PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Consultant paediatrician Dr John Gibbs from the Countess of Chester also recorded that a post mortem was not requested “since it was felt that Baby 17 had probably died due to a respiratory infection” complicated by a lung haemorrhage.
The Telegraph has also learnt that Letby was not on duty when the baby initially deteriorated."
————————————
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) is currently considering evidence presented on her behalf from an international panel of medics who claim poor medical care and natural causes were the reasons for the babies collapsing."
———————————-
PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "The 11 pieces of evidence that Letby’s lawyers passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission
- Nineteen detailed reports prepared by 16 experts from seven different countries which find no evidence of harmful acts committed by Lucy Letby and highlight a litany of errors by the treating clinicians.
- Two reports from the UK’s leading statisticians refuting the premise of the prosecution case of an unexplained spike in deaths and a coincidence of Letby being present when babies are said to have died or collapsed.
- Three reports, written by nine internationally renowned experts, on the issue of insulin, rejecting the hypothesis that exogenous insulin was given to any baby by Letby.
- The failure of the prosecution to disclose to the defence that the police had instructed an expert, met with the expert, taken guidance and advice from the expert and then not proceeded on that advice. This arguably led to the jury being misled on the central thesis of the prosecution case, that there had been a spike in deaths and the staff rota showed Letby being on duty for each incident.
- The failure of the prosecution to disclose a medical statement from a treating clinician which could have had a bearing on the defence approach at trial.
- Evidence from numerous interviews, podcasts and articles from (expert witness) Dr Dewi Evans since the trial, where he arguably undermines his independence as an expert witness.
- The failure to disclose a new report drafted by Dr Evans twelve months after Letby was convicted of murder. This report addresses the cause of death of one of the babies for which Letby was convicted of murder.
- The failure of the prosecution to adduce before the jury the report from the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) which, following a full review of the neonatal unit, raised several issues concerning suboptimal care.
- The failure of the prosecution to disclose to the defence the involvement of a senior coroner’s officer into the investigation of Letby and the results of her investigation.
- The failure of the prosecution to disclose that the coroner investigating the death of one baby (for which Letby has been convicted of murder) did not see important evidence of a hospital procedure which we say ultimately may have led to the child’s death.
- The change of position by Dr Evans on a key element of the case against Letby. This, we say, not only may have misled the jury but also the Court of Appeal.
SUB-HEADING: "Former nurse present when ‘Baby 17’ collapsed in February 2016 at Countess of Chester Hospital."
GIST: "A baby that Lucy Letby was accused of murdering died from a respiratory infection, according to neonatal experts.
Letby was present when “Baby 17” collapsed in February 2016 at the Countess of Chester Hospital, but police never charged her with his death.
In November Dr Dewi Evans, the prosecution’s chief expert at trial, wrote to police saying he believed the former nurse interfered with the child’s breathing tube triggering his deterioration. The infant was taken to Liverpool Women’s Hospital where he died.
But medical notes leaked to The Telegraph show that neonatal specialists in Liverpool believed the baby had died from a respiratory infection, while another prosecution expert queried why the infant had been transferred when he was critically ill.
Consultant paediatrician Dr John Gibbs from the Countess of Chester also recorded that a post mortem was not requested “since it was felt that Baby 17 had probably died due to a respiratory infection” complicated by a lung haemorrhage.
The Telegraph has also learnt that Letby was not on duty when the baby initially deteriorated.
Medical notes show that the little boy, who was born by caesarean section at just 31 weeks old, had restricted growth in the womb and weighed less than 1kg when born, an extremely low birth weight. He needed help breathing and showed signs of infection.
After struggling with various problems in the week after his birth, the baby stopped breathing several times and needed resuscitation. He was eventually transferred to Liverpool Women’s Hospital, where he died 10 days after his birth.
Dr Evans’s own notes from the time did not mention the tube had been dislodged but said it had been “taken out.”
Pre-trial police notes obtained by The Telegraph also show Dr Evans did not mention breathing tubes during his initial assessment of the case.
He told officers he thought the child had died of IC – Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation – a life-threatening disorder which can be brought on by an infection, or birth problems, although he also suggested the baby might have been smothered.
But in a recent letter to Cheshire Constabulary he wrote: “I believe that it is very likely that Letby interfered with his breathing tube. This would have triggered his deterioration and led to his death.
“Dislodging breathing tubes is a phenomenon that has been identified in relation to other babies placed in her care.”
Letby was convicted of murdering seven infants and attempting to murder seven more at the Countess of Chester in 2015 and 2016.
Dr Evans insisted that he did not use Letby’s presence as a factor in determining whether any of the deaths and collapses were unnatural, saying he looked only at the medical notes.
But when contacted, he was unable to explain why he had changed his mind about Baby 17 when the only new information he had was Letby being present.
“I’ve given my report to the police and need not add anything to what I have shared with them,” he told The Telegraph.
Since Letby was convicted, dozens of scientists, medics and Jeremy Hunt, who was health secretary at the time, have come forward to voice their concerns about how evidence was presented to the jury.
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) is currently considering evidence presented on her behalf from an international panel of medics who claim poor medical care and natural causes were the reasons for the babies collapsing.
The 11 pieces of evidence that Letby’s lawyers passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission
- Nineteen detailed reports prepared by 16 experts from seven different countries which find no evidence of harmful acts committed by Lucy Letby and highlight a litany of errors by the treating clinicians.
- Two reports from the UK’s leading statisticians refuting the premise of the prosecution case of an unexplained spike in deaths and a coincidence of Letby being present when babies are said to have died or collapsed.
- Three reports, written by nine internationally renowned experts, on the issue of insulin, rejecting the hypothesis that exogenous insulin was given to any baby by Letby.
- The failure of the prosecution to disclose to the defence that the police had instructed an expert, met with the expert, taken guidance and advice from the expert and then not proceeded on that advice. This arguably led to the jury being misled on the central thesis of the prosecution case, that there had been a spike in deaths and the staff rota showed Letby being on duty for each incident.
- The failure of the prosecution to disclose a medical statement from a treating clinician which could have had a bearing on the defence approach at trial.
- Evidence from numerous interviews, podcasts and articles from (expert witness) Dr Dewi Evans since the trial, where he arguably undermines his independence as an expert witness.
- The failure to disclose a new report drafted by Dr Evans twelve months after Letby was convicted of murder. This report addresses the cause of death of one of the babies for which Letby was convicted of murder.
- The failure of the prosecution to adduce before the jury the report from the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) which, following a full review of the neonatal unit, raised several issues concerning suboptimal care.
- The failure of the prosecution to disclose to the defence the involvement of a senior coroner’s officer into the investigation of Letby and the results of her investigation.
- The failure of the prosecution to disclose that the coroner investigating the death of one baby (for which Letby has been convicted of murder) did not see important evidence of a hospital procedure which we say ultimately may have led to the child’s death.
- The change of position by Dr Evans on a key element of the case against Letby. This, we say, not only may have misled the jury but also the Court of Appeal.
Lawyers for the families of Letby’s victims have dismissed the panel’s conclusions as “full of analytical holes” and “a rehash” of the defence case heard at trial.
Letby, who has always maintained her innocence, lost two bids last year to challenge her convictions at the Court of Appeal.
Cheshire Constabulary has also submitted a further case file to the Crown Prosecution Service who are currently deciding whether to bring new charges against Letby in relation to further incidents at the Countess of Chester Hospital and new cases at Liverpool Women’s Hospital, where she worked as a trainee.
Police are also investigating whether there is grounds for charging the former management with corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
-------------------------------------------------------------------
