The defense team for Lucy Letby, a British nurse convicted of murdering infants in her care, announced plans to seek permission from the Court of Appeal to review all of her convictions. The defense argues that a lead prosecution expert was unreliable due to a change in his assessment of the causes of death for three infants.
This development raises significant questions regarding Ms. Letby’s convictions for the deaths of seven infants at a hospital in northern England, a case that has shocked the nation and is increasingly viewed by some experts as a potential miscarriage of justice.
Dr. Dewi Evans, a retired pediatrician and the prosecution’s lead expert witness, initially testified that air had been injected into the nasal gastric tube of three infants under Ms. Letby’s care, which he identified as their cause of death. However, Dr. Evans has since revised his opinion regarding the cause of death for one of the infants, referred to as Baby C, and has made conflicting statements about the deaths of two other infants.
Mark McDonald, Ms. Letby’s defense attorney, stated during a news briefing that despite multiple requests, the prosecution has not provided the defense with Dr. Evans's updated report. The defense intends to argue that Dr. Evans is “not a reliable expert,” which could call into question all of Ms. Letby’s convictions.
Mr. McDonald noted that the application to reopen the case is rarely used, and a judge must determine whether the Court of Appeal will consider the matter. Dr. Evans could not be reached for comment.
Ms. Letby, 34, was found guilty of murdering seven infants and attempting to murder seven others at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016. During two trials, the prosecution alleged that she harmed infants through various methods, including injecting air, overfeeding, and insulin poisoning.
Throughout the proceedings, Ms. Letby has maintained her innocence, with her defense arguing that she was being scapegoated for systemic failures in care due to chronic understaffing at the hospital.
She received 15 mandatory life sentences, and her previous attempts to appeal her convictions have been denied. However, an increasing number of experts have raised concerns about the reliability of the evidence used against her, with significant issues first highlighted in a New Yorker article published in May. Since then, numerous statisticians and medical experts have pointed out flaws in the evidence presented in court.
No witnesses have come forward to attest to Ms. Letby harming any infants. A Court of Appeal ruling in April acknowledged that the case was largely circumstantial, relying on expert medical testimony, Ms. Letby’s shift patterns, and hospital treatment records to establish her guilt.
Medical experts have criticized the reliability of the tests used to indicate insulin poisoning and questioned whether the prosecution's expert witnesses accurately determined the causes of death for some infants. Statisticians have also criticized how staffing shift patterns were presented in court, arguing that they misrepresented Ms. Letby’s presumed guilt by omitting relevant shifts during which infants died.
Numerous issues plagued the neonatal unit where Ms. Letby worked, including inadequate staffing levels and infection control problems, both noted in a 2016 official report.
In September, Ms. Letby appointed Mr. McDonald as her new defense attorney, who plans to apply to Britain’s Criminal Cases Review Commission to investigate claims of a miscarriage of justice.
This is a developing story.