February 1: Neonatal Nurse Lucy Letby: Part One: Major Development: The Telegraph (Freelance Journalist Cleuci de Oliveira) reported, in a story headed, "Letby victim had deadly bug in lung at time of death," that During Letby’s trial, prosecutor Nick Johnson KC told the jury that “Baby I” tested negative for a battery of viruses. But jurors did not hear that the coroner had picked up the bacterium Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. Letby’s defence barrister said it was “not surprising” that the bacteria was found, as the nurse had raised issues of “sewage overflow” on the ward in her evidence. A tissue sample collected from Baby I’s right bronchus, three days after her death, came back positive for the bacteria, according to test results that The Telegraph reviewed. The post-mortem report does not mention the positive test result."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The bacterium is at the centre of an ongoing scandal at Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow, where it was found to be connected to the deaths of several patients, including 10-year-old Milly Main. It can be especially dangerous to immunocompromised patients and premature babies. Baby 1 was both. Mark McDonald, Letby’s defence barrister, said: “There were serious problems on the neonatal unit, it was a unit in crisis. “Lucy raised in her evidence an issue of infections and sewage overflow, so it is not surprising that Stenotrophomonas maltophilia was detected at the time.”

---------------------------------------

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Letby was convicted of murdering seven babies, and attempting to murder another seven, at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016. She was convicted of murdering Baby I by injecting air into her bloodstream. Prosecutors accused her of trying to kill the infant multiple times before succeeding in her final attempt. But concerns have arisen over the safety of her convictions, with leading medics questioning the evidence used against her during the trial. An international panel of top medical experts, working for free with Letby’s defence, has reviewed the evidence in the case of each baby, and found no evidence of deliberate harm."

--------------------------------------

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Nursing notes taken once Baby I had been transferred back to the Countess of Chester, after her stay at Liverpool Women’s Hospital, show nurses repeatedly inquiring about the appropriate measures to take in response to the bug."

--------------------------------------

STORY: "Letby victim had deadly bug in lung at time of death,"  by Freelance Journalist  Cleuci de Oliveira (Brazil) , published by The Telegraph, on January 31, 2026.

SUB-HEADING: "Bacteria found in Baby I ‘not surprising’ as nurse complained about sewage overflow at hospital."

GIST: "A post-mortem detected a deadly bug in the lung of whom Lucy Letby was convicted of murdering.

During Letby’s trial, prosecutor Nick Johnson KC told the jury that “Baby I” tested negative for a battery of viruses. But jurors did not hear that the coroner had picked up the bacterium Stenotrophomonas maltophilia.

Letby’s defence barrister said it was “not surprising” that the bacteria was found, as the nurse had raised issues of “sewage overflow” on the ward in her evidence.

A tissue sample collected from Baby I’s right bronchus, three days after her death, came back positive for the bacteria, according to test results that The Telegraph reviewed.

The post-mortem report does not mention the positive test result.

The bacterium is at the centre of an ongoing scandal at Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow, where it was found to be connected to the deaths of several patients, including 10-year-old Milly Main.

It can be especially dangerous to immunocompromised patients and premature babies. Baby I was both.

Mark McDonald, Letby’s defence barrister, said: “There were serious problems on the neonatal unit, it was a unit in crisis.

“Lucy raised in her evidence an issue of infections and sewage overflow, so it is not surprising that Stenotrophomonas maltophilia was detected at the time.”

Baby I’s post-mortem report concluded that cultured bacteria were a result of spreading or contamination in the post-mortem examination, but it is unclear if the positive test for Stenotrophomonas maltophilia was included as part of the assessment.

The World Health Organisation recognised Stenotrophomonas maltophilia as one of the most important multi-drug-resistant pathogens to emerge recently in hospitals.

The death rate can be as high as 37.5 per cent among vulnerable patients, such as the immunocompromised and pre-term babies.

Letby was convicted of murdering seven babies, and attempting to murder another seven, at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016.

She was convicted of murdering Baby I by injecting air into her bloodstream. Prosecutors accused her of trying to kill the infant multiple times before succeeding in her final attempt.

But concerns have arisen over the safety of her convictions, with leading medics questioning the evidence used against her during the trial.

An international panel of top medical experts, working for free with Letby’s defence, has reviewed the evidence in the case of each baby, and found no evidence of deliberate harm.

In the case of Baby I, the panel concluded that Stenotrophomonas maltophilia had colonised her respiratory system – which was already compromised – causing thick, creamy secretions that blocked her airways and exacerbated her breathing problems.

Dr Shoo Lee, who led the expert panel, said: “We conclude, therefore, that [Baby I] died of respiratory complications caused by respiratory distress syndrome and chronic lung disease, that were complicated by the Stenotrophomonas maltophilia colonisation.”

He said that doctors had failed to respond to surveillance warnings about the bug and “did not recognise the diagnosis, and did not treat her with the appropriate antibiotics”.

‘Likely a preventable death’

Routine testing had detected the deadly bug in Baby I when she was still alive, but “it did not trigger any alert or thought process among the medical staff that it could be pathogenic”, according to the panel’s report, which The Telegraph obtained.

“This was likely a preventable death,” Dr Lee added.

At Letby’s trial, Dr Sandie Bohin, a prosecution witness, admitted she “never heard of” Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, which was first detected in the baby six weeks before her death.

The bacterium was found in swab tests taken from Baby I’s throat and rectum after her health deteriorated and she was briefly transferred to Liverpool Women’s Hospital for more specialised care. The hospital also found Enterobacter cloacae and Staphylococcus aureus, most commonly known as staph, during her stay.

Dr Lucy Beebe, another prosecution witness, also admitted to not knowing anything about Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, despite having noted, during a medical examination, that Baby I had been colonised with it.

Hospital records also show that Liverpool Women’s Hospital, and infection control specialists at the Countess of Chester, provided incorrect information about Stenotrophomonas maltophilia to the nurses caring for Baby I.

Nursing notes taken once Baby I had been transferred back to the Countess of Chester, after her stay at Liverpool Women’s Hospital, show nurses repeatedly inquiring about the appropriate measures to take in response to the bug.

Both Liverpool Women’s Hospital and infection control told the nurses that Stenotrophomonas maltophilia was not multi-resistant to antibiotics, and that no special measures were necessary.

Lawyers for Baby I’s family have pushed back against the international expert panel’s findings, telling a public inquiry there was no evidence that the baby’s Stenotrophomonas maltophilia colonisation ever developed into an infection.

A report by Dr Mike Hall, a defence expert who was never called to the stand, also said that although Baby I had been “colonised” by the bacterium, she had not been “infected”."

The entire story can be read at:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/01/31/lucy-letby-victim-deadly-bug-lung-time-of-death/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

-------------------------------------------------------------------

February 1: Tyree Bowie: Pennsylvania: Major (Unwelcome) Development: Although he spent four years maintaining his innocence in prison - until a jury ruled after deliberating for only ten minutes that he didn’t kill a 2-year-old child - his fight goes on. As Reporter Jonathan Bergmueller reports on PennLive, two years after filing a lawsuit to revoke the costs of his defence and loss of income due to incarceration, his claims are still struggling to gain traction in federal court, noting that: "District Judge Jennifer Wilson on Wednesday dismissed Bowie’s second complaint against key players who tried locking him up for life. Wilson said Bowie’s attorney did not adequately allege the claims at issue in the lawsuit. She gave him a chance to refile a second amended complaint, dismissing the lawsuit without prejudice."

BACKGROUND:  (From a previous post of this Blog- December 1, 2023):  "The group — both the jurors and alternates heard the same testimony — criticized the investigation, led by York City Police Detective Kyle Hower, as flawed from the beginning. The case didn’t show a crime scene or provide a possible motive, some pointed out. They noted Hower targeted Bowie as his suspect almost immediately.  They also alleged Hower failed to investigate other potential suspects, including Dante’s mother, and that he sought evidence to support his theory while excluding other evidence.  Bowie was denied bail and spent four years in York County Prison while he awaited trial. “I think that we all feel Detective Hower was lousy at his job and what he did. And the way he had him guilty from the very start,” said Kelly Wentz, of Hanover, one of the alternate jurors."

https://draft.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/8497692795254057766

-------------------------------------------------

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "York City detective Kyle Hower arrested Bowie in 2018 alleging he beat Mullinix to death during a 90-minute period when he was watching the boy as a favor to the boy’s mother, Leah Mullinix. Bowie told police Dante fell unconscious in the back seat of his car after choking on Teddy Graham crackers Sept. 6, 2018, a story he maintained through the four-week trial in December 2022. “They didn’t want to hear the truth,” Bowie testified about police and prosecutors at trial, later vowing to get justice for Dante through a federal civil lawsuit."

-----------------------------------------------------

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The lawsuit brings malicious prosecution claims against Hower; the same claims against forensic pathologist Wayne Ross; and denial of procedural due process claims against Hower and members of the York City District Attorney’s Office. Bowie spent around $75,000 on his legal defense, and lost $150,000 in income while he was incarcerated, according to the lawsuit. Furthermore, he said he suffered extreme humiliation, embarrassment and loss of reputation due to the failed prosecution. Bowie told PennLive Friday that even three years out, he’s struggling to keep jobs. Blind applying to jobs isn’t netting results. He lives with his mother, still doesn’t have a car and is still mentally struggling to readjust to normal life. “I still have nightmares, I can’t sleep. It’s still living with me,” Bowie said, explaining he signed away parental rights for his son and that Children and Youth weren’t giving him a fair shake because of the charges he beat.

----------------------------------------------------

STORY: "Judge dismisses lawsuit filed by man acquitted of killing 2-year-old, but that’s not the end," by Reporter Jonathan Bergmueller, published by PennLive, on January 30, 2026. (Johnathan Bergmueller  writes about high-profile court cases in central Pennsylvania prioritizing high-impact crimes such as homicides, abuse and crimes committed by public servants. He also focuses on civil proceedings involving government, public policy and corporate accountability.)

GIST: "Tyree Bowie spent four years maintaining his innocence in prison until a jury ruled he didn’t kill a 2-year-old child.

Instead, the jury unanimously found after 10 minutes of deliberation, he tried to save Dante Mullinix.

But two years after he filed a lawsuit to recover the costs of his defense and loss of income due to his incarceration, Bowie’s claims are still struggling to gain traction in federal court.

District Judge Jennifer Wilson on Wednesday dismissed Bowie’s second complaint against key players who tried locking him up for life.

Wilson said Bowie’s attorney did not adequately allege the claims at issue in the lawsuit. She gave him a chance to refile a second amended complaint, dismissing the lawsuit without prejudice.

York City detective Kyle Hower arrested Bowie in 2018 alleging he beat Mullinix to death during a 90-minute period when he was watching the boy as a favor to the boy’s mother, Leah Mullinix.

Bowie told police Dante fell unconscious in the back seat of his car after choking on Teddy Graham crackers Sept. 6, 2018, a story he maintained through the four-week trial in December 2022.

“They didn’t want to hear the truth,” Bowie testified about police and prosecutors at trial, later vowing to get justice for Dante through a federal civil lawsuit.

That lawsuit came in Dec. 2024, alleging Hower didn’t have probable cause to arrest him and focusing on two key pieces of evidence.

One was the bag of discarded Teddy Grahams, which Hower refused to collect as evidence in the days after Bowie’s arrest, Bowie said.

Another is a video clip of Bowie and Dante interacting at a Rutters convenience store the night Dante fell unconscious.

Bowie, through his attorney Aaron Martin, charged that even if Hower had probable cause to arrest him, that probable cause evaporated once test results came back showing Teddy Graham residue on the jeans Bowie wore the night Dante died.

The lawsuit brings malicious prosecution claims against Hower; the same claims against forensic pathologist Wayne Ross; and denial of procedural due process claims against Hower and members of the York City District Attorney’s Office.

Bowie spent around $75,000 on his legal defense, and lost $150,000 in income while he was incarcerated, according to the lawsuit. Furthermore, he said he suffered extreme humiliation, embarrassment and loss of reputation due to the failed prosecution.

Bowie told PennLive Friday that even three years out, he’s struggling to keep jobs. Blind applying to jobs isn’t netting results. He lives with his mother, still doesn’t have a car and is still mentally struggling to readjust to normal life.

“I still have nightmares, I can’t sleep. It’s still living with me,” Bowie said, explaining he signed away parental rights for his son and that Children and Youth weren’t giving him a fair shake because of the charges he beat.

“I still don’t trust people. I feel like they’re trying to set me up,” Bowie said.

He was seeing a therapist at one point, but once he got comfortable that therapist, the therapist left the practice he was at.

“You gotta get another one — I don’t wanna get another one,” Bowie said. “It’s more or less a curse. It’s never going to end.”

Wilson’s ruling comes in response to motions for dismissal from the defendants, a legal buffer used to prune out lawsuits that don’t properly support the claims they are making.

Judges always presume the facts of the case as alleged by the plaintiff are true for the purposes of testing if the lawsuit can proceed forward.

However, Wilson noted in this case, the arguments in the brief Bowie filed in response to the motions don’t match the information in the complaint, so she said Bowie hadn’t adequately alleged his claims in the first place.

Bowie’s malicious prosecution claims

Wilson dismissed malicious prosecution counts against Hower and Ross.

To successfully sue officials for malicious prosecution, a plaintiff generally needs to prove there was no probable cause to charge them in the first place.

Probable cause is a low burden for cops to meet, making malicious prosecution claims difficult to carry to the end of a lawsuit.

Wilson ruled there was ample probable cause to charge Bowie with homicide:

1. The York County Coroner’s Office ruled Dante’s death a homicide caused by traumatic brain injury, strangulation and suffocation.
2. Dante appeared to be healthy and able to walk on his own shortly before arriving at the hospital the night he fell unconscious.
3. Bowie told police no other adults were present who could have caused Dante’s injuries.
4. Bowie told police Dante was in his care when he stopped breathing.

Because a magisterial district judge already ruled there was probable cause to arrest Bowie based on this information, Bowie’s claims could only move forward if Hower lied or omitted important information that could undercut the four factors listed above.

The lawsuit didn’t explicitly address that, and instead supported the malicious prosecution claim by faulting the prosecution for not providing a motive and faulting Ross for not explaining the significance of the Teddy Graham residue on Bowie’s pants.

Bowie later added in a brief that Hower omitted the existence of an empty Teddy Grahams bag and the description of how Bowie spent 15 seconds observing Dante through the window of his car.

But Wilson said those facts don’t undermine the inculpatory evidence in the Hower affidavit.

Wilson said the Teddy Graham residue has nothing to do with Dante’s injuries, Ross’ medical opinion or the fact Bowie was the only person with Dante when he died.

Fabricated evidence claims

Bowie argued excerpts of a longer surveillance video of he and Dante interacting at a Rutter’s gas station played at trial didn’t accurately reflect what actually happened. But Wilson tossed this claim, too.

“Here, it appears the prosecutors chose to play an excerpt of a longer video during Ward’s testimony and Ward testified the video was a fair and accurate representation of what happened,” Wilson wrote.

She said Bowie never alleged he wouldn’t have been charged but for the presentation of the excerpted video, and the video had been shown at trial long after probable cause was established. It couldn’t have played a role.

Wilson noted amending the complaint could see Bowie’s claims properly alleged, so she allowed Martin to refile. Alternatively, they can file a notice to stand on their arguments so they can appeal Wilson’s decision.

Bowie said they’re going to refile.

“We’re not giving up, we’re still gonna fight. Obviously the judge sees something to allow us to get another shot at this. Now we know where the flaws are, so now we gotta fix it,” Bowie said.

PennLive 

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2026/01/judge-dismisses-lawsuit-filed-by-man-acquitted-of-killing-2-year-old-but-thats-not-the-end.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AMFINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

------------------------------------------------------------------