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

@FaceIt That's a very strong statement. I'm interested to hear what makes you so certain? Has none of the information that has surfaced since the trial made you doubt the safety of the conviction at all?
I'm genuinely interested, I would like to have such a strong faith in the justice system

I don't think it's a reasonable expectation of lay people in a case like this either, where you've got to evaluate medical explanations and haven't had the training to do it.

As guilty as sin. No new trial. LET HER ROT.

I make no apologies for not reading the entire thread or any that have gone before. Lucy Letby has been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law. Anyone who has any real experience or dealings with the legal process will understand what this entails and why. LL has legal representation and there does not need random people on the internet to play detective without the full facts. None of you have the full facts, whatever you think. If there is enough evidence for a retrial, then it will happen prompted by her legal team.
Maybe think of the families of the victims? Just a bit of empathy as to how this constant speculation and amateur sleuthing by randoms impacts on them seems reasonable.

I am not sure how much the LL is innocent fanatics are able to do self reflection or rationale thoughts, maybe question why you are so invested in this particular case and think you know best? There are lots of miscarriages of justice the world you could get behind, maybe not so blond and innocent looking and from a middle class background.

Oh come on. She knows she’s a certain age, biological clock ticking, finds relationships with men hard, she must’ve known she was on a hiding to nothing with the married doctor. May have done internet dating/apps without success. It could be quite easy to state what she said in my view.

it’s been said before but her colleagues who could’ve been defence witnesses for her didn’t do so because if they did their jobs were at risk.

Amen to this.

She was 26 or 27 when she wrote that note. There are women ten years older than her who haven't given up on their dream of having a family because it's still perfectly possible. So giving up in her mid-20s? Nope don't buy that.

Maybe not every thought in a diary is a cold rational one? Maybe people write down worries and fears? It might seem silly to older people but even young people can feel like they’re never going to be happy and have dread about the future despite having so much time to right the course.

I remember being asked by someone younger when I was 27 if I was worried that I wasn’t married yet. Not everyone in their twenties is completely relaxed because they have time on their side.

They might sway a jury though. I have no idea if LB is guilty or not. You have to hope that any conviction is safe and the system is up to speed

I mean I agree she’s been found guilty after months of trial and we have to believe the system is rigorous and safe but at the same time you’re saying there are other miscarriages of justice to get behind. Do you mean outside the UK or that it is still actually possible for that to happen in the UK ?

@coolastheproverbialcucumber, not sure which I find more depressing. A website for parents being so lacking in empathy for parents that have suffered so much or the fact that MN HQ have not shut this crap down and sent them to the Daily Mail comment section.

@Redcars I am alluding to the fact there are lots of miscarriages of justice but they are not blond, middle class women who present like LL. I do not see why this a miscarriages of justice. I know lots of people want to believe it is. For full transparency, my job means I appear in court a lot, I am often an expert witness and have seen how rigorous the process is in criminal court. The outcome does not hinge on one witness or expert, several are called. The defence will also instruct their own witnesses. It is not tv, it is a long and drawn out process over several days.

@Dameputtingonabraveface

We all know that there are other miscarriages of justice, if they bother you so much you could post about them. Or are they to blond and middle class as well?

I think when Lucy Letby was convicted there were very few people saying she was innocent, or wanting her to be. Why would you want someone to be innocent and convicted? If you look at YouTube videos/articles posted around the time of her conviction the comments are basically exclusively saying how terrible she is. It was really only after when statisticians, journalists like from Phil Hammond in Private Eye and especially the panel of experts came out that most people started questioning it. I reject this framing that it’s just a bunch of random internet conspiracists who are driving this because of identity politics.

@FrippEnos yes there are many, LL is not one though. If there is enough evidence for it to go back to court, then it will. She is hardly unsupported.

In the meantime, lots of clueless and uninformed randoms are lapping up tabloid and internet misinformation and pretending to be detectives. Her victims have families who deserve respect and compassion and they should be at the forefront. Real people who have lost their babies and have had their lives changed forever. Do they not deserve compassion and basic human decency? Or is this trumped by someone with no real skin in the game just wanting to pass some time, making uniformed guesses and comments to people they do not know on the internet?

As you have admitted that you havem't read the thread or the ones that went before, you are judging on your own bias.
I would hope that an "expert witness" would be better, but then we know that there are major issues when using "expert witneeses".

I would hope that the system is rigorous enough to stand the proding of "randoms on the internet" after all it is these randoms that have managed to get many wrongly convicted people freed.

As for not thinking of the victims, I believe that they should know the truth and that at the moment they don't have it.

May I suggest the if threads like this offend you. you don't read them, or post snide comments about the people that are.

And as I posted earlier if you know of any mistrials etc. maybe you should post about them and get them the publicity that you believe that they deserve.

Hmm... love the smell of sanctimony in the morning.... plus the predictable (misogynistic) dog whistle "profiling" tropes....

I make no apologies for at least having some experience of court processes around contentious medical "evidence" before stating with some certainty that the conduct of this case falls far below the usual criminal standards for such an emotive and complex case. Feel free to AS prior to your inevitable lofty dismissal of anything I say of course....

I honestly think she won't be able to live a normal life if she is released, she will be looking over her shoulder for the rest of her life, too many people are convinced she is guilty whatever the result of an appeal.

@Dameputtingonabraveface and @coolastheproverbialcucumber

You're both totally wrong to say we shouldn't be discussing this. Potential miscarriages of justice are a public matter and affect us all, especially ones as serious as this where the person is locked up for the rest of their life with no possibility of parole.

Our justice system is the bedrock of our society and we are all subject to it. Next time it could be you potentially wrongly accused and locked up for life.

Plenty of medical experts have said they think the verdict is unsound, experts who are unpaid, who are risking their careers, and who are risking public ire. To fail to discuss the issues raised would be to potentially leave an innocent person to rot for many decades until they die. It is ESSENTIAL that societies discuss these things. As for miscarriages of justice around the world we could get involved in, per your suggestion, we are not subject to those foreign justice systems, we do not pay for them, and this case is about our society and our rules, the ones we are bound by.

I do feel for the families, but nobody is being forced to read this thread.

I felt the same as you - that this case has had a really thorough go in the courts and it's really unlikely to be wrong. But now I'm not sure, because it seems there are a truly alarming number of issues with the trial. People with serious brains and experience and nothing to gain are deeply questioning it, by which I mean medical experts and highly intelligent reporters at reputable publications.

The issue for society is not so much whether she did or didn't do it, as we can't know, but the fact that the trial was deeply flawed, to the extent that it was not a fair trial. You should be concerned, and reading about it, and discussing it. It's your justice system, too. Societies improve their institutions only when its members demand it. Shutting up about possible mistakes of this potential magnitude is not the way to go. We need to demand better.

As for saying that MNHQ should shut down "this crap," I'm surprised that you're so un-informed about such a serious issue that has such deep implications for how our society handles something as important as justice. I can only think that neither of you have thought this through. The trial was a travesty. Next time, it might be your trial, if you're in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Below is a link to a fairly short article that @Oftenaddled posted, showing some of the issues.

https://archive.is/PJmKM

For more reading, Private Eye has done an incredible in-depth series. It's free.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/special-reports/lucy-letby

I think she will definitely get out at some point. No conviction can withstand that many issues with the evidence and the case that was put forward.

The trials you've seen may have been fair and good. The point is that it strongly appears that LL's wasn't. Reports 34/35 in the Private Eye link I posted are devastating to the prosecution. (They're in one PDF.) Since you're familiar with the courts and criminal trial systems, I think you will find it very interesting and deeply concerning.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/special-reports/lucy-letby

Here's a link to the amazing article in The New Yorker about Letby. It's 14,000 words long. I hope the link works.

For those who don't know, The New Yorker is a highly respected current affairs magazine from the US. They published this research when the UK wasn't able to because Letby's second trial was pending, the one about Baby K.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/05/20/lucy-letby-was-found-guilty-of-killing-seven-babies-did-she-do-it?_sp=e7cd8dac-65bb-4ac7-bb29-8ff135473538.1780110745380

If this link doesn't work, I can paste the text.

I have no idea and definitely don't feel qualified to pass judgement on this case which brings me to my question.

How can a jury compiled of people who know next to nothing about medicine, hospital procedures and the jargon involved have the ability to dicuss this type of case in detail? Should they be deemed qualified enough in cases like this to pass a verdict of guilty or not guilty given their understanding of the evidence will probably be extremely limited. It's quite bizarre.

It's a very good point. Many people feel there should be juries made up of relevant professionals for cases like this.