header-logo header-logo

05 February 2025
Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Health , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

Medical panel disputes Lucy Letby evidence

An application on behalf of former nurse Lucy Letby has been received by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which reviews suspected miscarriages of justice.

Letby, who is serving 15 whole-life prison terms, was convicted of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others between June 2015 and June 2016 on the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital.

As part of its investigation, the CCRC is likely to consider a major report on the case by an international panel of medical specialists, who presented a summary of their findings this week. The panel was chaired by Dr Shoo Lee, a retired Canadian doctor who specialises in the treatment of young children. It examined 17 cases involved in the Letby trial, and concluded that no murders occurred.

Speaking at a press conference in London this week, Dr Lee said the panel believed that ‘in all cases death or injury were due to natural causes or just bad medical care’. He added: ‘In our opinion, the medical evidence doesn’t support murder in any of these babies.’

During Letby’s trial in 2023, the prosecution referred to an academic paper on air embolism co-authored by Dr Lee. Last July, Letby appealed against her conviction, seeking leave to present as ‘fresh evidence’ two reports by Dr Lee supporting the view that the prosecution experts used his academic paper outside any reliable basis for doing so. However, the appeal was dismissed, at R v Letby [2024] EWCA Crim 748.

A CCRC spokesperson said: ‘We are aware that there has been a great deal of speculation and commentary surrounding Lucy Letby’s case, much of it from parties with only a partial view of the evidence.

‘At this stage it is not possible to determine how long it will take to review this application. A significant volume of complicated evidence was presented to the court in Ms Letby’s trials.’

The CCRC can refer potential miscarriages of justice to the Court of Appeal if new evidence or new argument means there is a real possibility that a conviction will not be upheld, or a sentence will be reduced.

RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll