Lucy Letby: a condensed update on recent developments

[Kittybythelighthouse]

So, in the past week or so alone we’ve had:

Leading neonatology expert Dr Shoo Lee (Professor Emeritus at University of Toronto, Honorary Physician at Mount Sinai Hospital, President of the Neonatal Foundation, Founder of Canadian Neonatal Network, Previously Head of Neonatology at University of Toronto and a hospital for sick children) says his 1989 paper, which the prosecution relied on as their only proof of alleged intravenous air embolism (skin discolouration) was misused by the prosecution. He actually went to the appeal hearing and had his paper Judge-splained to him by three CoA judges who probably don’t even have a science A level (the judiciary have a poor record regarding science). He was so astonished and aggrieved that he has has published a new peer reviewed paper filling in all new evidence since 1989 and distinguishing between intravenous and arterial air embolism which the 1989 paper didn’t do. The conclusion: there is zero evidence for skin discolouration in intravenous air embolism, which is the only possibility in this case. This means there is absolutely no evidence to support an allegation of air embolism. It didn’t happen.

https://t.co/TRokh1hneu

Dr Shoo Lee pulled together a blue ribbon panel of the world’s best experts in relevant areas. Never before in legal history has a group of such highly regarded international experts come together to challenge the evidence against a convicted serial killer. They went through all of the evidence independently and pro bono (with the proviso that they would publish reports regardless of findings). Yesterday they held a press conference. Conclusion: there were no murders. There was plenty of poor care, medical malpractice, mistakes, and a poorly run struggling hospital.

“If this was a hospital in Canada, it would be shut down”

Link to their summary report: drive.google.com/file/d/1aV4zwwdBYw8Z_E-Tpe9_-iPR7n8cZdFk/view

A leak from an Operation Hummingbird detective which reveals that deaths were chosen as suspicious or not based on whether Letby was on shift (remember, most of the babies had uncontroversial post mortems at the time). There were ten other cases originally classed as suspicious until it was established Letby couldn’t have done them, then they magically became unsuspicious.

“Four more children would later be added, two children would be dropped, collapses deleted and added as the focus was turned in different directions, and the whole chart thoroughly chopped and changed. The guiding principle being, always, that Letby must be in the frame.” Trials of Lucy Letby on X.

https://t.co/FOO55lWlCi

Chester Police responded with a statement to The Mail on Sunday:

“There is a significant public interest in these matters, however, every story that is published, statement made, or comment posted online that refers to the specific details of a live investigation can impede the course of justice and cause further distress to the families concerned. It is these families and the ongoing investigations that remain our primary focus.”

“Cheshire Constabulary's statement to the Mail on Sunday is remarkable, coming from a police force that put out an HOUR-LONG promotional video about their own investigation.

They claim to be demurring from commenting now because "every story that is published, statement made, or comment posted online that refers to the specific details of a live investigation can impede the course of justice and cause further distress to the families concerned."

Such concerns did not stop them, less than two years ago, from flooding the press with incendiary and prejudicial commentary, going so far as to announce that they'd be reviewing the care of 4,000 babies that Letby may have ever come into contact with.

The lead investigator, Paul Hughes, even sat down with the co-hosts of the Daily Mail podcast for an episode called "Catching the Killer Nurse," where he speculated to no end about the supposedly evil and cunning machinations behind Letby's every move, and concluded that "she clearly does love the attention. I think she's loved the attention of a trial." (From The Trials of Lucy Letby on X).

Is Letby the one who loved the attention? The investigation was as active then as it is today. Why the silence now? 🤔

Thirlwall released the witness statement of Michelle Turner on behalf of Liverpool Women’s Hospital. She speaks about Letby's placement in 2012 & 2015, including how unlikely she would have been in an intensive care room without another nurse present.

thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/upl…

Former Director of Public Prosecutions Lord MacDonald to BBC’s World at One: “It is clear that there is now this quite impressive body of work. Something may have gone wrong here. That clearly has to be taken seriously.”

"New documents released by the Thirlwall Inquiry also show how the Countess of Chester refused to take part in research to improve outcomes for premature babies."

Neena Modi: "The Countess of Chester was the only hospital to decline participation."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/04/the-10-baby-deaths-that-cast-doubt-on-lucy-letbys-guilt/

Meanwhile the CPS still (as far as we know) refuse to hand over former Dr Dewi Evans new report about how one of the babies died - written in October 2024 after BBC’s File on Four challenged him about Letby not having been on shift when an ‘incriminating’ x ray was taken. In fact she hadn’t been on shift since the baby was born. She was convicted of killing this baby.

The CCRC announced yesterday that they have opened their investigation of the case. They assembled a team specifically for this case late last year, in anticipation of an application. This is an extraordinarily speedy and organised response from the CCRC.

https://ccrc.gov.uk/news/lucy-letby-application-received-by-criminal-cases-review-commission/

This has been a remarkable, historic, run of events. It is now looking very likely that the case will go back to the Court of Appeal, or there may be a more expedient solution. Whatever happens, it’s very unlikely to take the CCRC their usual 10 years to deal with it. They are on the ropes recently, with a CEO stepping down and a raft of bad press. I am not Mystic Meg, but my money is on an exoneration within the year.

Because this evidence is outside the remit of the Thirlwall Inquiry. The inquiry accepts the guilty verdict and is looking to find out how a killer was allowed to remain on the unit for so long. It may be that it is looking at entirely the wrong things...

The supposed ‘smoking gun’ evidence of the x ray which ‘proved’ her “murder method” of forcing air into his tummy, splinting his diaphragm, was taken the day before he died. She was not at work that day and had not been since he was born. There was no other evidence against her in that case except the fact that she was on shift the next day and he died that day.

Several of the cases relied on this method of murder, which has no precedent in history. In summing up Nick Johnson KC called it “her favourite method of murder”. Evans said it was well covered in medical literature, which is a lie that he later backtracked on when a multitude of experts called the very idea that you could kill a baby in this way “ridiculous” and “nonsensical”.

So why would you even say it?
Why ask if maybe her eyes and blonde hair had anything to do with people asking if she may be innocent?

The Inquiry is no longer sitting. Haven’t you followed it? It also had terms of reference which specifically excluded any possible acknowledgement that she may not have done it. That said, yes actually. Dr Modi did in fact testify at Thirlwall. Again, didn’t you follow the Inquiry?

thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/thirlwall-evidence/INQ0006759.pdf

By the way, why the scare quotes around “experts”? They are objectively speaking world class experts. If you disagree please feel free to prove that their credentials are fake. While you’re at it please show how Dewi Evans credentials are anything but a clownshow in comparison.

Sally Clarke was blonde and blue eyed too. What of it?

Thanks to the PP for posting the full Dr Lee & panel press conference which I’ve just watched (most of). Fascinating and absolutely damning in terms of the safety of Lucy’s conviction.

? What of it?

Yes, why are we talking about that at all? It didn’t make Sally Clarke guilty either. It’s utterly irrelevant. Perhaps if there were no issues whatsoever except plaintive wails about how a young white blonde woman couldn’t possibly do this it might be relevant, but there is an astonishing body of evidence that she didn’t do it and not a single shred of solid evidence that she did do it, so it is irrelevant.

D'oh: because the evidence was flawed meaning there's a possibility she has not murdered anyone. It's not defending a baby murderer and it's a great pity some people are so blinkered that's how they see it in the face of debunked prosecution "evidence".

If it is true that no crimes have been committed - as stated by these experts - then there doesn't need to be a retrial. Letby should be released as soon as possible if not immediately.

I say "if". Personally, I believe the conviction is unsafe but let's see what the CCRC think.

“It’ll likely be thrown out” what’s this based on? Are you the new CEO of the CCRC? Are you Mystic Meg? The CCRC assembled a special team specifically to work on this case late last year. They announced kick off yesterday, practically the instant they got the application. If you have any idea how the CCRC work you’ll know that this is exceptional. It’s delusional to state what you have with zero reason and every reason to think the opposite.

As to why I’m “so invested”. I’ll tell you why. The integrity of British justice is of extreme importance to every person subject to its rule. Whether they know it or not. This case does not exist in a vacuum. If Letby can be banged up on nothing but lies and rickety made up evidence, so can you. So can I. So can our children. If this is shown to be a miscarriage of justice, and at this point it is pretty clear that that is the case, then it is the worst MoJ in modern times. It is an injustice of historic proportions. Frankly, if you’re this casual about it you’re not invested enough. This affects you too. Whether you know it or not.

Edit: obviously I’m not “campaigning for a baby murderer”. The entire point is that I don’t think she is. This is such a tired and desperate slur. Engage honestly or not at all. Ffs.

Fwiw, I followed the case pretty closely and felt that, based on the evidence presented, LL was probably guilty. The report by this expert panel - who clearly are genuine experts - seems very compelling to me, not to mention damning for the hospital, and must mean that her conviction is unsafe at the very least.

Why are you shaming someone for being interested in a miscarriage of justice? Are you a mean girl?

Absolutely

How anyone can think she is somehow lucky lot getting an easy ride when she has been singled out for investigation and later convicted of an appalling serial murder on very scant evidence.

Just watched this. It's upsetting the sheer volume of evidence there were no murders. Very clear implications Letby was set up to cover up the failings of the hospital and staff.

It's like the witch trials are back

“On a previous thread, someone said she was deeply unpleasant in court- can anyone expand on this- I haven't heard about her unpleasant behaviour at the trial.”

What would any of us be like having spent several years already in prison, on remand, as the most evil and hated woman in Britain? What would we be like having lost everything, at 25, after working hard and buying your own house, in a job you love, the world at your feet, your house sold, your pets taken away, your entire existence turned into dehumanised trash?

I was a witness for the defence in a rape trial once. That wasn’t nearly as long or as high profile as this, but being cross examined was horrific. It was legitimately traumatising and I was just a witness. The cross examination in this case gave me flashbacks- trying to force her to explain the phrase ‘Go commando’ - a text she didn’t even send that had nothing to do with anything. It was purely about humiliating her. How is that not sexual harassment? The whole fiasco was horrifically misogynistic and ugly. The adversarial trial system has a massive misogyny problem.

Apparently she was diagnosed with PTSD and was on anti depressants at the time of the trial. I’d be shocked if she came across as anything but a hounded, broken, woman, because that’s what she was.

By all accounts she was lovely, well liked, bubbly, warm, happy, until this happened. It would destroy anyone.

This is a reasonable position to take and I respect that. I am only troubled by those who quadruple down and say (scare quotes) “experts” rather than show any capacity to be receptive to new information. It’s a bit scary tbh. Witch trials vibes. Your position is shared by many people now I imagine.

Do you know what’s scary about Evans? He’s been an expert witness in family court for decades. Family courts were closed to media/public scrutiny until a week or so ago. I cannot imagine how much devastation he has left in his wake. The man is unhinged.

No she wasn't. She failed her nursing placement through lack of empathy. A colleague said she spoke of one baby's death in an excited gossipy way. I wish folk wouls stop trying to portray her as some sort of latter day saint.

Ugh I was a witness for the prosecution, not the defence! Myself and my friend were so viciously attacked and dehumanised by the defence that it felt like we were the ones on trial.

Her supervisor moved her because of a personality clash. She then passed. Her eventual reference said she was reserved when anxious. Obviously something to work on when she was a young nurse.

Her colleague said that seven years later, after Letby had been accused of murder. I wonder how many of us would have been safe from the odd judgemental colleague at that point.

Ironically, it's just gossip.

I watched the full 2 hour press conference. These medical experts are the best of the best in their fields and they said each and every one of these deaths was not murder.

They spent months, sometimes weeks assessing each case.

Dr Lee himself said his own medical journals had been misinterpreted. He said that mottling of the skin as described by the prosecution does not happen when air is introduced into a vein. This was one of the prosecutions main arguments.

Other babies they reviewed for example....a baby who Lucy was accussed of injecting insulin with via an IV bag they said did not happen. They said this because the babies sugar levels were low all day and it was only several hours later that it was realised that the IV line was not located in the babies vein but in the leg which had caused excessive swelling in the groin. When this was rectified and the amount of glucose given risen from 10-15% the sugar levels rose to within a safe range. The baby had several IV bags throughtout their stay at the hospital and Dr Lee said it was impossible that Lucy was able to inject each one with insulin. The prosecution said when the IV bag was changed at 12 as always happened on the ward the sugar levels rose thus, the prosecution said, the old bag must have contained insulin, but, it was infact the increase of to 15% glucose causing the sugar levels to rise.

Another baby who was a triplate was injured not by Lucy but when he was delivered by cesarean section. The prosecution said a large amount of force had been applied to the abdomen causing brusing and bleeding. Dr Lee said when babies are born by cesarean this is a common injury of the sack which surrounds the liver. The hospital then tried to incorrectly drain the bleeding from the abdomen with a needle and pierced the liver. A secon triplate born at the same time also had the same injury to the liver but survived.

The comments about the prosecutions neonatal expert are also interesting. He has written no medical reports, Dr Lee over 400+ , he did not have a practicing medical certificate when these babies deaths happened and, further, he was not approached by Cheshire police as an expert he took it upon himself to drive to the station and announce himself as an expert and Cheshire Police accepted this.

I think it calls into question how experts for Trials are chosen and decided. It is worth noting that there was a seperate hearing in respect of the Prosecution's expert to decide if he was even indeed an expert at all in the eyes of the law.

I suggest anyone with any interest in this should watch the press conference start to finish because it really is very interesting.

None of these experts were paid, all gave up their time for free. They are the beat of the best in terms of neonatal care.

It is interesting to me that the very people Dr Lee questions and calls incompetent are the ones who made statements against Lucy.

Dr Lee and the other experts highlight that this was a failing drastically understaffed hospital. He goes as far as to say if this hospital was in Canada it would have been shut down!

https://www.youtube.com/live/ctwulAqke5I?feature=shared

I see no way this case cannot be reviewed by the Court of Appeal again.

Interesting indeed.

No one in the world (apart from the drs who accused her and only visited the ward twice per week) had a single bad thing to say about her until after they were told she was a baby killer. Even then it wasn’t much. She failed a placement? So what. I’m not saying she’s a saint anyway. I’m saying she’s a very ordinary young woman with none of the hallmarks of a serial killer. Even Judith Moritz’s ‘Unmasking Lucy Letby’ had to concede that. They dug hard to find people to say bad things about her. Worst they found was someone from her school who said she was really good at taking notes in geography so could not have made any mistakes in note taking at her job (I’m serious!).

How many of us can honestly say that if a machine of an investigation, hell bent on finding us guilty, really dug into our search histories, our school days, our uni days, our entire lives, that there would be no black marks, or incidents that can be blown up to look bad in the horrendous light that you’re a baby killer? That you lie. That you’re weird and selfish and cruel. Have you ever sent a text you regretted? Out it comes. The worst text on her phone was sent by someone else about ‘going commando’ to which she replied with a laughing emoji. Oh the horror! They even dug up her garden ffs.

One of the weirdest things about this whole thing is how many people say things like ‘she showed no emotion when talking about the babies.’

She was (and still is I am sure) zonked out of her brain on anti depressants.

So would you leave your baby alone in the care of Ms Letby?