Lawyers representing convicted child killer Lucy Letby have announced plans to seek a review of her murder convictions, citing concerns over the reliability of the prosecution’s lead medical expert. Letby, 34, is currently serving 15 whole-life orders following her conviction for the murders of seven infants and attempted murders of six others at the Countess of Chester Hospital between June 2015 and June 2016.
At a press conference held at London’s Royal Society of Medicine, her barrister, Mark McDonald, claimed that Dr Dewi Evans, the lead expert witness for the prosecution, has altered his opinion on the cause of death in three of Letby’s alleged victims. He asserted that this shift undermines the safety of her convictions and described the situation as “exceptional but necessary” for reopening her case.
Expert changes opinion
Mr McDonald revealed that Dr Evans has revised his conclusions regarding the deaths of three babies, identified only as Baby C, Baby I, and Baby P. During Letby’s trial, Dr Evans testified that the infants had died as a result of air being deliberately injected through a nasal gastric tube, a key element of the prosecution’s case.
However, Mr McDonald alleged that Dr Evans has since provided a new report, submitted to the police, which challenges this original assessment. “Remarkably, Dr Evans has now changed his mind,” Mr McDonald stated, adding that the defence had repeatedly requested access to this report, but the prosecution has yet to provide it.
Fresh evidence
In addition to Dr Evans’ altered opinion, Mr McDonald disclosed that two neonatologists have submitted reports offering fresh evidence in relation to Baby C and Baby O, concluding there was no evidence of deliberate harm in these cases.
He argued that the revised opinions cast doubt on the reliability of Dr Evans as a prosecution expert, stating, “We will argue that Dr Evans is not a reliable expert, and given that he was the lead expert for the prosecution, we say that all the convictions are not safe.”
Previous appeals rejected
Letby has already lost two bids this year to overturn her convictions. In May, the Court of Appeal rejected her argument that expert evidence presented during her trial was flawed, and in October, a separate appeal concerning the attempted murder of another baby was also dismissed.
A spokesperson for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) defended the integrity of the original trial, emphasising that two juries and three appeal court judges had reviewed a wide range of evidence before reaching their decisions. “Lucy Letby has been convicted on 15 separate counts following two jury trials. In May, the Court of Appeal dismissed her leave to appeal on all grounds,” they said.
More Read
Thirlwall inquiry ongoing
Letby’s case has already prompted a comprehensive independent inquiry, led by Lady Justice Thirlwall, into how the former neonatal nurse was able to carry out her crimes without detection for so long. The inquiry, which began hearing evidence in September, is expected to conclude in late 2025.
Concerns over judicial process
Mr McDonald highlighted that questions surrounding Dr Evans’ reliability had been raised during Letby’s trial and subsequent appeals. He noted, “The defence twice argued that Dr Evans’ evidence should not be considered by the jury. Both times, these arguments were dismissed by the trial judge and later by the Court of Appeal.”
However, with Dr Evans reportedly altering his conclusions and presenting a new report, Mr McDonald insisted that the case merits reconsideration. He stated, “The Court of Appeal may have been misled when ruling on the application for leave to challenge the convictions.”
Public reaction
Letby’s crimes, described as “cold, calculated, and cruel” by the trial judge, shocked the nation, and her convictions remain one of the most significant criminal cases in recent British history. The announcement of a potential review has sparked fresh debate over the role of expert witnesses in complex criminal trials.
As the defence prepares to lodge its new appeal, questions linger over whether the legal system can ever truly achieve justice in cases as devastating as this. For now, the identities of Letby’s surviving and deceased victims remain protected by court order, as the families of those affected await the next chapter in this harrowing saga.
