To think that Lucy Letby will get a new trial?

[NameChangeMay2026]

The previous thread on Letby is almost full. Posting here for traffic.

If we have any lawyers here, what do you think the likelihood is of Letby getting a new trial? I'm a layperson, but I'm going to guess that she will get one. It seems that many, many rebuttals have appeared since her conviction.

YABU - she will not get a new trial. The case is settled.
YANBU - the new evidence/discussion is compelling and she will probably get a re-trial.

I've been mainly convinced of her guilt, but I have started reading the free Private Eye series on the case by Phil Hammond. Now I don't know what to think. Here's the series, if anyone wants to read it. https://www.private-eye.co.uk/special-reports/lucy-letby

I hope so. Would like to see her acquitted and given a new identity, as, imo, she is innocent and has been blamed for the failing of the entire unit.

Edit, I am a lay person who has no legal knowledge, just my opinion.

I don’t know enough detail of the evidence to say whether I think she’s guilty or not. But I do think there is enough doubt about the evidence to warrant a new trial.
She either needs to be convicted again or needs to be cleared. One way or the other, it’s unfair on the victims’ families (and on her if she is innocent) to have constant doubt, debate and discussion over the cases and the conviction without any definite action taken to settle it.

I hope she does.

I have a law degree but am not practicing. I do think she will get a new trial eventually, these things could take years/ decades to roll around. I think future statisticians and law students will be taught how the erroneous use of statistics can mislead juries in the same way SIDS parents were convicted.

I’m not sure she will get a new trial. I think there is a good chance she’ll be exonerated though.

But doesn't she have to have a new trial in order for exoneration to happen?

I think it's beyond doubt that the expert witness for the prosecution was not fit for the role, given how many of his more experienced colleagues in the global medical community have completely disagreed with him.

There was no expert witness for the defence, albeit we have an idea now of what the jury might have heard if there had been one and it seems significant.

If the trial that went ahead is our justice system working successfully, we'd be better with divining rods.

The amount of pain caused to everyone involved is sobering.

Question for any lawyers: Twice, the Private Eye reports clearly refer to her having to be in prison for a decade before her case can be heard in the Court of Appeal. (That's if the CCRC does send her case back to the Court of Appeal.) However, I can't find any information online that says prisoners have to be in prison for ten years before their appeal is heard. Can someone clear this up for me?

It's extremely sobering, isn't it.

I haven't read enough yet to have an informed opinion, but I do wonder how they explain that the deaths stopped when she went on holiday and started up again as soon as she got back, having promised in text to a friend that "I'll be back with a bang."

That’s the thing. By the time she gets a new trial her life is effectively over. She won’t be able to have kids, nor adopt them. A relationship may be possible. She might change her identity. If she gets acquitted she will be free but that’s that. She’ll probably live with her family somewhere like New Zealand. She may be able to get work in a shop or something like that.

I know enough now about her conviction to say that she deserves a retrial. I was one of those who in the beginning was convinced of her guilt.

I'm a solicitor, not crime. There are clear and obvious problems both specific to the case and in the system generally. Because of the latter, I think it's really hard to predict, and I wouldn't be surprised if any retrial or unsafe declaration is a long way into the future. I also think there'd be significant practical issues retrying the cases anyway so wouldn't necessarily expect a hypothetical retrial to proceed to completion.

Are you aware of goings on at the CCRC? The director had to resign last year because of a litany of failures. And the head of investigations had to recuse himself from the Letby case review earlier this year due to impartiality concerns over a LinkedIn message.

Also a layperson, not sure if she is guilty or not but I do think there needs to be a retrial. I was mostly horrified at the handwritten notes that they found - when I first read about them I thought they had her banged to rights but then I heard the further context that she was asked to do this in therapy and that the context may have been she was under such an enormous amount of stress that she blamed herself for what happened, even if she knew she hadn’t done it on purpose. Almost like they gaslit her to believe she was guilty.

I've thought about this a lot.. if you were the actual murderer wouldn't you like to blame someone else? Wouldn't you think you are clever by holding off harming another baby knowing that another member of staff was on holiday.. someone sick enough to kill and harm these babies would be cunning enough to get the blame put on someone else.

Yes I do, the convictions are looking more unsafe as things progress. However, sadly for the families, and Letby herself if innocent, it will likely take years to happen.

She might get a new trial. But I still think she is guilty.

I agree with this. Seems like they looked for a pattern and found one.

Correlation ≠ causation.

It’s a bit like how people say “oh the deaths stopped when she left!!!” erm yes, because they were downgraded as a unit and could no longer take the sickest babies! It’s entirely possible that they just didn’t have a huge number of sick babies there that week.

I’m not sure of the system to be fair but the complexities of a trial for six deaths and several attacks seems huge.

It is awful as I’m pretty sure she is innocent but won’t be out for years.

I’ve read and seen enough articles on this case to know (in my mind) that her conviction is unsafe and she deserves a retrial. Her life is absolutely ruined now though. And will be if she’s acquitted.

I'd think she would have to change her identity. Public facing work unlikely to be a good idea either.

I would like a retrial for her.

I think she's innocent so I hope she does get a retrial. If I were her I'd probably move abroad once I got out changed, my name and maybe get plastic surgery.

I’m a doctor and not a lawyer and I hope there is a new trial - I find it concerning that so many very qualified experts have criticised the evidence. It also shows the difficulty in finding medical experts to do legal work as most practicing doctors don’t do this - and the ones that do, are most frequently retired and a bit of a strange lot - and pay is far worse for the defence, so very little motivation to do this work (it is far better for the prosecution)

When I was a junior doctor, I was also really anxious that I might have accidentally harmed someone and I always worried about things I might have missed or a mistake I might have made - and if a patient died that I had been caring for, I can definitely understand being really scared that you might have done something wrong. If I was taken off the ward after a couple of unexpected deaths, I can completely understand writing the notes and feeling scared that you had done something wrong and that you are a terrible person, even if you know that in reality, you did nothing deliberately

The first few years for all health care professionals are really tough and she was still very junior

I don’t think they did - if you read any of the information from the statisticians excluded from the trial, they were concerned that deaths were being cherry picked to form a narrative

I’m not criticising you but I am always amazed anyone took those notes seriously