British barrister Mark McDonald has taken on the case of Lucy Letby, a neonatal nurse convicted of murdering seven infants and attempting to kill seven more. Initially, McDonald believed in Letby’s innocence, but he now asserts that he possesses evidence supporting her stance as a victim rather than a perpetrator. He describes the case as potentially the most significant miscarriage of justice in the UK’s legal history.
Letby was sentenced to 15 life sentences after a lengthy legal battle, with her conviction based on a surge in neonatal deaths at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016. Concerns arose when the number of unexplained infant fatalities spiked. Following an investigation spearheaded by Dr Dewi Evans, who flagged a pattern of suspicious deaths during his review, the police arrested Letby in 2018. Upon searching her home, investigators found incriminating material, including hospital notes and searches for the victims’ families on social media.
Dr Evans, a crucial witness for the prosecution, concluded that Letby had deliberately harmed infants. He attributed their collapses to air injections and poisoning through insulin. However, doubts about the integrity of the evidence began to arise almost immediately after her conviction. McDonald argues that the case was largely circumstantial and lacked direct evidence linking Letby to the alleged crimes. He has enlisted leading experts, who refute the original medical claims and suggest plausible alternative explanations for the infants’ illnesses—pointing towards natural causes or medical oversights.
In April, McDonald presented what he believes to be new evidence to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, which oversees potential miscarriages of justice. He remains hopeful that this fresh information will allow for a re-examination of Letby’s case, emphasising her desire for a fair hearing.
Contrarily, Dr Evans maintains his position, asserting that the truth of Letby’s culpability has already been established. He believes that the claims of new evidence are simply new opinions and lacks appropriate judicial scrutiny.
This case continues to unfold, igniting intense discussions about justice, the reliability of medical evidence, and the potential implications of wrongful convictions in the UK’s history. As McDonald pursues Letby’s appeal, he expresses that she holds onto the hope of proving her innocence—her final chance to tell her side of the story.