David Davis MP has declared he is 90 odd per cent certain that Lucy Letby is innocent and will campaign for a retrial. This is very bad news for the Thirlwall lnquiry, whose chair brushed off the growing number of expert voices as “noise”, and who has conducted the inquiry on the axiom of the truth of the conviction, refusing to hear witnesses who do not think Letby is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. My reflection on this falls into two parts, firstly an attempt to state where this rapidly unravelling prosecution case now stands, and secondly to ask whether the full legal procedure for assessing scientific witness quality was observed through the trial.
The case against Letby is an “hypothesis to account for a difficulty”, to steal John Henry Newman’s phrase. The hypothesis was developed by senior doctors in the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit to ‘explain’ a spike in deaths. There is no need to rehearse the narrative leading to her arrest and two convictions, this has been forensically set out in Rachel Aviv’s famous and judicially censored article in the New Yorker; it really is a core text, and was censored even while a hysterically hostile press coverage was allowed to remain available. It has not received a rebuttal, just been ignored. Statistician Richard Gill has compiled a rehearsal of useful websites. Dr. Phil Hammond, who writes the ‘MD’ column in Private Eye, is also essential reading, taking us through the second trial and into the equally skewed Thirwall Inquiry and he is getting letters from nurses who want to testify on behalf of Letby but have been blocked.
The hypothesis for deliberate human agency being responsible for neonate deaths because Dewi Evans, lead expert witness for the prosecution, opined that there was “no other explanation”, has been crumbling. His controversial handling of nurses’ shift rosters, excluding doctors and other staff on the unit, pulled out Letby as on shift when many critical incidents happened, and so made her the target for the police investigation. Evans cited two insulin cases, not leading to deaths, for which better science has emerged showing a non-murderous cause for the high insulin level, to sit alongside Rachel Aviv’s counter-evidence. The BBC’s latest coverage of the case has sought to defend the prosecution case for the reliability of the insulin immunoassay tests.
But subsequently yet more top quality scientific evidence has emerged to counter the prosecution’s evidence in the neonates alleged to have overly high levels of insulin. Five top experts have agreed that the prosecution case for Babies F and L fails. ‘Insulin tests used to convict Letby cannot be relied upon, scientists say‘, reports Sarah Knapton in the Telegraph. Specialists argue results are notoriously unreliable as antibodies can cause “interference”. “Without confirming the integrity of the results then you are entering into the land of guessing,” Dr. Adel Ismail, a retired consultant in clinical biochemistry and chemical endocrinology who was the head of an NHS pathology lab for 25 years, told Knapton. And that is precisely what the prosecution barristers, and their expert witness Dr. Evans, gave to the jury, the land of guessing. This is what the vastly long and tendentious trials offered by way of evidence against Letby: guessing and a hypothesis spun like Ariadne’s web out of fresh air. This torpedo holes the case against Letby, but the legal establishment will seek to ignore it, brush it aside and continue to deny her the appeal demanded by the flow of damning criticism of the prosecution case. The Criminal Cases Review Commission is notoriously unwilling to act and will even keep a victim of miscarriage of justice locked up despite compelling evidence while it dawdles and delays.
Hypotheses, for scientists, are put up to be challenged by counter-evidence, and this Letby hypothesis continues to weaken as the weeks go by and major errors appear in the prosecution hypothesis, errors which undermine the trustworthiness of its method and deduction. For example, the X-ray on which Dewi Evans relied for the alleged killing of Baby C proved to be dated on a day she was not present. She was not there – and the whole hypothesis is based on her ‘being there’ – so this should seriously vitiate the theory. But no, the establishment virtually ignores this rend in its allegation. Likewise, when it turned out that Letby was not even present when an I.V. bag she had supposedly poisoned with insulin was given to a baby, the prosecution stuck to its guns, putting forward the utterly improbable hypothesis that Letby had left the poisoned bag in the fridge for another nurse to pick at random and inadvertently use.
Like a medieval witch, if she ‘was there’ her very presence could kill, and even if she was not. The start of the second trial for attempted murder of baby K, where Dr. Jayaram famously “looked at his watch” and recalled the exact time when she was supposedly alone with the neonate, vitiated his testimony since the door swipe data backing up his story was after all wrong. Another nurse had come into the unit, not gone out, Letby was not alone – so surely the case against her was bust. But no, the jury convicted her despite this torpedoing of the timing and solo opportunity for our assassin. The jury must have been befuddled to convict on the attempted murder of baby K as once again, there was no evidence of her harming any baby at all.
We are forced to ask, given that Evans’s X-ray proved nothing against Letby even on his own “must have been murder” axiom, and the court’s ignoring of this flat contradiction of his allegation by date and by method, would anything have sunk Evans’s evidence in their eyes? It seems to be invested with a holy impregnability in the eyes of the judge, barristers, jury, the Appeal judges: the logic is “she must have been an assassin, so never mind the dates and methods, she must have killed Baby C”. The logic is a deduction from the hypothesis, not from witness evidence of crime, nor forensic evidence.
We need to note that the defence failed to take up this golden opportunity in court, just as it had astonishingly agreed with the prosecution in the insulin cases that insulin must have been injected exogenously, thus helping the hypothesis of the prosecution entirely unnecessarily. The defence failed to put its own expert, Dr. Hall, in the witness box, despite the fact he sat through the trials and regards them as simply unfair. The adversarial trial system depends on the defence being equally funded as the prosecution, and we can only speculate why it proved to be so ineffective.
The Thirwall Inquiry is turning out to be rather like the Post Office Inquiry with its Fujitsu fundamentalism and the Covid Inquiry, predicated on lockdowns being utterly necessary and vital to saving lives, refusing to heed any counter-evidence which has grown louder and louder. Thirlwall is operating on a similar axiom which the establishment is desperate to maintain: that Letby the brilliant killer hypothesis is now proven. There is no reasonable doubt whatsoever, and the gainsayers are “noise” who were not at the trial. On 17th October, Eirian Powell, the neonatal unit manager, told the inquiry that there never had been any evidence showing Letby had harmed anyone. Letby the silent assassin was indeed a hypothesis, not a witnessed wrongdoer. No forensic evidence was ever produced against her. She was on duty more than other nurses as more experienced with neonates and keen to develop as a nurse, plus she was said to be saving for a house. On October 18th barristers, acting as if inquisitors in Seville, bullied Powell into saying what she clearly did not believe, that Letby was guilty, despite lack of evidence. The “inquiry” is anything but fair and rational. This inquiry will surely become a matter of shame for the legal profession in future years when Letby is finally exonerated, as seems to be becoming increasingly inevitable.
The hypothesis looks weaker and weaker by the day. The post-it notes of anguish have subsequently been found to have been written on the advice of a counsellor when she was being constantly pressed to admit guilt. This is not evidence of anything but a persecuted soul. She had taken home handover notes and shoved them under her bed, wrong but explicable in rushed world of nursing with paper put into pockets at the end of shift, certainly nothing to do with a cunning assassin’s behaviour. As the counter-evidence to the hypothesis grows, so does the determination of the establishment to prevent any further scrutiny of this case. They don’t want to hear ‘the noise’; the fall of this judicial temple is damaging to contemplate. Appeals have been denied.
The case is a standout example of confirmation bias: how do we pin this on Lucy? The case reversed the burden of proof, she ended up having to prove her innocence, and the mass of reasonable doubt was barely mentioned in the judge’s summing up. The jury itself was accused of having made its mind up before the trial began by a jury member. The judge let it carry on. He also ignored the excoriating condemnation of Dewi Evans’s expert testimony in another case by Lord Justice Jackson, damning it as worthless, one-sided and aimed at a particular result. Evans has subsequently been forced to admit he was wrong in embolism evidence over triplet baby R because Letby wasn’t present at the time, but for those up to their necks in this case his reputation seems invincible. The jury, uninformed and no doubt confused, seemingly did as it was told. The seething hatred of Letby in the media surrounding the case and both trials will have seeped through. The outcome of this theatre of the absurd, with all its flummery and stress on procedure over truth finding, is the scapegoating of a nurse to save the face of a unit and its doctors.
Dr. Timothy Bradshaw is a retired Lecturer in Theology at the University of Oxford.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Hmm. Can any administration actually do that under the USA constitution?
No chance. Not unless he packs the Supreme Court.
I, and I am sure most on here knew this was on the way. There is nothing more certain than a new “pandemic” being found as soon as this is all signed up. The primary purpose behind this is depopulation. Control naturally falls alongside but only so that the depopulation can be proceeded with more efficiently.
The legal aspects will certainly be convoluted. I firmly believe this will breech UK Sovereignty although doubtless Fishy and his team of WEF stooges will have prepared some legislation aimed at swerving said Sovereignty. However, there is no question that there is absolutely nothing about the Pandemic Preparedness Treaty that would count as binding. Laws both national and international are flouted regularly so there is no requirement to pander to bad laws. Actually are bad laws really ever laws?
The Davos Deviants have been running amok for years and a brutal fightback is now required.
This year is destined to become pretty damned ugly.
Damn right. Comes as zero surprise. The EU will be next. Absolute bunch of psychopathic, corrupt crooks.
I wouldn’t argue that there aren’t plenty of sociopaths in high positions of power.
However, I don’t think all this happens because of evil people. To me it’s a structural problem.
You have a system of governance and administration that doesn’t really work for the interest of ordinary people. It works for powerful interest groups. And the incentives for the people within the system are not aligned with interests of ordinary people.
Powerful interest groups are far better are incentivising the politicians and bureaucrats than ordinary people. And so much power has now been concentrated within government and the bureaucracy that all the incentives are in place for interest groups to do all they can to capture the system.
Basically, I think the system is completely screwed.
I’m not saying the people aren’t arseholes. But without the power to wield they’d just be arseholes to those around them. It’s the power these bureaucrats have that make them so dangerous.
It’s all so F- in obvious !!…
So true. And they always telegraph their intentions in advance.
The following is a small selection of what can only be described as malevolence:
“The objective, clearly enunciated by the leaders of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present system of independent nations. The future is to be World Government with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises – whether real or not – is expected to lead to – compliance’ Dixy Lee Ray Former liberal Democrat governor of State of Washington, U.S.: ” The objective, clearly enunciated by the leaders of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present system of independent nations. The future is to be World Government with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises – whether real or not – is expected to lead to – compliance” Dixy Lee Ray Former liberal Democrat governor of State of Washington
” The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation.” UN’s Commission on Global Governance
“ A deal must include an equitable global governance structure. All countries must have a voice in how resources are deployed and managed.” Ban Ki-Moon UN Secretary General
“We contend that the position of the nuclear promoters is preposterous beyond the wildest imaginings of most nuclear opponents, primarily because one of the purported ‘benefits’ of nuclear power, the availability of cheap and abundant energy, is in fact a liability.‘ Paul Ehrlich
“The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man” Club of Rome
“Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs John Davis Editor of Earth First
“A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer” Paul Ehrlich
“There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated…It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society” John Holdren President Obama’s science czar
“The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing” Christopher Manes Writer for Earth First!
“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal” Ted Turner
“My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world” David Foreman Co-founder of Earth First!
“Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing” David Brower A founder of the Sierra Club
Wow. What a compilation.
Could be Adolph,s top ten
There is more and it’s all been festering for decades:
“Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it” Amory Lovins Scientist, Rocky Mountain Institute
“We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth. It is cosmically unlikely that the developed world will choose to end its orgy of fossil energy consumption, and the Third World its suicidal consumption of landscape. Until such time as Homo Sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along” David Graber Scientist U.S. Nat’l Park Services
“Good terrorists would be taking [Ebola Roaston and Ebola Zaire] so that they had microbes they could let loose on the Earth that would kill 90 percent of people” Eric Pianka Professor at University of Texas
“The only real good technology is no technology at all. Technology is taxation without representation, imposed by our elitist species (man) upon the rest of the natural world” John Shuttleworth Founder of Mother Earth News magazine
“…every time someone dies as a result of floods in Bangladesh, an airline executive should be dragged out of his office and drowned.” George Monbiot UK Guardian environmental journalist
” In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day” Jacques Cousteau
All here:
https://www.c3headlines.com/global-warming-quotes-climate-change-quotes.html
This Malthusian miasma is a classic example of Poe’s Law.
Telegraphing their intentions again, as usual. We need to pay attention!
Horrifying. The last paragraph is beyond belief. Who are these monsters?
Basically Nazis taking over the world. Everyone else is a “psuedo Jew” to be eliminated.
I would argue it’s Marxism, but either way Nazis and Communists are siblings. The parent is top down collectivism. The Grand Parents are all the ancient Assyrian style empires. The modern open society is not only vulnerable to corruption, but is primarily a threat to the collectivist, because the autonomous individual freely associating and spontaneously cooperating renders the top down collectivist irrelevant. Or perhaps this?
“The world of tomorrow will witness a tremendous battle between technology and psychology. It will be a fight of technology versus nature, of systematic conditioning versus creative spontaneity.” – Joos Meerloo
Hux you save me having to write stuff
can you read my mind , spot on as usual 
And lemme guess, the next plandemic will be….wait for it…BIRD FLU!
I mean, they already telegraphed their intentions. As they always seem to do. People just need to pay closer attention (hard, I know, given how most Americans have shorter attention spans than a goldfish).
The only hope I have for humanity is that the hard-earned cynicism from the past three years will be a bulwark against them fooling us again.
The next pandemic has already been war-gamed and is planned for 2025. This one will, apparently, be particularly dangerous for young people.
Medical fascism has finally arrived…scary times ahead!
Out-sourcing ones inalienable rights, such as bodily autonomy, could never be constitutional in any jurisdiction.
If you think government is there to represent the best interest of the population, then this obviously makes no sense.
But if you know that “the people” are little more than a feeble voice in the corridors of government power and really the people who shape and influence government policy are organisations, especially large corporations, then this makes perfect sense.
US pharma companies are at the forefront of all the WHO pandemic planning and the principal beneficiaries of WHO centralised control. This is perfect for them. They don’t have to go government to government lobbying and pushing their products. They tie all the government strings to the WHO and pull them all from there in one go.
The US government is an influential voice. So they’ll lobby hard for the US government to support it and get momentum for all other nations to do it.
Pharma companies don’t give a toss about national sovereignty. The opposite, national sovereignty is a nuissence to them.
That’s not going to work at the state level.
Red states will simply ignore this.
The problem is the crappy wet pollytishans haven’t the balls to take responsibility for another Panic Demic
So the best plan is to outsource the responsibility to the hopeless/hapless WHO
There hasn’t been a “panic demic.’ The last three years have all been carefully contrived.
Indeed, it is a PLANDEMIC.
Why?
Could it be that in fact the good old USA is controlling the WHO & using this new supposed deal for more of their own nefarious manoeuvres, my theory is that nothing in this world gets past the CIA !..
Legally, it’s gonna be murky.
DeSantis has already proposed laws to prohibit just that becoming possible in Florida.
If he becomes POTUS in 24, it’s gonna be history again anyway in the US.
The real question is: How and why can ANY allegedly democratic nation seriously discuss, let alone sign up to this?
First and foremost British ‘It’ s all about sovereignty, mate!’ Brexiters?!
This treaty puts dictatorial powers into a foreign body’s and even just 1 person’s hand.
It is as such even more authoritarian than Hitler’s enabling act of 1933 and also outright treasonous.
And we can probably count on Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota as well to oppose this.
Not sure about any other governors. But most blue governors will cheer it on, while even most red governors will roll over and play dead.
Wow, this one of the scariest things I have read in a long time, and that really says something! How can this possibly legal, unless the US Constitution is effectively a dead letter?
How is this not treason?
With due deference to the Bulley family at this sad time. Our wonderful police couldnt find a body a mile away from an incident so asking the Keystone Cops to police WHO polices is frankly risible
I have written to my MP to highlight this issue.
If I am correct these WHO amendments only need a majority vote to pass. It will bypass Parliament and means an end to countries’ sovereignty in terms of health decisions.
I wrote to my Tory MP a few months ago about this issue. He is supportive of the initiative denying there will be any loss of national health sovereignty by signing up to the WHO ‘treaty’. We know he is lying, he knows he is lying and he knows he can rely on the Party to lie too.
This is WAR!
These hopeless clods just folded in the face of China’s non- co operation with the investigation into the origins of the SARS Cov virus. (No doubt agreed in advance)
Hopefully their record of ineptitude will put paid to any notion of a centralised medical authority for the whole world with them at the head.
I’m trying to suppress the sinking feeling that this is exactly the qualification required for the job. That, and a commitment to rubber stamp the mandate for whatever brew Pfizer churn out.
This is the BIG ONE ! If the the western world traitors get this through , The George Orwell Boot will be firmly treading on Humanity’s collective face !
This is beyond EVIL.
One more step towards the ‘utopian’ one world govt?
Globalists are handing away every bit of freedom we have to unelected unaccountable bureaucracies. Everything from climate to covid is to be controlled by the global government in waiting at the UN/WEF ———We may still be allowed some small freedoms like maybe cutting our own toenails. ——-Wake up people you are being played.