So, did she do it? Seven controversial points from the Lucy Letby documentary explained

A new Netflix documentary, The Investigation of Lucy Letby, revisits one of the UK’s most controversial criminal cases and begs the question: Did she do it?

The former neonatal nurse was convicted of seven murders and six attempted murders, but the film brings together voices who both support and question the verdict.

Cheshire Police

Some contributors argue Letby was unfairly blamed for systemic failings at the Countess of Chester Hospital, while others maintain the jury reached the right conclusion based on the evidence presented in court.

The documentary has also drawn criticism from Letby’s parents, who called the inclusion of arrest footage filmed inside their home an invasion of privacy, a decision defended by the filmmakers.

Here are seven details highlighted in the documentary that are reigniting debate around the case.

A rota that placed her at every incident

Prosecutors relied heavily on staff rotas showing Letby was on duty whenever babies deteriorated or died. The documentary includes legal commentators who argue this created a compelling narrative for jurors.

However, one person featured in the documentary suggests her presence could be explained by her experience level and willingness to take extra shifts. They also note that no CCTV footage captured any wrongdoing and that questions remain around motive.

A handwritten note interpreted as a confession

Netflix

One of the most widely discussed pieces of evidence was a note Letby wrote containing phrases such as “I killed them on purpose because I am not good enough.”

Most Read

It’s everywhere, so here’s how to do that viral AI caricature trend with ChatGPT

Wait, what happened to Sophie’s mother? The Bridgerton books explain the backstory properly

Chappell Roan broke the Grammys 2026 with *that* risqué dress, so here’s how it actually worked

In police interviews shown in the documentary, Letby said she wrote the words during an emotionally difficult period after being moved off the neonatal unit and while receiving counselling.

The same document also contains phrases expressing fear, panic and claims of innocence. A friend interviewed in the film argues the defence did not present expert testimony to offer alternative explanations for the note’s meaning. Letby’s barrister declined to comment on trial strategy.

Mortality rates dropped, but so did the unit’s capacity

Police in the documentary say serious incidents stopped after Letby was removed from clinical duties.

However, people have also pointed out that the neonatal unit was later downgraded, meaning it cared for fewer high-risk babies. Therefore, it would make sense that the change in patient mix could have influenced outcomes as well.

Complex medical evidence and the risk of misunderstanding

Netflix

The highly technical medical testimony was presented at trial. Criminal barrister Mark McDonald argues the scientific detail may have been difficult for jurors to fully understand.

Independent paediatrician Dr Dewi Evans previously concluded that some babies had been intentionally harmed, which shifted the investigation’s focus from what had happened to who was responsible. Other people have since said that the complexity of the science leaves room for differing interpretations.

The insulin cases and disputed responsibility

Two cases involving unexplained insulin administration were presented in court as strong evidence. The prosecution argued Letby’s signature appeared on nutrition bags allegedly contaminated with insulin.

Letby accepted insulin had been given unnecessarily but denied being the person responsible. Her defence team argued there was no direct proof she tampered with any medical supplies.

Sensitive documents discovered at her home

Netflix

During a police search, officers found hundreds of confidential handover sheets in a box labelled “keep”. Letby told investigators she had taken them home accidentally, and said she hadn’t destroyed them because she didn’t own a shredder.

A competing medical panel challenges earlier conclusions

The documentary follows a panel organised by McDonald, including Dr Shoo Lee, whose research had previously been referenced by the prosecution’s expert witness. According to Lee, the panel identified possible misdiagnoses, staffing pressures and difficulties accessing doctors quickly.

A consultant from the hospital disputes that explanation in the film, noting that earlier staffing shortages did not correspond with similar spikes in deaths. Dr Evans argues the panel offered alternative opinions rather than new evidence.

A bereaved mother’s testimony adds a personal perspective

For the first time in a documentary, a parent whose baby died speaks on camera. Appearing anonymously, she describes being told her daughter was improving before a sudden collapse and recalls her experience in court.

Medical experts in the film say the child’s unexpected deterioration remains a key focus, with one suggesting an unusual rash could have been linked to air entering the bloodstream.

For all the latest Netflix news and drops, like The Holy Church of Netflix on Facebook.

Featured image credit: Cheshire Police, Netflix