Who Is Emily Waters: UK Judge Unmasks Nurse Responsible For 20 Horrifying Injuries On Newborn Twins

A judge has taken the rare step of identifying Emily Waters, a private maternity 'nurse' found responsible for inflicting 20 separate injuries on newborn twins. Waters was held accountable last July for a series of severe injuries sustained by the babies during the 11 days she was with their family in 2023.

Now in her mid-30s, Waters woke the twins' mother at around 2 a.m. on 6th October 2023, saying she believed Baby X was in distress. Court documents reveal that the infant was taken to the hospital, where an X-ray showed a fractured leg.

The Sun reported that Waters also searched 'broken leg baby' at 12:19 a.m., then informed the parents an hour later that the infant had cried. Further investigation revealed Baby X had a fractured skull, seven broken ribs, a broken leg, and a bruised forehead. Baby Y was found to have ten broken ribs.

Waters claimed Baby X's bruised forehead and broken leg were accidents and denied causing the other injuries. Judge Judith Rowe cleared the parents of any blame, saying Waters was 'dishonest' in concealing the real reasons for the injuries.

Judge Takes Unprecedented Step

The judge has now taken the unusual step of naming Waters, concluding that she remains a risk to other children. She considered naming Waters to be in the 'powerful public interest' because children were 'seriously injured' in the maternity nurse's care, and Waters was not accountable to any professional organisation.

Although Waters was hired as a maternity nurse, this profession lacks regulation, and those working in it are not typically medically trained. 'It would be difficult to explain to the public why the name of the perpetrator was hidden, without a compelling reason,' the judge said.

'Beyond the question of the public interest, very significant in this case in itself, publication will significantly add to the safeguards against the risk posed to children by Ms Waters.' She added: 'I acknowledge that publication will have a significant impact on Ms Waters. That is regrettable.

'Sadly the impact on Ms Waters of publication of her name falls, in my judgement, into the category of the price to be paid for open justice.' A police investigation was launched, but whether their probe is ongoing remains unclear.

Waters' Claims Rejected

To support her request for a delayed court decision, Waters had argued that 'a plethora of issues may arise.' According to a Transparency Project report, these include '(a) an acquittal, (b) an appeal, (c) new evidence coming to light before or during the trial (i.e. expert evidence, the missing phone records, etc) and (d) an application to reopen the fact-finding to which this judgment relates.'

In short, she argues that the court should wait to decide on this matter until the criminal process is complete and the impact of the decision will be 'more predictable.' However, this request was denied. MailOnline contacted a phone number associated with Waters; the person who answered said she declined to comment.