NADINE DORRIES: I was the first to challenge the credentials of this 'expert' in the Lucy Letby trial. Now I'm even more convinced judges MUST think again
Share:
If I was convinced of Lucy Letby's guilt, I'd have no qualms about her punishment. She'd deserve everything she got – 15 whole life sentences – for her cold-hearted crimes against tiny, defenceless babies and the immense suffering inflicted on their parents.
![[Dr Dewi Evans rejected the term 'expert witness', preferring to be described as an 'independent medical witness']](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/12/18/01/93254459-14203181-Dr_Dewi_Evans_rejected_the_term_expert_witness_preferring_to_be_-a-4_1734485461456.jpg)
But like a growing number of people – eminent doctors, nurses, scientists, statisticians, legal experts, politicians and campaigning journalists like my colleague Peter Hitchens – I have serious doubts about the safety of Letby's conviction on all charges.
Now those doubts are strengthening after barrister Mark McDonald, who heads up Letby's new legal team, announced that, in an unprecedented step, he was asking the Court of Appeal to review all her convictions. He said he had 'significant' new evidence that the convictions were not safe because the chief prosecution witness, Dr Dewi Evans, had 'remarkably changed his mind' over the mechanism of death in three of the seven babies – Babies C, I and P – murdered in the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital between June 2015 and June 2016.
He was not, McDonald said, a 'reliable witness'. (For his part, Dr Evans believes that his changing his mind would have had little effect on the verdict.). Mr McDonald also revealed that Dr Evans had written a further report about Baby C which was now with the Letby prosecution team. Despite numerous requests they were refusing to share the report.
