I can dismantle ENTIRE case against Lucy Letby with one piece of evidence – probe into innocence could see her walk free

Scottish Sun

3 days ago

LETBY WALKS I can dismantle ENTIRE case against Lucy Letby with one piece of evidence – probe into innocence could see her walk free
A SINGLE piece of evidence could dismantle the entire case against Lucy Letby and see her walk free, a leading expert has claimed.
In a bombshell revelation today, a top professor who specialises in statistical misrepresentation, says the prosecution's handling of the case could result in "half" the cases against Letby being scrapped on appeal.
Advertisement
9
Lucy Letby was convicted of the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of seven more
Credit: PA
9
A grab from footage of the serial baby killer's arrest
Credit: PA
9
The deaths occurred between 2015 and 2016
Credit: Getty
Professor Richard Gill says the "chaotic" handling of the timeline surrounding one of the murdered babies could see the entire case unravel.
Letby is currently serving 15 whole-life orders for murdering seven babies and attempting to kill seven more in a year-long reign of terror.
Advertisement
But now, in a sensational new exclusive chat with The Sun, Prof Gill has revealed how the serial killer nurse could potentially walk free.
His claims centre on Child P - the sixth baby to die in her spree.
Prof Gill told The Sun, the case of Child P 'could be a really big issue' with the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) currently examining the conviction after an application by Letby's legal team.
Child P
Child P, a premature triplet who was one of seven babies Letby was convicted of killing, died after being injected with an excessive amount of air, the trial at Manchester Crown Court heard last year.
This occurred less than 24 hours after she'd killed his brother Child O, prosecutors said.
Advertisement
But in order for the neonatal nurse to have committed the horror attack, she'd have had to have done it within a brief five-minute window in a cramped nursery room packed with several other medical professionals.
None of whom, it is now understood, subsequently came forward to report anything untoward in her behaviour.
What's more, the prosecution's version of events changed in court compared to the pre-trial theories and timelines. Some pro-Letby campaigners argue it proves the narrative was shaped in order to point the finger at the nurse.
How Dutch Lucy Letby who was CLEARED over murder of seven patients, including babies, is 'key to freeing jailed nurse'
It comes as three senior members of the leadership team at Countess of Chester Hospital when the murders took place between 2015 and 2016 were arrested last week on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, meanwhile, says he has a 'horrible feeling' that Letby might have been a 'very convenient scapegoat' and should be retried.
Advertisement
'Really big issue'
Prof Gill has previously helped free multiple medical professionals wrongfully convicted of killing patients, including Dutch nurse Lucia de Berk and Italian nurse Daniela Poggiali.
He is among an increasing number of supporters who believe Letby to be innocent, and has been pushing for a retrial - although many others, including the victims' families, have blasted the campaign to free her.
Prof Gill told The Sun the "chaos" around the Child P timeline urgently needs to be untangled - as it could prove key to answering the questions around Letby's conviction.
Expert witness Dr Dewi Evans, approached by cops to help build the prosecution case, initially theorised in his pre-trial reports that Child P had fallen ill before Letby started her shift.
He suggested the tot had been significantly destabilising on the evening of June 23 2016 - the day before he died and when Letby was off-shift.
Advertisement
But during the trial he changed his mind, suggesting instead that the baby was given 'an extra dollop of air' the following morning - soon after the convicted nurse had started.
Ben Myers KC, defending, accused the doctor of trying to make his evidence fit to 'when Ms Letby was on duty', which he refuted.
Since the trial, neonatal experts have called blasted theories which point the finger at Letby. They say injecting enough air into Child P's lungs to cause his diaphragm to split is a 'ridiculous' suggestion - and almost impossible.
Dr Evans admitted in an interview after the trial: 'It was a phenomenon I had never encountered previously.'
Prof Gill said the change of heart and flip-flopping of theories could prove vital to Letby's appeal.
Advertisement
'All that stuff about air is so totally ridiculous, it's dreamed up,' he said.
'It could be the case that the CCRC gives a good recommendation to the Court of Appeal and maybe they disqualify Dowie Evans.
'Once you've scratched him out, you've lost half of the cases.'
Prof Gill argues there were clearly mistakes made in the treatment of Child P that resulted in his death, and not caused by Letby.
'The allegation changed during the trial, what had happened, and it's very important to notice that that child was in a very critical state,' he explained.
Advertisement
9
Nursery 2 at the Countess of Chester Hospital, where Letby is said to have attacked Child P
Credit: YouTube
9
Letby tried to get an inquiry into the circumstances around the baby deaths suspended
9
The killer nurse has twice failed to appeal her convictions
Credit: SWNS
He said the baby's death was down to 'mismanaged care after he collapsed', adding: 'They were treating the baby wrong and he was dying.'
Child P was being treated in nursery room 2 at Countess of Chester Hospital when he suddenly collapsed at around 9.40am on June 24 2016.
Advertisement
The room is cramped at just 4x4 metres and in the lead up to the baby's distress, there were at least five medically-trained people present.
Five minutes' prior, at 9.35am, Dr Anthony Ukoh and an unnamed doctor reviewed the baby, noting no significant concerns.
But just five minutes later he needed CPR, adrenaline and a full resuscitation.
Prosecutors in Letby's trial last year accused the now 34-year-old of pumping excessive amounts of air into the sick infant, kicking off a series of collapses, and his eventual death at 4pm.
Timeline of Child P's death
June 23 2016
6pm - Dr Gibbs examines Child P and notes the baby's stomach is "mildly distended" - with the doctor ordering an X-ray
8.09pm - The X-ray is taken and reveals "moderate gaseous distention"
8.10pm Child P was given an X-ray
June 24 2016
4am - Nurse notes the baby still has gastric distention
6.36am - Nurse notes: "Abdomen has been soft and non-distended."
8am - Lucy Letby starts her shift. She retrospectively records of Child P: "Abdomen full. Loops visible. Soft to touch."
9.35am - Dr Ukoh conducts ward round and finds the baby stable but writes "abdomen moderately distended/bloated, soft".
*The prosecution claims during this five-minute window Letby injected air into the baby via his feeding tube.
9.40am - Child P experiences severe deterioration and collapses, requiring resuscitation. He temporarily recovers.
11.57am - An X-ray is carried out.
12.30pm - Another X-ray is taken and pneumothorax is identified.
3.14pm - Child P suffers a cardiac arrest.
4pm - Resuscitation efforts are ended and the baby is pronounced dead.
They asserted this attack was done during the 5-minute window in the cramped room, full of people: Dr Ukoh, Nurse Christopher Booth and Nurse Morgan.
Advertisement
During cross examination at Manchester Crown Court in March 2023, Nurse Booth was asked if he'd recalled whether Letby - who was overseeing Child P - 'went for help' after the sudden deterioration.
He said: 'I think, because the room was full of the people we needed, that negated the need for calling for assistance because everyone was already there.'
Dr Ukoh told the court he was tending to Child R - Child P's other sibling - in an adjacent cot at the time of the collapse - with all activity in the room on full display of a busy corridor via a large internal window.
The two little boys' brother - Child O - had died the previous day, and Letby would also be later convicted of his killing.
In her notes regarding Child P, Letby would retrospectively write for 8am, over an hour prior to the collapse: 'Abdomen full. Loops visible. Soft to touch.'
Advertisement
The prosecution claimed this entry was fabricated to 'create an illusion of the ongoing problem', which hadn't been present during checks at 6.40am the same morning or the previous evening.
In their closing speech, prosecutors said: 'If [Child P] really did have an issue at 8 o'clock that morning, we suggest that Lucy Letby would have escalated it immediately, given what had happened to [Child O] the previous day.
'But she didn't escalate it because there wasn't a problem. There was nothing to escalate.'
During her own cross examination on day 126 of her trial on June 8 2023, Letby was told Child P was found by Dr Ukoh to be in a 'very different condition' at 9.35am to his sudden collapse at 9.40am, to which she agreed.
9
A court sketch of Letby during her trial at Manchester Crown Court last year
Credit: PA
Advertisement
9
Letby during her police interview in 2018
Credit: Derbyshire Constabulary
9
Prof Richard Gill is convinced Letby is innocent
The prosecutor added: 'The only conceivable reason for that, I'm suggesting, is because you sabotaged him.'
Letby answered: 'No.'
The prosecution went on to accuse Letby of again 'falsifying the notes' to make Child P 'look worse', when she wrote the infant 'had an apnoea/brady/desat with mottled appearance' which required 'facial oxygen and Neopuff'.
Advertisement
Prosecutors argued this was referring to the baby's condition just 10 minutes before the collapse and before Dr Ukoh's initial examination.
They argued Letby tried to create the impression in her note that the Neopuff - a machine which pumps air into the lungs - caused the baby's abdomen to distend causing the diaphragm to fatally splint.
In reality, they claimed the nurse had injected a fatal amount of air via the child's feeding tube, almost immediately after Dr Ukoh turned his back.
But Letby claimed that particular note was actually describing Child P's condition during the subsequent resuscitation at 9.40am, during which all parties agreed the Neopuff machine was used.
The charges Letby has been convicted of in full
Child A, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby injected air intravenously into the bloodstream of the baby boy. COUNT 1 GUILTY.
Child B, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby attempted to murder the baby girl, the twin sister of Child A, by injecting air into her bloodstream. COUNT 2 GUILTY.
Child C, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said Letby forced air down a feeding tube and into the stomach of the baby boy. COUNT 3 GUILTY.
Child D, allegation of murder. The Crown said air was injected intravenously into the baby girl. COUNT 4 GUILTY.
Child E, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby murdered the twin baby boy with an injection of air into the bloodstream and also deliberately caused bleeding to the infant. COUNT 5 GUILTY.
Child F, allegation of attempted murder. Letby was said by prosecutors to have poisoned the twin brother of Child E with insulin. COUNT 6 GUILTY.
Child I, allegation of murder. The prosecution said Letby killed the baby girl at the fourth attempt and had given her air and overfed her with milk. COUNT 12 GUILTY.
Child K, allegation of attempted murder. The prosecution said Letby compromised the baby girl as she deliberately dislodged a breathing tube. COUNT 14 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT AT ORIGINAL TRIAL, NOW GUILTY AFTER RETRIAL
Child L, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said the nurse poisoned the twin baby boy with insulin. COUNT 15 GUILTY.
Child M, allegation of attempted murder. Prosecutors said Letby injected air into the bloodstream of Child L's twin brother. COUNT 16 GUILTY.
Child N, three allegations of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby inflicted trauma in the baby boy's throat and also injected him with air in the bloodstream. COUNT 17 GUILTY, COUNT 18 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT, COUNT 19 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT.
Child O, allegation of murder. Prosecutors say Letby attacked the triplet boy by injecting him with air, overfeeding him with milk and inflicting trauma to his liver with "severe force". COUNT 20 GUILTY.
Child P, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said the nurse targeted the triplet brother of Child O by overfeeding him with milk, injecting air and dislodging his breathing tube. COUNT 21 GUILTY.
Child Q, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby injected the baby boy with liquid, and possibly air, down his feeding tube. COUNT 22 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT
During her defence team's closing statements, they brought up the prosecution's confused timeline, which had altered multiple times.
'It's like a game of chess with check, check, check, moving around. It's not the night before, okay, now it's the night before,' Letby's team's closing statement said, mockingly.
Advertisement
'Well, it can't be that morning because he's examined by Dr Ukoh at 9.35.
'Hmm, no, it can't be. Ah, what's happened is, in the 10 minutes after that, the baby has splinted his diaphragm.'
Dr Evans, in his pre-trial reports, concluded that seven babies Letby was accused of either murdering or attempting to murder had been harmed by injecting air into them causing dangerous air embolism.
He believed either air had been injected into their stomachs via the tiny feeding tube newborns have inserted through their nose, or into their bloodstream through various lines and catheters.
In regards to the feeding tube, there is much debate as to whether such an act would kill a baby.
Advertisement
In July last year, eight separate expert clinicians, specialising in neonatology, told the Guardian the theory was nonsensical, or 'rubbish', 'ridiculous', 'implausible' and "fantastical".
Dr Evans admitted after the trial: 'It was a phenomenon I had never encountered previously.'
Prof Gill told The Sun: 'People who know about these things say it is physically impossible.
'You could put any amount of air you liked into a baby's stomach and they will burp it out.
'It is not going to blow up their stomachs like a balloon and split their diaphragm, leading to collapse.'
Advertisement
He added: 'The allegation was changed to air was possibly injected into his intravenous line to cause air embolism, collapse and death. But there's no evidence for that either.'
This second theory drew on skin discolorations observed in babies in reference to a 1989 academic paper.
It described the discoloration being caused by high-pressure ventilation, entirely different to injecting air at normal pressure.
Dr Sandie Bohin, a second expert witness in the Letby trial who reviewed Dr Evans' conclusions, agreed with him but the sole surviving expert of the 1989 paper, Canadian neonatologist Dr Shoo Lee, did not.
During an expert testimony in Letby's appeal in April last year, he said he did not believe any of the descriptions of the babies' skin discolorations used by prosecution witnesses matched that characterised by air embolism.
Advertisement
However, in her pre-trial notes, Dr Bohin said: 'My impression of the care afforded to [Child P] after the collapse on 24 June is that it was muddled.
'There were unacceptable delays in recognition and treatment of the pneumothorax, the ventilatory strategy used, and the use of a high-dose adrenaline infusion was unusual.'
Both Drs Evans and Bohin, in their pre-trial notes, appeared to agree that the X-ray at around 8.10pm on June 23 - the day before Child P's death - showed his diaphragm had already been 'splinted', likely causing the collapse the next morning.
Dr Evans had advised cops to investigate the night staff, though Letby had finished her shift earlier in the day.
During his testimony in court, some years later from his writings in 2017, however, Dr Evans' opinion had changed.
Advertisement
The baby had appeared destabilised during the June 24 X-ray, but in his medical opinion in 2023, someone had given the baby an 'extra dollop of air' at 9.40am the next day.
When questioned about his change of heart in court during cross-examination, he said: 'I think there was excess air given before the X-ray, if I could put it that way.
'Then I think that destabilised the baby, but I think he had even more air given into his stomach on the morning of the 24th.
'That, I think, is a more accurate way of explaining the sequence of events.'
Moving in line with this new thinking, the prosecution had said the allegation was that Letby 'deliberately caused a problem' for Child P 'as she was going off duty [on June 23] so that overnight he'd have problems', which would divert attention from her if he died overnight.
Advertisement
Letby's defence team told Dr Evans: 'You've simply now shunted it along the line to a point near to, as it happens, when Ms Letby was on duty after the 8 o'clock handover in the morning.'
The expert refuted the suggestion, saying he "cannot be accused of putting anyone in the frame" as his evidence also related to the night shift before Letby was working.
Mr Myers said the medic had "invented" an "extra dollop of air" on the morning of June 24 to "take his theory over the line".
"I haven't invented any dollops," Dr Evans responded.
The court had earlier heard that a "mistake was made" by the prescriber of adrenaline on the day that Child P died, and he was administered with "precisely double" the intended dose.
Advertisement
But Dr Bohin said: "I don't think it had any adverse effect, in that the infusion was started after [Child P] had at least two of his collapses".
Prof Gill went on to tell The Sun: 'It's very important to note that that child was in a very critical state.
'So those four doctors and nurses in that little room were not hanging around chatting, doing Facebook.
'They were busy with that baby for very good reason because he was having acute problems. He was in great danger. Unfortunately, they mismanaged his care.
'Those four people in that room did kill that baby by the treatment which they were being told to give.'
Advertisement
Prof Gill believes it comes down to Countess of Chester Hospital being understaffed, overrun and unsuitable for treating a baby like Child P, as well as his brothers.
He pointed out Child R was removed from the hospital after the death of his two brothers and recovered - though non-Letby supporters would argue that was because he was no longer in the hands of the convicted nurse.
Prof Gill said: 'O,P and R were triplets and extraordinarily exceptional triplets - they shared a placenta, they were identical… these babies were actually developing particular diseases which you only have with identical twins or triplets that share a placenta, and it's that the blood is not being shared evenly over the three babies.
'It puts them at incredibly high risk. Those three babies, their mum had antenatal care at Liverpool Women's Hospital, which is basically one of the best places in the world to have twins or triplets.
'So why did the doctors allow that mother to have those babies at Chester?"
Advertisement