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

Yes. Her life is ruined either way, and if she's innocent, then there are no words for such a travesty.

Yes, true. Thanks for reminding me about that.

No you are making things up. She didn’t write “I murdered babies”, she wrote “I did this” you’re assuming what “this” is.

Its not up to the defence to prove innocence.
It is the job of the procecution to prove that the murders took place.
IMO, the procecution has not done this. They haven't even proved that a murder took place, everything is circumstantial and is based on unproven theories. No direct lonk has been found.

Evans when he changed one of his theories said something like "well something bad must have happened"

The International panel's work (and that of the UK panel inasmuch as we have seen it) offers direct links between the problems with the unit and the deaths. They weren't the first. Reviews by an external neonatologist and pathologist found that care failings had possibly or probably contributed to most of the deaths and incidents examined as early as 2017.

But - it wasn't actually the job of the defence to explain how or why the children died. Now that Lucy Letby is convicted, explanations feel necessary. But it's not the defence's responsibility - the prosecution has to prove murder

Regarding the defence. They wanted it heard on a case by case basis. It wasn’t. The defence expert was not called it’s thought, because , like any competent professional witness, he would not be able to categorically disprove some of Evans’ theories. Medicine is not an exact science, as anyone who has been dangerously ill will tell you.

Not in a million years will she be getting a retrial and getting out! Her PR company really have done a number on the public though. As a PP said, a complete white washing. It's scary people think the trial somehow doesn't matter now and will jump on the innocence bandwagon because a few experts who don't know all the evidence came up with alternative theories-not that they can even rule out deliberate harm anyway. Can't even imagine what all the parents of her victims are thinking about this utter circus.

@Nyungnyung Thanks for your post. Very interesting indeed.

I have no idea what to think regarding LL's guilt.

I mean, the topic at hand is the issue of the babies and their deaths. That's what the notes are all about.

I don't think she was referring to putting a tray of chicken in the oven when she wrote "I did this"!!

Very true @Oftenaddled

It should also be pointed out that the prosecution/police had two 'journolists' in there pocket as well which gave rise to various sensationalist headlines and a podcast.
Something that the defence couldn't do.

Please try really hard to think critically. I know it’s possible for you.

As has been pointed out to you many times on the other threads,
We, who have debated this with you many times, do not know if she is innocent or guilty but believe that the conviction is unsound.

Personally I think the notes were of the spiralling, self-hating, crisis type and not an admission of guilt.

The notes are about her feelings and mental state.
Not a direct link to the deaths.

Maybe it was also "random words" when healthcare serial killer Victorino Chua wrote a similar type of note but maybe he's innocent too...

I think there should be a retrial. Indeed, I hope there will be.

I have always felt uncomfortable about this case. I'm not sure it was even proven beyond reasonable doubt that the crimes actually took place. Surely that needs to be ascertained first?

Plenty of experts from around the world (the panel of 15, including the one whose paper was erroneously used by the prosecution to prove the case) to challenge the so-called "evidence" now.

The case should be heard again. Properly this time.

Me too. She was hung out to dry to avoid the shortcomings in standards of care and safety at the unit becoming public knowledge imo.

And I'm sure that if info that has come out since the trial had been before the jury, they wouldn't have convicted her. It's clear to me that there was "reasonable doubt".

She wrote "I killed them on purpose" but people will do any number of mental gymnastics as to why those words don't mean the exact same thing as murder.

I mean, if you're going to search for alternative explanations for clear words, the possibly interpretations are endless, aren't they?

"I am evil, I did this" is damning, so I can see how that looked in court. Possibly they are meaningless words. She also wrote that she didn't do it. So who knows. It looks bad, is what I'm saying, especially in the presence of all the other coincidences.

LL knew long before she was arrested that she was under suspicion. It was so, so silly of her to keep those notes, and her diary with the babies' death dates written in code, and the 257 handover notes filed in a ring binder and stored in a box marked Keep. So silly, in fact, that part of me wonders if she is guilty and she wanted to get caught, to have her murderous urges (if any) contained. I mean, why oh why would you keep that stuff if you knew you were being suspected?

I think the diary code is weird. The dates were marked with an asterisk-like mark. Wouldn't an innocent person write in their diary something like "Baby Smith died today. So heartbreaking" etc. Why code it up?

Sadly if she was acquitted and let out I could see her taking her own life.

The notes are laughable as evidence of guilt. They were a stream,of consciousness outpouring encouraged by her therapist at a time of acute trauma. Babies died in her dare. Of course she wondered if it was her fault.

The unit was understaffed and ill equipped to deal with acutely ill babies, some of whom were delivered at the brink of viability, and others were multiple births . Two sets of twins and one set of triplets. Many should have been delivered at a bigger specialist unit. Not one with poor consultant oversightl lapses in antenatal care, and far too few nursing staff, where raw sewage was dripping through the ceiling.

This case is an appalling trahedy for all concerned - Lucy herself and the families of all the poor babies who died.

Well you did initially say you thought she was guilty.

You know who never got to have a life? The babies she killed.

Oh, I do hope not. Hopefully she would be given a new identity and would find a new career that she'd find satisfying. I am not convinced of her guilt - although I am pretty suspicious - so I would never want that, in case she is innocent.