Lucy Letby not charged with further crimes - what does this say about her current convictions

[mids2019]

So no more charges for Lucy Letby currently.

I can't say I am surprised as the tactics the CPS used the first time to secure convictions wont wash. There have been too many questions about the 'expert' evidence in the first trial and in my opinion the CPS don't want to take the risk of trying again with a more possibly more aware jury.

The police seem to be not too happy and probably thought they had similar evidence as they had initially so were taken aback by the CPS decision. They have had to approach parents to say that their children dies either through medical incompetence or through natural causes. The poor parents will now feel distraught and confused being lef up the garden path and the police maybe telling them Lucy was guilty.

I wonder if this is paving the way for a retrial?

Maybe the doubt wasn't so tiny?

He's got to know how that's going to be received, surely?

Yes that's what I meant, he's saying it's tiny but you wouldn't admit a 'tiny' doubt on netflix for millions to see if you didn't think there was a very decent chance this was going to be eventually ruled as a miscarriage of justice.

He calls it "guilt", too, which to me is a hell of a lot stronger than just calling it "doubt ".

I think you've got it there. He wants to be seen as being on the right side of history when she finally gets a retrial.

I also think he's "confessing" to assuage his feelings of guilt.

It was only a matter of time before one of them expressed their doubts. They know the case hasn't been proven. Maybe initially when the police investigated, and the prosecution had 'experts' and no one defended they were fully convinced but there's no way with everything that has gone on since they could all continue to believe it had been proven.

Agree about the use of the word 'guilt' too.

Will she really get a retrial though? Doubtful. Poor woman by the time she’s released if she’s released there will be virtually no time to find a man and have children. Especially as she may be given another identity.

And I have no idea whether LL is guilty or innocent or not. But on side of innocent.

I've not seen this docu but just read that the prosecution made a huge deal over her 'lying' about what she wearing at arrest (her sleepwear) and therefore is a liar... but the docu shows her being arrested 3 times, wearing sleepwear! The trials really were a shitshow. I am really hoping she gets some justice. I also think the parents of the children are able to be helped to sue the hospital for their failings

I’m hopeful the CPS won’t seek a retrial.

Why don’t you want a retrial? I think this would be only fair seeing what’s come out since the original trial, the new evidence and so on.

I want her to win her appeal and be released without a retrial.

I believe that if Dewi Evans’ evidence had been ruled inadmissible the first trial would have collapsed. Evans has been overruled by the panel, Jayaram has been frowned on by the Court of Appeal. The CPS didn’t bring further charges. Maybe I’m leaping ahead but I’d be surprised if they tried to bring a retrial.

Evans should be charged, imo. Surely, what he did amounts to perverting the course of justice?

I do think Letby would benefit from a retrial. Short of someone coming forward and confessing, which, given that it is doubtful there was any murderer, is unlikely, Letby will always be assumed guilty by many. A retrial might help put some doubts aside.

Can't see how there's any realistic possibility of Evans meeting the criminal standard of proof test for perverting the course of justice. It requires specific intent.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/prosecution-guidance/public-justice-offences

Doesn't cover someone who is genuinely and honestly wrong.

I do not think any good would come of trying to criminally pursue a blowhard. Would also potentially deter other expert witnesses from giving evidence to court. They do need to be able to give their honest opinion.

I realise that it's just frustrating that he is able to act so outside of his role as an expert and not face any consequences. Criminal charges are probably a step too far.

I do believe he thought she was guilty. I don't think he intentionally set out to frame an innocent woman, but I also believe he decided on her guilt before looking at the medical notes and then knowingly and deliberately manipulated and fabricated evidence to "win" the case. There should be some consequences for that, although I understand it would be impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

If the evidence isn’t there, there shouldn’t be a trial. The courts are overloaded as it is.

Tom Hayes, the LIBOR man said he would have liked a retrial so it’s not impossible she would like one but rules are rules. I think she’s better off just getting out asap.

Inquest opened and adjourned

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c75xp200r0lo

"I needed to face Letby in court, says victim's mum"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62nyld3d60o

The BBC have messed it up. The sixth inquest, which had already been suspended is Baby D. Other outlets confirm this.
“An inquest into the death of a sixth baby, Child D, which was originally opened and suspended in 2016 was further suspended on Wednesday.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/feb/04/lucy-letby-inquest-coroner-death-babies-cheshire?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

IMHO

I think he wanted to find "someone" guilty for the prestige value and LL fitted the basic requirements and so evidence was filtered to fit the narrative, he should have presented all the facts whether they supported his favoured narrative or not.

Saying that, if a retrial takes place, that's the time to see what, if anything (benefit of doubt), he chose to hide from the previous trial - and then a decision on what action should be taken could be made.

Evans pocketed well over £50,000 for being an expert witness. Of course he, and those who paid him, wanted a result!

Being an expert witness is an extremely lucrative gig.

In 2023 alone he was paid £52,000.

Really what we need is a system that doesn't incentivise the likes of Dewi into existence in the first place. He didn't get to do any of this by himself, and nor is it his fault we don't have proper safeguards.

The publishing company which took Nick Wallis's book about the Post Office scandal now has a book planned about Lucy Letby. It will be very interesting to read it when it comes out. The author thinks there's been a miscarriage of justice.

I heard a suggestion a while back from someone who knows more than I do about the legal system that what might happen is a retrial but the crown doesn’t offer any evidence so she is found not guilty immediately.

If anyone who knows these things has an opinion about how plausible or not that is I would be interested to hear.

Sounds right.
Originally she was charged with the murder of baby K but the CPS didn't bring the evidence to trial so the judge ordered a not guilty verdict on that charge before the trial started.

I see the BBC reported that the parents of Baby A do not want his inquest to be reopened.