British cocaine dealer fled to South American bolthole after masterminding brutal murder of 'love rival' - only to end up in hellhole prison
Days after murdering 38-year-old Thomas Campbell in his own home in Mossley, Greater Manchester on July 2, 2022, John Belfield, 31, travelled on a stolen passport to Anglesey and onwards through Dublin, Amsterdam, Spain and Brazil.
He finally ended up in the former Dutch colony of Suriname, an untouched rainforest- covered melting pot which remains firmly off the tourist track.
But rather than being attracted by its colonial architecture or nature reserves teeming with wildlife, among its key appeals was a lack of an extradition treaty with the UK.
Additionally, its reputation as a tropical bolthole had already served as a magnet to Belfield's cocaine-dealing on-the-run gangster cousin Paul Cooper.
'It's not a very nice country to be honest,' Belfield confessed to Manchester Crown Court during a trial that ended on Thursday with a jury finding him guilty of murder.
On Friday, he was jailed for life, serving at least 37 years behind bars before he is eligible for parole.
Before the killing of gangster Thomas Campbell made him Manchester's most wanted, Belfield had forged an illicit living as a wholesale drug dealer.
Hiding out on the other side of the Atlantic, he was to turn to the one occupation he knew – and it would swiftly prove his downfall.
In March 2023 – just after his 'right-hand man' and driver had been convicted over their roles in the killing alongside Mr Campbell's ex-wife Coleen – he was arrested on drug offences at a hotel in the capital, Paramaribo, and thrown into jail.
Belfield was no stranger to the inside of a prison cell – his previous convictions include theft and affray – but he described conditions in Surinamese custody as 'pretty horrendous'.
Cells are shared by as many as six inmates, no bedding is provided and shower facilities are communal.
Belfield's cover story quickly aroused suspicion, and the Suriname authorities were able to establish his true identity by reading British newspaper appeals.
They contacted Greater Manchester Police, enabling the manhunt to be called off.
But the Suriname authorities were unwilling to give up the fugitive until he had faced justice there, leading to fears of a sentence measured in years before he could be brought back to Britain.
Det Sgt Paul Davies, who led the investigation, said the initial reaction to Belfield being traced to Suriname was 'brilliant'.
'But I wanted to get him back and see him in court, not over there. I wanted him to be brought back here, face justice and in front of the family.'
Finally in March last year Belfield was released into the custody of Surinamese police who handcuffed him during a commercial trans-Atlantic flight to Amsterdam before the short transfer to Manchester.
Belfield's gaunt appearance on arrival was far removed from the well-built figure pictured on wanted posters and he had lost a lot of weight.
Looking 'pale, thin and dishevelled', he was arrested by Det Sgt Davies.
Asked about his emotions that day, Det Sgt Davies said: 'Relief, but it's not the end, it's like now the hard work starts.'
British police praised the co-operation they received from their South American counterparts, who demonstrated they had no wish to see their tiny country seen as a safe haven for European fugitives.
Belfield – who made no comment when he was arrested - was driven to prison to await trial over the murder of 38-year-old Mr Campbell.
More than 12 months on, jurors at Manchester Crown Court saw another side of him, featuring a 'studious' new look with glasses, smart shirts and a calm, polite demeanour.
However it was an act they quickly saw through.
The career criminal now faces a sentence likely to be at least as long as accomplice Reece Steven, who is serving a minimum of 37 years, after being convicted of murder.
Belfield was the key 'driving force' behind the carefully planned ambush and murder of Mr Campbell at his £350,000 townhouse in Mossley, Greater Manchester.
Fuelled by a toxic combination of greed and jealousy, detectives are in no doubt that Belfield and his two henchmen – one of whom remains untraced – were determined to 'humiliate' their victim.
Covered in tattoos and muscle-bound, Mr Campbell's appearance was a far cry from the tubby figure pictured during his marriage to Coleen.
The couple, who lived in an extended house in the Clayton area of Manchester, had been investigated by police since 2014 over their role in the area's cocaine trade.
Under suspicion due to their lavish lifestyle and garage of Mercedes and BMWs, in 2019 the couple both admitted money laundering.
Thomas was jailed for two years and Coleen handed a 16-month prison sentence, suspended for two years.
The couple split, and by 2022 Thomas Campbell was in a relationship with Demi-Lee Driver – a nursing assistant who, fatefully, was John Belfield's ex.
In court, Belfield maintained he had moved on from her and had 'multiple' sexual partners – however the savage crime which was to follow showed his true sense of betrayal.
'He was sending nasty, misogynistic messages to Demi Lee,' a source said. 'It was quite obvious that he saw her as his property. And he didn't like the fact that she was in the relationship with somebody else.'
Born in Manchester, Belfield and his younger sister were raised in the eastern suburb of Openshaw by their NHS worker mother, who attended his trial daily.
Contemporaries branded him an 'arrogant troublemaker' and it was not long before he embarked on a life of crime.
From the age of 18 he was dealing drugs and involved with farming cannabis, although for a time he also made money legitimately through selling and repairing cars.
Over the next decade he amassed a string of convictions including for burglary, criminal damage, affray, theft and possession of an offensive weapon.
However by his late 20s he had carved out a profitable role as a wholesaler of cocaine and cannabis.
Detectives describe him as someone who was 'building a reputation' within organised crime.
Belfield was earning up to £2,000-a-week by selling to street dealers – enough to afford to run a white Porsche Boxster - while endeavouring to keep a sufficiently low profile to avoid police attention.
Detectives believe he recruited hardman Reece Steven - and potentially the second, unknown attacker - as 'muscle'.
'There's no way John Belfield would have been able to tackle Tom Campbell alone,' one said.
During his trial, Belfield maintained his sudden interest in Coleen Campbell – who by now ran her own aesthetics business – was due to being attracted to her.
Meanwhile his ex, Ms Driver, was sending him videos of herself dancing naked and saying she wanted to sleep with him again, he claimed.
But the grim reality was revealed by the 'sadistic' level of violence meted out on Mr Campbell after he was overpowered and bundled into the hallway of his home.
Stripped naked but for a pair of socks and bound with extra-strength duct tape, his face was mutilated, while boiling hot liquid was poured over his genitals.
Describing the catalogue of injuries as an effort at 'humiliation', Det Sgt Davies said the brutal violence meted out under Belfield's command was 'another level'.
'I think he wanted to show off a bit as well,' he added.
After the gang left, a 999 call was made from his phone – police believe one of his killers dialled the number before leaving the handset beside him, not intending him to die.
Det Sgt Davies told Mail Online he believes 'they've panicked and rung 999 from his phone thinking that the ambulance would get there'.
Instead, a harrowing recording shows that after the sound of panting and faint breathing from the critically injured victim, the operator ended the call.
So it was not until more than nine hours later that neighbours investigated, alerted to the front door being left open, and found his bloodied body.
Bizarrely, shortly after her ex-husband was killed, Coleen Campbell visited a psychic, later telling the dead man's mother that facial injuries had been done 'so other girls would not look at him'.
The macabre detail was to prove crucial in arousing suspicion that she had prior knowledge of the plot.
But it lends support to the theory that Mr Campbell was supposed to survive in order to live with his humiliation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
32 minutes ago
- BBC News
Man charged with murder after man, 85, found dead in Streatham
A man has been charged with murder after an 85-year-old man was found dead at a property in south London Ambulance Service called the police to a property on Churchmore Road in Streatham, at around 13:00 on Friday Met Police said the man was pronounced dead at the scene and he had "a number of injuries".Amithraz Balgobin, 36, of Lambeth, south London, was on Sunday charged with murder and drug possession, and is due to appear at Bromley Magistrates' Court on 7 July. The victim's next of kin have been made aware of his death but his identity has not been released.
The Sun
4 hours ago
- The Sun
Terrifying moment boy, 4, was taken from his bed by stranger as he slept beside his twin – and was never seen again
THIS is the harrowing moment a four-year-old boy is kidnapped from his bed next to his twin brother. Footage shows the man suspecting of abducting and killing Cash, believed to be 22-year-old Darriynn Brown, hovering over the crib in a hoodie and sweatpants with a backpack on in Dallas, Texas. 8 8 8 8 His twin brother, Carter, was laying sound asleep next to him. The man - who is believed to be Brown - continues to hover and appears to hesitate for a couple of seconds before reaching down to grab little Cash. He then picks him up by under his underarms and carries him out of the bedroom. The harrowing case is now finally set to come to trial this year. And one lawyer told The Sun it is going strain the American legal system, with swirling questions around mental health and competency. Brown allegedly broke into the house just before 5am on May 15, 2021, and snatched the tot. The same day, Cash was tragically found dead around eight blocks away from the house by a jogger. Cash passed away from multiple stab wounds, with cops previously saying his wounds appeared to have been inflicted by an "edged weapon". Brown was identified following the release of the CCTV footage of a man snatching the four-year-old in the middle of the night. He is charged with capital murder in the heinous killing and has finally been deemed competent to stand trial, a judge declared four years after the incident. Cash's blood was found on Brown's clothes, according to the murder affidavit. Surveillance installed in the six-bedroom Florida Parkway home also shows that, after Cash was snatched from his bed, the culprit returned for his twin brother, Carter. The second clip appears to show Brown in the bedroom at around 7am, when it's light outside. Inside France's brutal crypto crime wave with chopped off fingers, delivery van street kidnaps & £10million ransoms He is captured on camera, like a couple of hours earlier, hovering over the boy who is asleep, but leaves him be after he appears to be scared off by something. The motive for the alleged abduction of Cash by Brown is unclear. Now Brown has undergone treatment through an "outpatient competency restoration program" and is now deemed capable of understanding the charges against him, as well as able to participate in his own defence. Brown was evaluated by two doctors in 2022 and found unable to understand court proceedings and help with his own defence, according to court records. But in January a doctor said in a report that Brown is competent, with a judge ordering that criminal proceedings against him can continue. The 22-year-old's lawyer Heath Harris has previously said he has mental illnesses, including schizophrenia, and was hearing voices in the moment he is accused of taking Cash from his bed. Former prosecutor and defence attorney Dr. Robert Sanders told The Sun how the case could lead to a potential defence of insanity. He said: "He might be clearly incompetent to understand the wrongfulness of the action he did at that time, and that could lead to a not guilty by reasonable insanity or guilty by insanity and a lockup at a certain point in time. "The way they usually do this is they treat you and determine when you are reasonably competent to stand trial. 8 8 8 "They've done all of that, and now he's been determined to be reasonably competent to stand trial, but the defence is still allowed to show that at the time of the offence, he could not understand the wrongfulness of his actions. "That doesn't mean he is not competent now - but at the time he did it, he may not have understood the wrong of his based on some mental disease or defect." Dr Sanders also explained how the tragic case could even test the limits of the legal system's ability to balance justice as well as mental health. He added: " The issues in society are how do we view mental health? And is mental health a mitigation and extenuation? " So mitigation lessens the impact not of the depth, but of the results of the individual's actions. "And the extenuation is, 'what is the rationale for the irrational action of murdering a child?' Chilling moment creep tries to drag teen girl away in kidnap bid at station "So the jury, the judge, whoever is the trier of the fact, will get to balance those things if in fact they get to a point where they find he's guilty of the crime or not guilty by insanity based on the defence's application at the time that the insanity is an affirmative defence, which means you have to tell the court front that's what you're going to do. "And once his defence counsel has an opportunity to look at all the evidence, which he hadn't seen, at some point in time he'll be able to say, 'I'm going to assert the affirmative defence of not guilty by insanity' because he wasn't able to contemplate the wrongness of his actions when he took them or not. "The likelihood is that since he was confined and not able to be tried immediately after this, it seems very likely that that defence is going to come up." Brown also faces charges of burglary and kidnapping in connection with the four-year-old's heinous abduction, alongside additional burglary and injury to an elderly person charges from another incident, according to court and jail records. Brown was also reportedly seen in footage lurking outside the home about 10 weeks before Cash was abducted. The male who is believed to be Brown is seen next to the neighbor's shared fence before he peers into Sherrod's backyard, in the clip published by the Daily Beast. The suspect, wearing black jeans and a grey tank top, even quickly opens the back gate before promptly leaving the premises. He is also accused of walking into a home in Dallas in February 2021 - three months before the murder of Cash - and grabbing a young child. Cops said he broke in and searched the house before punching the homeowner after a confrontation, according to an affidavit. The homeowner didn't want to press charges at the time and told cops that Brown had apologised.
The Sun
6 hours ago
- The Sun
I can dismantle ENTIRE case against Lucy Letby with one piece of evidence – probe into innocence could see her walk free
A SINGLE piece of evidence could dismantle the entire case against Lucy Letby and see her walk free, a leading expert has claimed. In a bombshell revelation today, a top professor who specialises in statistical misrepresentation, says the prosecution's handling of the case could result in "half" the cases against Letby being scrapped on appeal. 9 9 9 Professor Richard Gill says the "chaotic" handling of the timeline surrounding one of the murdered babies could see the entire case unravel. Letby is currently serving 15 whole-life orders for murdering seven babies and attempting to kill seven more in a year-long reign of terror. But now, in a sensational new exclusive chat with The Sun, Prof Gill has revealed how the serial killer nurse could potentially walk free. His claims centre on Child P - the sixth baby to die in her spree. Prof Gill told The Sun, the case of Child P 'could be a really big issue' with the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) currently examining the conviction after an application by Letby's legal team. Child P Child P, a premature triplet who was one of seven babies Letby was convicted of killing, died after being injected with an excessive amount of air, the trial at Manchester Crown Court heard last year. This occurred less than 24 hours after she'd killed his brother Child O, prosecutors said. But in order for the neonatal nurse to have committed the horror attack, she'd have had to have done it within a brief five-minute window in a cramped nursery room packed with several other medical professionals. None of whom, it is now understood, subsequently came forward to report anything untoward in her behaviour. What's more, the prosecution's version of events changed in court compared to the pre-trial theories and timelines. Some pro-Letby campaigners argue it proves the narrative was shaped in order to point the finger at the nurse. How Dutch Lucy Letby who was CLEARED over murder of seven patients, including babies, is 'key to freeing jailed nurse' It comes as three senior members of the leadership team at Countess of Chester Hospital when the murders took place between 2015 and 2016 were arrested last week on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, meanwhile, says he has a 'horrible feeling' that Letby might have been a 'very convenient scapegoat' and should be retried. 'Really big issue' Prof Gill has previously helped free multiple medical professionals wrongfully convicted of killing patients, including Dutch nurse Lucia de Berk and Italian nurse Daniela Poggiali. He is among an increasing number of supporters who believe Letby to be innocent, and has been pushing for a retrial - although many others, including the victims' families, have blasted the campaign to free her. Prof Gill told The Sun the "chaos" around the Child P timeline urgently needs to be untangled - as it could prove key to answering the questions around Letby's conviction. Expert witness Dr Dewi Evans, approached by cops to help build the prosecution case, initially theorised in his pre-trial reports that Child P had fallen ill before Letby started her shift. He suggested the tot had been significantly destabilising on the evening of June 23 2016 - the day before he died and when Letby was off-shift. But during the trial he changed his mind, suggesting instead that the baby was given 'an extra dollop of air' the following morning - soon after the convicted nurse had started. Ben Myers KC, defending, accused the doctor of trying to make his evidence fit to 'when Ms Letby was on duty', which he refuted. Since the trial, neonatal experts have called blasted theories which point the finger at Letby. They say injecting enough air into Child P's lungs to cause his diaphragm to split is a 'ridiculous' suggestion - and almost impossible. Dr Evans admitted in an interview after the trial: 'It was a phenomenon I had never encountered previously.' Prof Gill said the change of heart and flip-flopping of theories could prove vital to Letby's appeal. 'All that stuff about air is so totally ridiculous, it's dreamed up,' he said. 'It could be the case that the CCRC gives a good recommendation to the Court of Appeal and maybe they disqualify Dowie Evans. 'Once you've scratched him out, you've lost half of the cases.' Prof Gill argues there were clearly mistakes made in the treatment of Child P that resulted in his death, and not caused by Letby. 'The allegation changed during the trial, what had happened, and it's very important to notice that that child was in a very critical state,' he explained. 9 9 9 He said the baby's death was down to 'mismanaged care after he collapsed', adding: 'They were treating the baby wrong and he was dying.' Child P was being treated in nursery room 2 at Countess of Chester Hospital when he suddenly collapsed at around 9.40am on June 24 2016. The room is cramped at just 4x4 metres and in the lead up to the baby's distress, there were at least five medically-trained people present. Five minutes' prior, at 9.35am, Dr Anthony Ukoh and an unnamed doctor reviewed the baby, noting no significant concerns. But just five minutes later he needed CPR, adrenaline and a full resuscitation. Prosecutors in Letby's trial last year accused the now 34-year-old of pumping excessive amounts of air into the sick infant, kicking off a series of collapses, and his eventual death at 4pm. Timeline of Child P's death June 23 2016 6pm - Dr Gibbs examines Child P and notes the baby's stomach is "mildly distended" - with the doctor ordering an X-ray 8.09pm - The X-ray is taken and reveals "moderate gaseous distention" 8.10pm Child P was given an X-ray June 24 2016 4am - Nurse notes the baby still has gastric distention 6.36am - Nurse notes: "Abdomen has been soft and non-distended." 8am - Lucy Letby starts her shift. She retrospectively records of Child P: "Abdomen full. Loops visible. Soft to touch." 9.35am - Dr Ukoh conducts ward round and finds the baby stable but writes "abdomen moderately distended/bloated, soft". *The prosecution claims during this five-minute window Letby injected air into the baby via his feeding tube. 9.40am - Child P experiences severe deterioration and collapses, requiring resuscitation. He temporarily recovers. 11.57am - An X-ray is carried out. 12.30pm - Another X-ray is taken and pneumothorax is identified. 3.14pm - Child P suffers a cardiac arrest. 4pm - Resuscitation efforts are ended and the baby is pronounced dead. They asserted this attack was done during the 5-minute window in the cramped room, full of people: Dr Ukoh, Nurse Christopher Booth and Nurse Morgan. During cross examination at Manchester Crown Court in March 2023, Nurse Booth was asked if he'd recalled whether Letby - who was overseeing Child P - 'went for help' after the sudden deterioration. He said: 'I think, because the room was full of the people we needed, that negated the need for calling for assistance because everyone was already there.' Dr Ukoh told the court he was tending to Child R - Child P's other sibling - in an adjacent cot at the time of the collapse - with all activity in the room on full display of a busy corridor via a large internal window. The two little boys' brother - Child O - had died the previous day, and Letby would also be later convicted of his killing. In her notes regarding Child P, Letby would retrospectively write for 8am, over an hour prior to the collapse: 'Abdomen full. Loops visible. Soft to touch.' The prosecution claimed this entry was fabricated to 'create an illusion of the ongoing problem', which hadn't been present during checks at 6.40am the same morning or the previous evening. In their closing speech, prosecutors said: 'If [Child P] really did have an issue at 8 o'clock that morning, we suggest that Lucy Letby would have escalated it immediately, given what had happened to [Child O] the previous day. 'But she didn't escalate it because there wasn't a problem. There was nothing to escalate.' During her own cross examination on day 126 of her trial on June 8 2023, Letby was told Child P was found by Dr Ukoh to be in a 'very different condition' at 9.35am to his sudden collapse at 9.40am, to which she agreed. 9 9 The prosecutor added: 'The only conceivable reason for that, I'm suggesting, is because you sabotaged him.' Letby answered: 'No.' The prosecution went on to accuse Letby of again 'falsifying the notes' to make Child P 'look worse', when she wrote the infant 'had an apnoea/brady/desat with mottled appearance' which required 'facial oxygen and Neopuff'. Prosecutors argued this was referring to the baby's condition just 10 minutes before the collapse and before Dr Ukoh's initial examination. They argued Letby tried to create the impression in her note that the Neopuff - a machine which pumps air into the lungs - caused the baby's abdomen to distend causing the diaphragm to fatally splint. In reality, they claimed the nurse had injected a fatal amount of air via the child's feeding tube, almost immediately after Dr Ukoh turned his back. But Letby claimed that particular note was actually describing Child P's condition during the subsequent resuscitation at 9.40am, during which all parties agreed the Neopuff machine was used. The charges Letby has been convicted of in full Child A, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby injected air intravenously into the bloodstream of the baby boy. COUNT 1 GUILTY. Child B, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby attempted to murder the baby girl, the twin sister of Child A, by injecting air into her bloodstream. COUNT 2 GUILTY. Child C, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said Letby forced air down a feeding tube and into the stomach of the baby boy. COUNT 3 GUILTY. Child D, allegation of murder. The Crown said air was injected intravenously into the baby girl. COUNT 4 GUILTY. Child E, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby murdered the twin baby boy with an injection of air into the bloodstream and also deliberately caused bleeding to the infant. COUNT 5 GUILTY. Child F, allegation of attempted murder. Letby was said by prosecutors to have poisoned the twin brother of Child E with insulin. COUNT 6 GUILTY. Child I, allegation of murder. The prosecution said Letby killed the baby girl at the fourth attempt and had given her air and overfed her with milk. COUNT 12 GUILTY. Child K, allegation of attempted murder. The prosecution said Letby compromised the baby girl as she deliberately dislodged a breathing tube. COUNT 14 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT AT ORIGINAL TRIAL, NOW GUILTY AFTER RETRIAL Child L, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said the nurse poisoned the twin baby boy with insulin. COUNT 15 GUILTY. Child M, allegation of attempted murder. Prosecutors said Letby injected air into the bloodstream of Child L's twin brother. COUNT 16 GUILTY. Child N, three allegations of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby inflicted trauma in the baby boy's throat and also injected him with air in the bloodstream. COUNT 17 GUILTY, COUNT 18 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT, COUNT 19 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child O, allegation of murder. Prosecutors say Letby attacked the triplet boy by injecting him with air, overfeeding him with milk and inflicting trauma to his liver with "severe force". COUNT 20 GUILTY. Child P, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said the nurse targeted the triplet brother of Child O by overfeeding him with milk, injecting air and dislodging his breathing tube. COUNT 21 GUILTY. Child Q, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby injected the baby boy with liquid, and possibly air, down his feeding tube. COUNT 22 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT During her defence team's closing statements, they brought up the prosecution's confused timeline, which had altered multiple times. 'It's like a game of chess with check, check, check, moving around. It's not the night before, okay, now it's the night before,' Letby's team's closing statement said, mockingly. 'Well, it can't be that morning because he's examined by Dr Ukoh at 9.35. 'Hmm, no, it can't be. Ah, what's happened is, in the 10 minutes after that, the baby has splinted his diaphragm.' Dr Evans, in his pre-trial reports, concluded that seven babies Letby was accused of either murdering or attempting to murder had been harmed by injecting air into them causing dangerous air embolism. He believed either air had been injected into their stomachs via the tiny feeding tube newborns have inserted through their nose, or into their bloodstream through various lines and catheters. In regards to the feeding tube, there is much debate as to whether such an act would kill a baby. In July last year, eight separate expert clinicians, specialising in neonatology, told the Guardian the theory was nonsensical, or 'rubbish', 'ridiculous', 'implausible' and "fantastical". Dr Evans admitted after the trial: 'It was a phenomenon I had never encountered previously.' Prof Gill told The Sun: 'People who know about these things say it is physically impossible. 'You could put any amount of air you liked into a baby's stomach and they will burp it out. 'It is not going to blow up their stomachs like a balloon and split their diaphragm, leading to collapse.' He added: 'The allegation was changed to air was possibly injected into his intravenous line to cause air embolism, collapse and death. But there's no evidence for that either.' This second theory drew on skin discolorations observed in babies in reference to a 1989 academic paper. It described the discoloration being caused by high-pressure ventilation, entirely different to injecting air at normal pressure. Dr Sandie Bohin, a second expert witness in the Letby trial who reviewed Dr Evans' conclusions, agreed with him but the sole surviving expert of the 1989 paper, Canadian neonatologist Dr Shoo Lee, did not. During an expert testimony in Letby's appeal in April last year, he said he did not believe any of the descriptions of the babies' skin discolorations used by prosecution witnesses matched that characterised by air embolism. However, in her pre-trial notes, Dr Bohin said: 'My impression of the care afforded to [Child P] after the collapse on 24 June is that it was muddled. 'There were unacceptable delays in recognition and treatment of the pneumothorax, the ventilatory strategy used, and the use of a high-dose adrenaline infusion was unusual.' Both Drs Evans and Bohin, in their pre-trial notes, appeared to agree that the X-ray at around 8.10pm on June 23 - the day before Child P's death - showed his diaphragm had already been 'splinted', likely causing the collapse the next morning. Dr Evans had advised cops to investigate the night staff, though Letby had finished her shift earlier in the day. During his testimony in court, some years later from his writings in 2017, however, Dr Evans' opinion had changed. The baby had appeared destabilised during the June 24 X-ray, but in his medical opinion in 2023, someone had given the baby an 'extra dollop of air' at 9.40am the next day. When questioned about his change of heart in court during cross-examination, he said: 'I think there was excess air given before the X-ray, if I could put it that way. 'Then I think that destabilised the baby, but I think he had even more air given into his stomach on the morning of the 24th. 'That, I think, is a more accurate way of explaining the sequence of events.' Moving in line with this new thinking, the prosecution had said the allegation was that Letby 'deliberately caused a problem' for Child P 'as she was going off duty [on June 23] so that overnight he'd have problems', which would divert attention from her if he died overnight. Letby's defence team told Dr Evans: 'You've simply now shunted it along the line to a point near to, as it happens, when Ms Letby was on duty after the 8 o'clock handover in the morning.' The expert refuted the suggestion, saying he "cannot be accused of putting anyone in the frame" as his evidence also related to the night shift before Letby was working. Mr Myers said the medic had "invented" an "extra dollop of air" on the morning of June 24 to "take his theory over the line". "I haven't invented any dollops," Dr Evans responded. The court had earlier heard that a "mistake was made" by the prescriber of adrenaline on the day that Child P died, and he was administered with "precisely double" the intended dose. But Dr Bohin said: "I don't think it had any adverse effect, in that the infusion was started after [Child P] had at least two of his collapses". Prof Gill went on to tell The Sun: 'It's very important to note that that child was in a very critical state. 'So those four doctors and nurses in that little room were not hanging around chatting, doing Facebook. 'They were busy with that baby for very good reason because he was having acute problems. He was in great danger. Unfortunately, they mismanaged his care. 'Those four people in that room did kill that baby by the treatment which they were being told to give.' Prof Gill believes it comes down to Countess of Chester Hospital being understaffed, overrun and unsuitable for treating a baby like Child P, as well as his brothers. He pointed out Child R was removed from the hospital after the death of his two brothers and recovered - though non-Letby supporters would argue that was because he was no longer in the hands of the convicted nurse. Prof Gill said: 'O,P and R were triplets and extraordinarily exceptional triplets - they shared a placenta, they were identical… these babies were actually developing particular diseases which you only have with identical twins or triplets that share a placenta, and it's that the blood is not being shared evenly over the three babies. 'It puts them at incredibly high risk. Those three babies, their mum had antenatal care at Liverpool Women's Hospital, which is basically one of the best places in the world to have twins or triplets. 'So why did the doctors allow that mother to have those babies at Chester?" What is the difference between corporate and gross negligence manslaughter? CORPORATE manslaughter is a criminal offence in England and Wales used to prosecute companies accused of causing a person or persons death. Corporate manslaughter is a relatively new offence under English law. The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act came into force across the UK in April 2008. Before this companies could be prosecuted for causing death under the offence of gross negligence manslaughter. But in order for the prosecution to be successful a senior individual in the company would also have to be accountable. The new act provided that the company itself could be found guilty of the offence. The Crown Prosecution Service says: "The offence was created to provide a means of accountability for very serious management failings across the organisation." Meanwhile, gross negligence manslaughter is a common law offence. It is committed where the death is a result of a grossly negligent (though otherwise lawful) act or omission on the part of the defendant, The Crown Prosecution says. The circumstances in which this offence may fall to be considered often involve death following medical treatment or care or death in custody.
