Calls for Lucy Letby's Retrial Spark Debate in Parliament

[Social Media]

 

Sir David Davis, a senior Conservative MP, has urged Parliament to reconsider Lucy Letby’s case, arguing that the poor quality of care in the NHS, rather than Letby, is “most likely” responsible for the tragic deaths of babies at The Countess of Chester Hospital. Davis’s call for a retrial has stirred significant debate, marking the first formal discussion of the case in the House of Commons.

 

Letby, a neonatal nurse, was handed 15 whole life sentences for the murder of seven infants and the attempted murder of seven others between 2015 and 2016. However, Davis, after eight months of extensive research, now challenges the verdict. He pointed to alternative explanations and criticized the judicial process, which he believes failed to handle complex medical and statistical evidence properly.

 

“There was no hard evidence against Letby; nobody saw her do anything untoward,” Davis stated. He emphasized that the hospital's neonatal unit might have lacked the necessary resources and skills to care for such vulnerable infants. “It is a clear miscarriage of justice by a judicial system that could not manage admittedly difficult statistical and medical scientific evidence,” he told the Commons.

 

The intervention from Davis, known for his advocacy for civil liberties and his role in exposing injustices like the Post Office scandal, has sparked broader scrutiny. Numerous professionals, including doctors, scientists, and statisticians, have questioned the evidence presented against Letby. Davis recounted his initial belief that Letby was guilty, a perspective that shifted after consulting experts from the Royal Statistical Society and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.

 

Adding to the controversy, Davis highlighted that the jury was never informed of an outbreak of the deadly Pseudomonas bacteria in the neonatal ward, a significant oversight noted by The Telegraph. “It’s hard to see how we can eliminate this as a cause of death or collapse for some of these babies,” Davis remarked.

 

MP Jesse Norman, representing the area where Letby’s family resides, described the revelations as “deeply troubling and distressing on so many different levels.” Moreover, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is under scrutiny for possibly breaching the Code for Crown Prosecutors by instructing police to abandon a thorough statistical inquiry into Letby’s presence during the deaths.

 

Professor Jane Hutton, a medical statistics expert from Warwick University, was initially consulted by Chester Police but was later removed as an expert following CPS directives. Davis stressed that this decision was critical, as one of the pivotal pieces of evidence was a shift chart indicating Letby’s presence during the incidents. New evidence from prominent neonatologists now suggests alternative explanations for the deaths, such as a consultant accidentally causing severe internal bleeding in one infant, known as “Baby O,” and suboptimal care in another case, “Baby C.”

 

Letby’s convictions have been upheld, and her right to appeal was denied. Nevertheless, her new legal team, led by barrister Mark McDonald, is challenging this decision in the Court of Appeal and plans to take the case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The ongoing reviews by Letby’s defense continue to cast doubt on the initial verdict, fueling the call for a retrial.

 

 

Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-01-10

 

 

[jippytum]

 There does seem to be evidence of a miscarriage of jusice here.  Lots of credible people seeking further investigation and a retrial. 

However most people who attended her trial are convinced of her guilt. 

[Gandtee]

1 hour ago, jippytum said:

 There does seem to be evidence of a miscarriage of jusice here.  Lots of credible people seeking further investigation and a retrial. 

However most people who attended her trial are convinced of her guilt. 

Maybe they were if that is true. But on the evidence they were given and not evidence that they were denied due to professional medical experts not being allowed to attend to give that evidence.

[Thingamabob]

An appalling miscarriage of justice. How on earth a judge and jury came up with a guilty verdict on the basis of such flimsy evidence is beyond me. This was a case of senior hospital staff scapegoating a competent and caring nurse who is now serving a life sentence. Utterly disgusting.