There is hardly a day that passes that I am not troubled by Lucy Letby’s wrongful conviction, in my opinion.
The former neonatal nurse has served more than 2,000 days in prison after receiving 15 whole life terms for killing seven infants and attempting to kill seven more at the Countess of Chester Hospital between June 2015 and June 2016.
She is 36 years old and has been sentenced to death in prison. Yet many legal experts agree that the threshold of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ was never reached in her case and even some of her detractors agree that a retrial must take place.
I, along with several specialists from various fields, have observed as the case against her has faded in the three years after her incarceration. However, Lucy still has to wait for the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) to finish its endless deliberations before deciding whether or not to send her case to the Court of Appeal.
I can share some of the hundreds of pages of fresh material and expert reports that Lucy’s attorney Mark McDonald submitted to the CCRC in four distinct areas of her case.
The first is about the alleged “confession note” that Lucy wrote, “I am evil.” This is what I did. These statements were taken out of context even though they were given to the jury and covered by the media. She had also written, “I haven’t done anything wrong,” but the notes weren’t displayed in their whole.
Professionals advised Lucy to write the notes as she attempted to organise her thoughts during a period of extreme stress after being relieved of her ward responsibilities.
The notes are “unreliable as evidence of a confession of criminal intent and should have been treated with extreme caution,” according to Professor Gisli Gudjonsson, a well-known expert on false confessions.
Mark McDonald, Lucy’s attorney, has provided the CCRC with hundreds of pages of fresh material and expert reports pertaining to four distinct aspects of her case.
The selective notes used as evidence during the trial are a major source of worry, according to his report to the CCRC.
According to Gudjonsson, an Emeritus Professor of Forensic Psychology at King’s College London, “the note reveals utter despair and bewilderment.” “Why me?” Miss Letby becomes perplexed by what has occurred to her, wondering if she unintentionally caused the deaths. It appears that she was unable to figure out what went wrong. Even writing “I haven’t done anything wrong”
The deluge of numbers that were used to convict her is the second area for which fresh evidence is being presented.
For instance, in order to “prove” that Lucy was on the special care infant unit more frequently than other staff members at the time of deaths, police used “swipe pass” data from the electronic passes employees use to access the unit to track who was there and when.
However, we now know that passes weren’t always carried, and the code required to enter the apartment without one was inscribed on the hallway wall.
Additionally, Cheshire Police did not reveal that they had hired Dr. Jane Hutton, a statistician, to do statistical analysis. They stopped using her services when she offered evidence that contradicted their premise.
A recent study by two well-known Cambridge statisticians is included in the CCRC submission, and it shows unequivocally that the “spike” in infant deaths at the Countess of Chester Hospital was not an anomaly when compared to comparable UK hospitals.
The insulin problem comes next: two newborns who passed away had high levels of insulin in their blood. Lucy overdosed the infants, according to the prosecution. The jury was not informed, meanwhile, that Great Ormond Street Hospital had terminated the contract of Professor Peter Hindmarsh, the prosecution’s expert witness, four months prior to his testimony.
According to Nadine Dorries, a recent study by two well-known Cambridge statisticians offers convincing proof that the “spike” in infant deaths was not an anomaly when compared to comparable UK hospitals.
He was the focus of a formal investigation by University College London Hospitals NHS Trust investigating a variety of issues about his work in the run-up to the trial. Later on, he took his name off the GMC Register.
The new evidence includes a 100-page analysis by biochemical engineer Helen Shannon and expert biomedical engineer Professor Geoff Chase of the University of Canterbury in New Zealand, which contends that “low blood sugar levels are not unusual in pre-term infants.”
Lastly, the doctor who pressured managers to call the police due to his worries regarding Lucy spoke in court. Dr. Ravi Jayaram claimed that while Lucy was standing over a baby whose breathing tube had come loose, he witnessed what he called a murder attempt.
He failed to reveal that the nurse had summoned him to the ward to assist with the infant.
An email he wrote to another physician at the time corroborated this. It wasn’t until Lucy was imprisoned that the email was discovered.
Only one of these four crucial aspects of the Lucy Letby case—reports written by 32 top authorities in their respective fields—for which fresh evidence has been obtained may be referred to the court by the CCRC.
Her conviction might be overturned with just one.
Nonetheless, I and others hope that the court will receive all of the reports and hear all of the evidence.
Lucy needs complete, not partial, exoneration in order to move on with her life. This is undoubtedly the case when justice must be shown to be served.
Now that Claudia Winkleman’s and Graham Norton’s attempts to enter different formats have failed, may I offer them both a well-meaning recommendation?
The Claudia Winkleman Show debuted on BBC1 in March, but Nadine claims she isn’t good at the format.
Stay focused on your strengths and areas of expertise. You’re great at Strictly-style shows and traitors, Claudia. You’re just not very good at the talk show.
Graham, you are British TV’s sofa supremo, able to draw in the biggest personalities in entertainment for genuine interviews with an advantage thanks to your wit and comedic timing. The Neighbourhood wasn’t really necessary.
Watching my fellow Liverpudlian Stephen Graham win his first Bafta for Best Actor for his performance in the highly acclaimed Netflix film Adolescence brought me immense joy.
Owen Cooper, a 16-year-old Warrington native who won his own Best Supporting Actor Bafta for the same play, stole the “thank you speech” moment.
For his performance in the Netflix thriller Adolescence, 16-year-old Owen Cooper won the Best Supporting Actor Bafta.
“So, in my opinion, all you need to succeed is an obsession, a dream, and The Beatles.”
He continued by quoting John Lennon. From someone so young, such class.
That boy is going to be very successful.
A Conservative government will withdraw from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), according to Kemi Badenoch. Really? More than two-thirds of Tory MPs are fervent Remainers who would prefer to leave the party than vote to exit the ECHR, as she is well aware. It is not going to occur. Some Tories would probably prefer to join the pro-European Liberal Democrats. Politics will soon become even more fascinating!
In our home, the new assumption that a new pair of eyes can locate something you’ve been looking for since they don’t have a preconceived notion of where it might be doesn’t hold true.
I always contact the same daughter when I can’t find anything, including passports or keys. She can tell me where the item is or is likely to be without even having to be inside the house. She is also always correct.
