It’s possible for sure, but there is far more public interest in the problems with this case. Most people are only vaguely familiar with Bamber’s case and not in a way that is helpful to him. What I mean is, when people think of Jeremy Bamber they think of the characterisation of him at the time - a wannabe rich kid poser doing farm work in Adam Ant garb. The evidence is, arguably, less egregiously bad and hasn’t been torn asunder by a slew of experts in the same high profile way. If I recall correctly that case might also need to establish planting of evidence? (The gun silencer that was found in a cupboard quite far along in the investigation).
There hasn’t been anywhere near the same outpouring of critical experts supporting innocence and so not nearly as much of a high profile with the public calling for a review of evidence. As always it’ll come down to how much the public care and therefore how much pressure is created and maintained. It’s a shame, but that’s often how these things go in real life.
Given that the justice system seems to have excluding important evidence from actual experts for the sake of procedure baked into it (as per the appeal judgement), I no longer doubt that many people are languishing in prison unfairly. I’m far from the only one whose faith in the judicial system has been badly undermined by this case and other recent high profile Miscarriages of Justice (post office scandal and Andrew Malkinson). That is an image problem for the judicial system. A handful of sceptics is one thing. A popular interest in this case (as a MoJ) is another.
In my opinion the justice system needs an overhaul. Will that happen? Not likely, and certainly not quickly. But is there a chance that Letby will have her case reviewed? I think with the amount of public interest this case is generating, as a possible Miscarriage of Justice, yes. It just might. Particularly given the above recent high profile exonerations.
According to the below linked article by Bill Robertson (who advised on Bamber’s recent CCRC application) it might take a (virtually unprecedented) political intervention to do it.
“The Court of Appeal, in suppressing evidence and issuing decrees to limit public access to information, such as banning articles published abroad, is still trying to act as if the internet has not been invented and that word of the dissenting scientists will never come to light. The reality is that within a year or two the majority of those interested in the Lucy Letby case will have seen sufficient scientific refutation of Evans’ testimony to accept that in layman’s terms a miscarriage of justice has occurred. Someone, (would the CCRC dare?), needs to tell the CoA that they should enter the 21st century and agree to hear from scientists better qualified than Evans as to what killed the babies”
empowerinnocent.wixsite.com/ccrcwatch/post/lucy-letby-and-her-quest-for-justice-why-it-is-unlikely-that-the-ccrc-would-refer-lucy-letby-s-conv