Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
National

The Lucy Letby trial and the limits of expert opinion

A mugshot of Lucy Letby.
After two trials and two attempts to appeal, Lucy Letby has been convicted of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others. Composite: Cheshire Constabulary/Observer Design

The remarkable report by Felicity Lawrence on the trial of Lucy Letby poses many questions that – notwithstanding the suffering for the families involved – must be followed up (Lucy Letby: killer or coincidence? Why some experts question the evidence, 9 July).

As a non-lawyer and non-statistician, I comment on the one aspect that should concern all. That is the references to people working in the NHS expressing concerns, but asking to remain anonymous, “fearing the impact if they are named”.

The idea that in 2024 the benefits of openness and transparency are not being learned to the extent that neonatal nurses who flagged up concerns to an NHS consultant neonatologist were “frightened to go public” is a symptom of unacceptable public administration. This urgently needs addressing.
Jeff Rooker
Labour, House of Lords

• I write as a retired paediatrician in response to Felicity Lawrence’s article about the evidence in the trial of Lucy Letby.

Before 2005, a procedure known as the “whoosh” test was commonly used to inject air through a nasogastric tube in neonates. By listening for a “whoosh” over the abdomen, the sound of expelled air indicated that the distal end of the feeding tube was correctly sited.

This procedure was subsequently abandoned because of a lack of accuracy rather than safety.

Having reviewed the neonatal literature, I have not been able to identify any evidence of air injected into the stomach causing collapse or death.
Ivan Blumenthal
Swanland, East Yorkshire

• Your report says that evidence from Dr Shoo Lee, “who retired recently from a career as one of Canada’s top neonatologists … was not admissible by the court of appeal, with the judges saying the defence could have called him in the trial”.

Does this mean that the court of appeal will not take into account further evidence, no matter how strong, if it hasn’t been raised in the trial? This is the high – nay, world-beating – standard of British justice? I think not. Perhaps the whole system needs a thorough overhaul.
Simon Lauris Hudson
Pontefract, West Yorkshire

• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.