LUCY LETBY SENT DR. MARK DEAKIN A MESSAGE ABOUT BABY N AFTER THE INFANT COLLAPSED — BUT ONE QUESTION SHE ASKED HAS TAKEN ON A MUCH DARKER MEANING

Lucy Letby sent Dr. Mark Deakin a message about Baby N after the infant became seriously unwell.

But it was not simply a question about the baby’s condition.

According to evidence later heard by the Thirlwall Inquiry, Letby also asked the paediatrician whether she had done anything wrong while caring for the infant.

At the time, the exchange appeared to be part of a private conversation between two colleagues who had become unusually close.

Years later, after Letby was convicted of attempting to murder Baby N, the same message was examined in a very different context.

“HAVE I DONE ANYTHING WRONG?”

Baby N was one of the infants involved in the criminal case against Letby.

During the period when the baby was receiving treatment, Letby contacted Dr. Deakin, a consultant paediatrician who worked alongside her at the Countess of Chester Hospital.

The message went beyond asking how the infant was doing.

Letby wanted reassurance about her own actions.

Deakin responded by telling her that Baby N had received the best possible care and that she would have done everything she could for him.

But when Deakin later gave evidence to the Thirlwall Inquiry, he acknowledged that the exchange looked very different with hindsight.

He accepted that he had shared too much information about patients with Letby.

“In hindsight, no.”

That was how Deakin responded when asked whether the messages were appropriate.

He said he believed at the time that he was providing support to a colleague who was distressed, but later accepted that he had not understood the full clinical picture.

A RELATIONSHIP THAT BECAME A MAJOR PART OF THE STORY

The Baby N exchange was not an isolated conversation.

Evidence presented during the inquiry showed that Letby and Deakin exchanged 1,355 Facebook messages between June and September 2016.

Their conversations ranged from ordinary personal exchanges to discussions about babies receiving treatment.

Deakin later said that Letby had “misled and maybe manipulated” him and that he had regrets about how the relationship developed.

His identity had previously been protected during Letby’s criminal proceedings. He was referred to publicly as “Dr A.”

That anonymity was lifted after his death in 2026.

WHAT MADE THE BABY N MESSAGE SO SIGNIFICANT?

The significance of the exchange is not that it proves what Letby was thinking.

It does not, by itself, establish why she asked the question.

But the wording became striking when viewed alongside the later criminal case.

Letby was eventually convicted of attempting to murder Baby N after a series of sudden deteriorations in June 2016.

The message therefore became part of a much larger picture examined by investigators, prosecutors and the Thirlwall Inquiry.

Deakin himself did not tell the inquiry that he understood Letby to be admitting wrongdoing.

Instead, he described himself as someone who had been providing emotional support while failing to appreciate the wider concerns surrounding her.

YEARS LATER, EVERYTHING LOOKED DIFFERENT

By the time Deakin gave evidence, Letby had already been convicted of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others.

He told the inquiry that he had not understood the full clinical circumstances when he shared information with her.

He also expressed regret over his conduct.

Meanwhile, a later investigation by Alder Hey found that Deakin had inappropriately accessed Baby N’s medical records and had arranged observational visits for Letby at the hospital after she had been removed from clinical duties at the Countess of Chester Hospital.

He was dismissed for gross misconduct in June 2026.

The inquiry heard that the relationship between Letby and Deakin had become exceptionally close.

But the most haunting detail may be the simplest one:

After Baby N became seriously unwell, Letby did not only ask how the baby was doing.

She also wanted to know whether she had done anything wrong.

At the time, it was a question answered by a doctor trying to reassure a colleague.

Years later, after the conviction, the same question carried a very different weight.