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 see the therapist bullshit has now become "fact" because people have repeated it so many times.

I said I have been convinced of her guilt, but now I don't know what to think. Have been, as in have been convinced in the past. Not have been as in, I was convinced and remain convinced. I can see how my wording was confusing.

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.

Re the diary. An asterix is not a secret sinister code. It was an appointments diary, not a journal’of feelings. It was her way I suppose, of simply recording when the deaths occurred.

I don't think it will be quick, but I think that her case will be referred to the Court of Appeal and that the conviction will be judged unsafe.

The new evidence that has emerged since the trial includes some of the formal problems which the Court of Appeal tends to respect: non disclosure of key evidence by the prosecution, and indications that key witnesses are unreliable. These issues are just a drop in the ocean of what's wrong with the case. But they are the sort of thing that the Court of Appeal can accept without seeming to override a jury's decision. They indicate that the case put up the jury was unsound.

After that, I think it's unlikely that the CPS will want a retrial. For a long time, people kept saying there would be more cases against Lucy Letby. But after the police submitted their file, the CPS made a clear statement saying that the evidence was not strong enough for a prosecution. That's significant because it surprised both the police and the expert witness working on the new cases, suggesting they have more faith in the evidence against Lucy Letby than the Crown Prosecution Service.

The original prosecution was approved by the regional Crown Prosecution Service. The new cases were rejected by the national Crown Prosecution Service. It's the national Crown Prosecution Service that will decide whether to go for a retrial if the Court of Appeal quashes the current conviction.

Yes, I'm amazed how many people are completely convinced by that explanation. The truth is that we don't know what she meant, given that she wrote two opposing things. (That she both did and didn't do it.)

The therapist issue is not bullshit and Î am not stupid. She has been named, and has confirmed that this is what she advised. It is a common technique.

Same. I understand why people would do that if they've only heard one of the things she wrote, but there are people who know she wrote both and still make that argument. They can't each be true, however you slice it she wrote something inaccurate!

Well, again, as with the notes, you can make different interpretations.

I do feel that many, many excuses are being made. You can excuse away every piece of evidence, but when you put them together, the picture is pretty bad for her.

Of course, there is another picture, too, of her innocence.

Perhaps she will be exonerated and we will never know for sure.

Spot on @Oftenaddled

MK Family do not chime with the picture you’ve concocted - I think you do them a disservice - In Fact it’s very patronising

they are not in the first throws of the murder and have sat through plenty if not all of the evidence and convictions

no one is hiding - you tried to belittle my opinion saying “one a Knox believer in 2026” (again very patronising) and I have merely pointed out her family believe the same too

I simply put forward the truth of what her family believe - no hiding behind - unlike you hiding behind what you see as facts to have a dig at another poster

im going back to the discussion at hand

I suppose we all judge things by what we would do, to an extent, and I cannot imagine writing "I am evil. I did this" if I had not done it. But then, I am not one to feel guilt if I know I've done nothing wrong. However, I know that some people are very prone to feeling guilty when there's no objective reason to.

It's not normal to keep such a close track of baby's deaths and their families. In a more general way, absolutely - NICU nurses care for their families and deaths, especially on a lower level unit not so exposed to such awfulness, absolutely sticks with staff. But recording it in diaries, searching them on exact anniversaries... no. Understandable if it had been more of a 'oh that baby died just before Christmas, I wonder how their parents are doing' search mid December... but not exact dates. Not for every baby.

I also think the situation with inserting herself into the grief process of the parents for one of the babies, with the bathing thing, is a clear indicator.

I just cannot imagine the utter horror of being one of the baby's parents. I have skin in the game in both directions and just... it is horrific. I actually really wish the whole thing would go silent now because I cannot imagine trying to live your life with this circus carrying on... but I appreciate I am contributing with this comment too.

Exactly - one of those notes is wrong!!

I doubt we will ever get the truth to the satisfaction of rational minds.

I have followed this case extremely closely and even read the appeal documents (related to my job) no doubt in my mind that she is guilty

Well she won’t work in healthcare anymore. She’ll need a whole new identity and there’ll always be people hunting her down.

The CCRC is still looking at it and got new evidence in January. They haven’t recommended anything yet so nothing likely to happen. They also have no power to force it. Two appeal requests have been turned down so it’s wait and see.

Can I ask What makes you say that?

I agree btw

@NameChangeMay2026

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.

Please stick to the facts and not mis information.
The diary notes were marked shift dates.
The 257 "handover notes" were in carrier bags, 7 (I think) were in a box marked keep, none of the notes in the box were related to the babies that died.

Yes, she certainly wasn’t particularly conniving or secretive, was she?

The interesting thing with the notes is that for me they point away from murder, not towards it. They are hysterical, contradictory and raw. They are the complete opposite of someone ‘cold, callous and cruel.’

She never said that in court! She said it's something she'd always done, no word of a therapist telling her to "confess" to crimes she didn't commit. Don't you think her barrister would've hunted high and low for something that could make that note seem less damning? The whole therapy thing came out long after the trial, some journo made it up and enough people parroted it it's now become "true". The entire horrific case is slowly being rewritten. Kathryn De Beger is not a therapist she's in occupational health.

@Oftenaddled you said

new evidence that has emerged since the trial includes some of the formal problems which the Court of Appeal tends to respect: non disclosure of key evidence by the prosecution, and indications that key witnesses are unreliable.

wooden the above have got tested at the first 2 applications for appeal??

So how many babies did Lucy Letby search for around their anniversaries? I'm only aware of one case - the triplets. I really don't think there are any more but if there are I'd be glad to know.

It would be normal for anyone in a role requiring reflection and evidence of continuous reflection to note the dates of significant events for that purpose. If I remember rightly that's how Lucy Letby explained it. I know she was hoping to go for a new role / promotion toward the end of her time on the ward.

It is so easy to twist so many things into evidence of guilt

I don’t think she will (have a whole new identity.)

I don't think it's just because of her PR firm. Private Eye has done an amazing series of reports, as did the respect US current affairs magazine, the New Yorker. Many experts have come forward to doubt the convictions, including that international panel of experts. A PR firm couldn't muster up those experts and make them say stuff they didn't believe.