Martyn Pitman

Why Letby is so compelling is that it is so “clean” — in other cases there is circumstantial stuff & defendant behaviour at least vaguely — if weakly — commensurate with criminality. In Ms. Letby’s case there is nothing. She seems barely capable of a bad mood.

Post Office Horizon, Malkinson, Campell, and as well as Letby there are a range of insulin poisoning/healthcare serial killer cases which have the hallmarks of the same system problem.

"Cross examination is the greatest engine for the discovery of truth." Say lawyers. And no one else. Because anyone in the real world knows that the scientific method better. But lawyers don't care for the views of non-lawyers.

Add “only child” to the list of psychological traits. 1 More Life of Brian reasoning from the criminastrology sect: MANDY: Well, what is he then? What star sign is he? WISE MAN: Capricorn. MANDY: Capricorn, eh? And what are they like? WISE MAN: He is the son of God. Our…

A bigger problem in the Letby case was that Evans was able to serve both as an investigator for the police and as an expert witness at the trial marking his own homework. It's hard to understand how that was ever allowed.

My point is that if there is even a bonafide, but irreconcilable, difference in the expert evidence, there *must* be doubt. If that evidence is the sine qua non of guilt, there can’t be a conviction.

It certainly does! For example, in the Lucy Letby case, how an earth was an "Expert" allowed to advance theories that were (and remain), completely unsupported in the medical literature. It beggars belief @drphilhammond

Just seems ridiculous that expert evidence should be allowed on matters where there is not general consensus. If the science is sufficiently controversial that two experts can contradict each other, a lay jury cannot possibly arbitrate.

All these people are living proof of how the judiciary cover up the disgraceful behaviours of judges…this is happening now bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…

However the scandal underscores the need for urgent reform in our justice system on several key issues, including the use of unvetted & unqualified expert witnesses, the role & function of the CCRC, & the Court of Appeal's ability to stop cases from progressing to @UKSupremeCourt

A huge thank you to @DavidDavisMP for all his public support throughout this ordeal, and to @karentodner for continuously believing in Tom and the others. The world would be an amazing place if there were a lot more people like these two wonderful human beings.

Holroyde is retiring: he was with Sir Robin Spencer ( prosecuting barrister in Sally Clark’s case quarter of a century ago ) in August 2023 in Andrew Malkinson’s Appeal the same month as Lucy Letby was sent down for life by Judge Goss. Then when Spencer was appointed as the…

It looks like the Channel 5 documentary is back available online. I am really glad I spoke up last year, especially when many of my colleagues — including some in very senior positions — chose to stay silent, even though they had concerns. At the time, I didn’t know whether…

Very well said Svilena. Evidence which has emerged since the convictions tell me this/these is/are without question unsafe convictions. All power to Lucy Letby's legal team to give enough evidence to CCRC to refer to Court of Appeal.

City traders convicted of fraud just had their convictions quashed,the supreme court was very critical of the trial and appeal court judges, and stated the effectiveness of the appeal system was very concerning. So more pressure being put on the CCRC and appeal court from the top

To all those who believe all of Lucy Letby’s colleagues were suspicious of her - no they weren’t! And in fact a large amount of nurses on that unit “absolutely believe Lucy is innocent”!

"The justices said the history of the two cases... “raises concerns about the effectiveness of the criminal appeal system in England and Wales in confronting legal error”. Probably wishful thinking but I hope they have an eye on LL & would love to intercede on that mess.

Significant for Lucy Letby? There has been much talk of how rarely the Court Of Appeal overturn cases, regardless of how overwhelming the evidence. Here the Supreme Court ruling, in the opening sentence, REBUKES the CofA and their effectiveness in "confronting legal error."

How 'convenient.' Probably very keen 'to spend more time with his family,' as that seems to be the go-to excuse of failed NHS CEOs, who want to make a hasty exit in order to avoid scrutiny and legitimate challenge.

It's deeply disturbing and not surprising that there have been so many miscarriages of justice. At the root of all of this is the problem with expert witnesses and the inability of the courts to recognise who the appropriate experts are.