Lucy Letby has tried to challenge the sentence thrown out by the Court of Appeal

Child serial killer Lucy Letby has had her bid to challenge a conviction for the attempted murder of a girl thrown out by the Court of Appeal.

Letby was convicted of trying to kill the newborn, known as Child K, after a retrial in July and was given a 15th life sentence.

He sought approval to challenge his conviction for attempting to kill the boy on the grounds that the trial should not have gone ahead because of the “overwhelming and irreparable harm” caused by the media coverage.

Wearing a green top and dark trousers, Letby looked tired and appeared via a video link from HMP Bronzefield.

He remained emotionless as his application was dismissed by three senior judges during a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Judge William Davis, sitting with Judge Jeremy Baker and Judge McGowan, said at the start of his sentence that they would “deny leave” for Letby to challenge the conviction.

He added: “There has been significant media coverage on the basis of these convictions.

“Some of the comments from publicists have called into question whether Letby should have been sentenced in 2023. If there are issues arising from the first trial … we don’t have to say, that would be speculative.”

Letby was previously sentenced to 14 life terms after being found guilty at her first trial of the murders of seven babies and the attempted murders of six more, including two attempts on a child.

Her offenses took place in the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, where she worked as a nurse, between June 2015 and June 2016.

After that trial, which ran from October 2022 to August 2023, the jury was unable to reach a verdict in Child K’s case, but a second jury took just three and a half hours to convict- the in the new trial in Manchester. Crown Court.

Jurors were told he targeted the “very premature” baby during a night shift at the Countess of Chester Hospital in the early hours of February 17, 2016, by dislodging Child K’s breathing tube after she was transferred from the delivery room to the intensive care unit of the unit.

She was given her 15th life sentence for the offence, which sentencing judge Mr Justice Goss said was “another shocking act of calculated callous cruelty”, describing Child K as “exceptionally vulnerable”.

After being sentenced, Letby said “I’m innocent” as officers from the dock led her away.

Benjamin Myers KC, for Letby, told the court the charge of attempted murder should have been “upheld” as an “abuse of process” because of the “overwhelming and irreparable harm” caused by the cover-up media coverage of his first trial.

He said: “The learned judge erred in rejecting the defense’s application at the start of the trial to stay the prosecution as an abuse of process.”

He continued: “It is an exceptional case, with exceptional media interest, and therefore exceptional injustice can occur, despite the safeguards that are often used.”

Mr Myers said media coverage before the retrial was “saturated with unadulterated vitriol towards Ms Letby”, which included coverage on the BBC’s Panorama and ITV’s Loose Women which “depicted her as mean and depraved”. .

He went on to say that “media coverage following the first trial, particularly immediately afterwards” included “very damaging and emotional public comments by the investigating police officers” while a new trial was still being considered.

Opposing the appeal, Nick Johnson KC said in writings that he was “wrong” and that the jury found Letby to be a “multiple murderer and habitual liar”.

He said: “The application appears to rely on the sheer volume of publicity as a sufficient reason in itself to base an application to drop the prosecution.

“It also leans heavily on the proposition that it is wrong for a witness to speak to the media and that this in itself taints the prosecution to the point that it should be dropped.

“This is the wrong approach.”

In court, Johnson said Letby’s lawyers had provided 62 pieces of advertising to support the appeal.

In response to Mr Myers’ claims, he said: “We do not accept, for one minute, that that is a reasonable or accurate characterization.

“What the police said after the convictions at the first trial was reasonable and accurately and sparingly described the horrific crimes (for) which this applicant had been convicted of.”