries are where many policy, staffing, and procedural concerns are expected to be examined in more detail. Those inquiries may yield recommendations for safeguarding, clinical governance, and record-keeping that could affect local healthcare practice and public oversight.
This decision closes one prosecutorial avenue but leaves open broader institutional and public questions. Readers involved in advocacy, hospital oversight, or local community groups should watch for updates from the CPS, Cheshire Constabulary, and the ongoing inquiries that will probe system-level failures and potential reforms. The core convictions against Letby remain in force, while families and the wider community await fuller explanations from the parallel reviews that aim to prevent future harm.
Know something we missed? Have a correction or additional information?
Submit a Tip

