Chester, UK — New findings from an audit examining baby deaths at the Countess of Chester Hospital suggest that many of the acutest deteriorations did not occur under the watch of nurse Lucy Letby, who is currently serving multiple life sentences for the murder and attempted murder of infants. The information has surfaced amidst legal moves to reevaluate her case, which is potentially one of the most significant miscarriages of justice in British history, according to her new lead attorney, Mark McDonald KC.
The audit, which compiled mortality data through various sources including Freedom of Information requests, indicated a broader trend of fatalities inconsistent with periods Letby was on duty. These revelations are poised to bolster claims that systemic failures in care might have contributed to the deaths, rather than the actions of any single individual.
Lucy Letby was convicted for the murders of seven babies and the attempted murder of seven others between 2015 and 2016. She was arrested and has since been handed down fifteen whole-life orders. The conviction was heavily reliant on medical evidence which is now under scrutiny.
A critical piece of the prosecution’s evidence was provided by Dr. Dewi Evans, a key witness whose testimonies were instrumental in the conviction. However, his credibility was recently questioned following a Radio 4 investigation. In a notable development last month, Dr. Evans retracted his interpretation of how one of the victims died, after it was determined that Letby was not present at the hospital at the time an incriminating X-ray was taken. Furthermore, in a previous unrelated case, one of Dr. Evan’s assessments was dismissed by a judge as ‘worthless.’
Dr. Evans had referenced a 1989 study concerning air embolisms in his testimony, suggesting this was how Letby had caused the fatalities. However, Dr. Shoo Lee, the author of the cited paper and a renowned former neonatologist from Canada, countered Dr. Evans’s application of his findings. Dr. Lee argued that none of the described skin discolorations in the babies matched those typical of air embolisms, thus challenging a central argument of the prosecution’s case.
Despite these concerns, an appeal court ruled that evidence from Dr. Lee was inadmissible as it had not been introduced during the original trial, stating no sufficient cause was shown to include new evidence which could have been presented earlier.
The controversy has prompted a broader examination of the case, with 24 experts in fields such as statistics, forensic science, and neonatology urging the government to address various troubling aspects of the evidence. The letter highlights anomalies, including overlooked data pertaining to other fatalities that occurred when Letby was not working.
The case’s complexities echo the difficulty and emotive nature of criminal investigations involving infant patients, where the expectancy for care is juxtaposed dramatically against the stark tragedy of death. The developments have led to Letby’s new legal team pushing for a review by the Criminal Cases Review Commission, with hopes of referring the case back to the Court of Appeal.
If such a referral occurs, it will not only re-open the case but also potentially recalibrate the conversation around medical malpractice, systemic failures, and the demanding scrutiny required in the justice system, especially in cases as grave and sensitive as those involving the deaths of children. Meanwhile, the Countess of Chester Hospital has yet to officially comment on the new findings released in the recent audit.