Dewi Evans (prosecution expert) changes his opinion in Letby case

[LisaJohnsonsFacebookMole]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cyv3jlzme90o

Anyone read about it?

He's changed his mind about the cause of death of 3 babies so her defence say he is an unreliable witness and the prosecution us unsafe

MD in Private Eye has written quite extensively about this.

Yes I saw an article on this https://apple.news/AE7-JezhAQIGdQL1q1J2ViA.
Apparently Dr Evans was the lead expert witness for the prosecution so it’s a big deal.

”Her barrister, Mark McDonald, said he would immediately seek permission from the Court of Appeal to take the "exceptional, but necessary, decision" to apply to reopen her case. Speaking at a press conference in London on Monday, 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. The defence argued twice at trial that Dr Evans' 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."

”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," he continued.
"This was repeated to the Court of Appeal, who may have been misled when they 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."

“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.
It is not our role to determine any impact this new evidence might have on the legal process.”

”Although some of the medical information within the reports is complex, it is possible to draw clear and sound conclusions which we believe will stand up to scrutiny: in this respect we are completely happy for our report to be subject to appropriate independent expert critical analysis. 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."

He put himself forward as the expert. He didn't wait to be asked.
LL Part 6: The Incredible Dr Dewi Evans

What next then?

I don't think a barrister would ruin his reputation holding a press conference during the Thirwall enquiry without a lot of thought

@LoremIpsumCici thanks, that Apple article provides more detail than the BBC one. I wonder if she is permitted to appeal, would it only be for charges related to those three babies?

The transcript of what the Barrister said seems to indicate that they are asking to appeal the convictions for murder of those three babies.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/letby-victim-baby-o-had-liver-lacerated-in-medical-blunder-expert-claims-after-w/

Evidence that baby O’s liver injury caused by ‘medical blunder’

One wonders whether her murders or "murders" were used to cover up any ballsups that were going on

Oh, thank you. So the earlier articles were about Baby P, I and C and now there are doubts about Baby O. That is four out of seven babies she was convicted of murdering. It does say:

“Speaking on Monday, Letby's legal team, led by barrister Mark McDonald, confirmed they are set to ask the Court of Appeal to immediately review all of the nurse's convictions.”

So that answers an earlier question.

That is a horrible account of medical negligence.

Im shocked at the prosecutor behaviour! Also why was this dismissed by judge and court of appeal.

her case seems littered with errors.

It’s certainly possible given the history of the neonatal unit’s short staffing and downgrade during the Letby tenure.

Those poor parents, being traumatized over and over again. Their heads must be spinning.

I don’t know what to think. I haven’t followed it as closely as some but if there is any chance there has been a miscarriage of justice then it needs to be investigated.

Christ Almighty.

I wonder who that doctor was. Wonder if it was one who "saw" Letby do things.

This case becomes more horrific with every new story reported.

Her convictions are clearly unsafe, whether she’s guilty or not (I tend to think she’s not).

But none of what was said at the press conference is new. Evans’ unreliability has been part of previous, rejected, appeal attempts.

I expect this was more of a PR exercise than anything. Her team probably know they won’t get an appeal by the route they’re suggesting.

So what’s his aim then? Angering the judiciary with a press conference doesn’t sound helpful.

I suppose it’s helpful to keep the idea that it’s a miscarriage of justice in the public mind? Most of the post-conviction publicity around her case has worked in her favour, and with her appeals rejected she doesn’t have too many tools at her disposal right now apart from public opinion…

Didn't she write about the murders though?

I watched all of the conference having followed the Private Eye journalism extensively. I
found the explanation for Baby O compelling - I was impressed at the number of experts and
worldwide expertise that is being sought. I thought the defence lawyer was doing a good
job in the original trial testing the evidence against the standard of the unit being unsafe. I never understood why no defence experts were called
He has a hell of a job on his hands to get this overturned but I hope he gets the chance for a retrial as at least some of these convictions are clearly unsafe

The previous appeals took place before it became apparent that Evans had changed his mind on the cause of death for some of the babies. That is new and may give her defence a chance at appeal. However, the fact there is an expensive inquiry under way based on Letby's guilt may mean that the Court of Appeal's tendency to reject appeals that they think might damage public confidence in the courts will weigh against any attempt. There have been many previous cases where the Court of Appeal repeatedly rejected appeals long after it was abundantly clear that the original conviction was unsafe.

I've always been of the opinion that there was insufficient evidence to prove her guilt.

I've also seen first hand how there can be a culture of banding together against a scapegoat rather than dealing with fundamental issues within a department.

The whole situation is awful and at the centre of it are grieving families who have been told their children have died of natural causes then had their world turned upside down and had to deal with the horror of the possibility that they were murdered. And now potentially will have to go through it all again and may well never know for sure.
Equally if Letby is innocent then her life has been ruined too.

I agree. Just approaching Christmas too, a difficult time of year re grief and loss.

No, her notes were evidence of her distress at the situation, not admissions that she killed them. 'I did this' and 'I am evil' might indicate that she felt guilt regarding the deaths, but not because she deliberately murdered them, rather that she blamed herself because she was caring for them and they died.

On the same piece of paper where she wrote “I killed them on purpose” she’d written something like “I did nothing wrong.” As well as a lot of other nonsense. Anyone’s guess what she was really thinking.

The note suggests a poor mental state, but by then she’d been removed from duty and knew she was likely to be arrested. A lot of people might lose the plot in those circumstances, even if they hadn’t done anything wrong.