Lucy Letby’s lawyers have said they have “new evidence” that “significantly” undermines her convictions after a key medical witness changed his mind about three baby deaths. They urge the Court of Appeal to reopen the case. The Mail has more.
The 34-year-old is currently serving fifteen whole life terms after being found guilty of murdering seven babies and trying to kill seven others while at the Countess of Chester Hospital between June 2015 and 2016.
She was convicted in August 2023 and was refused permission to appeal against the convictions in May 2024.
Her barrister Mark McDonald was appointed after she was found guilty in two trials and he said today he would be giving details of “fresh developments” in the case.
This is because an expert witness, Dr. Dewi Evans, has “now changed his mind on the cause of death of three babies”, referred to as C, I and P, he said at a press conference. …
Speaking at a press conference today, her barrister said he will be asking the Court of Appeal to immediately review all of her convictions.
He said: “The primary grounds of appeal at the previous hearings related to the admissibility before the jury of the evidence of the lead prosecution expert Dr. Dewi Evans,” he said.
“The defence argued twice at trial that Dr Evans’s evidence should be disregarded.
“This was refused by the trial judge.
“It was then later argued in the Court of Appeal, and was refused in the Court of Appeal.
“Remarkably, Dr. Evans has now changed his mind on the cause of death of three of the babies: Baby C, Baby I and Baby P.”
Mr. McDonald continued: “Dr Evans had said to the jury that Lucy Letby had injected air down a nasal gastric tube and this had led to the death of the three babies.
“This was repeated to the Court of Appeal, which may have been misled when it ruled on the application for leave against the convictions.
“Dr. Evans has also said that he has revised his opinion in relation to Baby C and has written a new report, a new report that he has given to the police, months ago now.
“Despite numerous requests, the prosecution has yet to give this report to the defence.
“The defence will argue that Dr. Evans is not a reliable expert, and given that he was the lead expert for the prosecution, we say that all the convictions are not safe.”
He spoke alongside Dr. Richard Taylor, a neonatologist from Victoria, British Columbia, Dr. Roger Norwich, a consultant paediatrician, and Peter Elston, who is a statistician. …
The defence team has reports from two neonatologists that it claims count as fresh evidence in the cases in relation to Baby C and Baby O.
Mr. McDonald read a statement from Dr. Neil Aiton and Dr. Silvena Dimitrova that said: “Our reports demonstrate that there are identifiable medical reasons why both babies became unwell, sadly did not respond to resuscitation and subsequently passed away.
“We have set out clearly within our reports evidence showing that these babies could not reasonably be described as ‘well’ or ‘stable’. Neither should their deteriorations be described as ‘unexplained’.
“Our reports contain carefully justified new evidence which has not been presented before – either in court or as part of previous examinations of these cases by multiple sources. …
“We have provided evidence that Baby O died due to issues related to the resuscitation. Baby C died due to problems caused by failing placental function at the end of the pregnancy.
“We have seen no evidence of deliberate harm to these babies by anyone.”
Mr McDonald added he also has reports from two neonatologists that he claims count as fresh evidence in the cases of Baby C and Baby O, with no evidence of deliberate harm.
Worth reading in full.
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.
“We don’t save a lot relative to oil and gas, but I would still recommend any house with a heat pump also gets solar panels,” he says.
The cognitive dissonance is strong with this one.
I wonder if they save anything at all relative to gas?
Of course not! It’s interesting they didn’t factor in anything to do with long term maintenance and ultimately asset replacement – clearly they believed a mechanical device would simply work ‘forever’ which is naive at best. It shouldn’t be too much work to drop an oil fired boiler back in there, or gas with a propane tank setup.
Solar panels are a revenue stream “thanks” to feed-in tariffs whereby as mandated by Government, electricity retailers must pay more per kWh by a substantial margin for electricity fed-in than electricity supplied.
That’s why the economics are favourable.
We other lucky consumers pay for this by higher charges in our bills.
Mr and Mrs Watts will need megawatts if they want to keep warm.
I guess the government is already preparing a solution for them in the form of “voluntary” euthanasia.
The Inuit would use ice flows. Environmentally friendly.
Fewer ice floes in Buckinghamshire…
Mr and Mrs Watts – another fine piece of nominative determinism!
But yes an absolute unfolding nightmare.
Harsh fact of life – Conning yourself into installing a cheat pump is worse than being conned onto installing a cheat pump by state-sponsored scammers.
No substitute for a hydro-carbon powered boiler, when you take into account purchase price, cost of house-upgrading and the state-sponsored highest unit electricity price in the world.
Whilst they might not be on the gas grid, many have lpg tanks as an alternative to oil.
Still that’d be admitting you made a mistake with the heat pump in the first place…
Cause: “they did enjoy an advantageous scheme of selling the power they generated from solar panels back to the grid”
and
Effect: “the cost of electricity has soared”
The power from solar panels was of no use to the power companies, but they were forced to pay for it anyway.
Sunken cost fallacy ( trademark of government’s COVID and Nut Zero policies, to name but just two ) … Invested so much in this [scheme, technology, policy, emotive virtue ], can’t pull out now.
Solar panels will save us. And a vegan diet.
Sigh …. I am an emphatic person, but it’s being stretched awfully thinly recently … Awfully …
No comment
We just upgraded our oil boiler for less than £5k. Add a tank.
Sorted.
One day there may be millions of pensioners living in houses with failing or failed heat pumps that they cannot possibly afford either to run or replace or obtain loans to do either
I won’t be one of them. They can keep their heat pumps.
Me neither…they can shove them along with the electric vehicles!
I don’t want to see any old person struggling due to affordability to heat their home. That said, it’s hard to have sympathy with anyone who falls for this ‘saving the planet’ bo11ocks. Anyone who installs a heat pump, or solar panels, or buys an electric car because they think they’re being ‘green’ is buying one for completely false and non-existent reasons, which is where my sympathy ends.
“We had a reporter up from the local paper asking us about our solar panels and our heat pump,” recalls Mr Watts.
So since 2008 I and others have had money taken out of our pockets via taxes and via hidden charges on our energy bills to line the pockets of Mr and Mrs Watts so they can have reduced costs whilst mine and others’ go up and up.
Sympathy for them? I should co-co.