LONDON — A legal representative for the convicted nurse Lucy Letby, who was found guilty of multiple murders, announced plans on Monday to request an appeal court to revisit her convictions following a significant shift in the opinion of a key prosecution expert regarding the deaths of three infants.
According to attorney Mark McDonald, Dr. Dewi Evans, who initially testified that Letby killed the babies by injecting air through a nasal gastric tube, has since changed his stance, leading the defense to claim that his testimony is no longer credible. McDonald asserted, “The defense will contend that Dr. Evans is an unreliable expert, and since he was the primary expert for the prosecution, we argue that all her convictions are unsafe.”
Letby, aged 34, is currently serving multiple life sentences with no opportunity for parole after being convicted of taking the lives of seven babies and attempting to murder another seven while employed as a neonatal nurse at the Countess of Chester Hospital in northwestern England between June 2015 and June 2016.
In response to these developments, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) staunchly defended the previous verdicts. A CPS spokesperson noted, “Two juries and three appeal court judges have considered a vast array of evidence against Lucy Letby.” They remarked that in May, the Court of Appeal declined Letby’s leave to appeal on all issues, rejecting claims of flaws in the prosecution’s expert evidence.
During the trial, prosecutors detailed that Letby’s methods were stealthy and included actions such as injecting air into the infants’ bloodstream, administering insulin, and tampering with breathing apparatus. They characterized her as a “constant malevolent presence” on the neonatal unit, asserting she was on duty alone when the infants suffered critical distress or passed away. Letby has consistently maintained her innocence, having testified in both trials that she never harmed any child.
Legal experts have suggested that it is quite rare for a Court of Appeal to reconsider a case previously dismissed and highlighted that more compelling evidence would be required for such an unusual request to succeed. Defense attorney Sean Caulfield, who is not involved in the case, remarked, “It is exceedingly uncommon for a lead expert witness in a criminal case to change his position on critical evidence, and I have not witnessed an instance where this occurred alongside a request to revisit a rejected appeal in my over 20 years of legal experience.”
McDonald mentioned that a team of 15 medical professionals from various parts of the world is currently reviewing the evidence presented during the trial. In the meantime, an ongoing inquiry is investigating the hospital’s failure to promptly identify why the infants were dying and the delays in stopping Letby’s actions, which began in September amidst growing scrutiny by medical and legal experts concerning the evidence presented against her.
A collective of scientists, doctors, and legal experts who independently reviewed the scientific evidence from Letby’s trial expressed concerns to Britain’s health and justice ministers, alerting them to the legal system’s vulnerability to errors in technical matters, particularly in cases that involve complex statistical data in healthcare environments.
Dr. Evans later communicated his revised insights regarding the deaths of the infants referred to in court as Baby C, Baby I, and Baby P in a signed statement for a Channel 5 documentary, as mentioned by McDonald.
While Dr. Evans may still assert that Lucy Letby is guilty, he has apparently developed a new hypothesis regarding the cause of death that diverges from the one presented during the Court of Appeal. McDonald emphasized, “We believe this change is significant and warrants a thorough reevaluation.” As of now, Dr. Evans has yet to respond to requests for comment following McDonald’s press conference.
Moreover, two neonatologists who are collaborating with the defense indicated that there were plausible medical explanations for the deteriorating conditions of Baby C and Baby O, which ultimately affected their resuscitation.