Expert Witness Refutes Claims of Altered Testimony in Letby Trial

An expert witness has characterized the criticisms leveled against his testimony by Lucy Letby’s legal representatives as “unsubstantiated, unfounded, inaccurate”. On Monday, the legal team representing the former neonatal nurse announced their intention to request an immediate review of all her convictions by the Court of Appeal. They asserted that Dr Dewi Evans, the lead prosecution expert, had modified his opinion regarding the causes of death for three infants at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016. In a statement, Dr Evans stated that he had not received any official notification concerning the announcement, nor any communication from Letby’s barrister, Mark McDonald, or his legal team. Dr Evans further commented: “Mark McDonald’s observations regarding my evidence is unsubstantiated, unfounded, inaccurate.” He continued: “His method of presenting his information reflects clear prejudice and bias.” Dr Evans added: “I find his style most unedifying, most unprofessional. It’s highly disrespectful to the families of babies murdered and harmed by Lucy Letby.” During a subsequent exclusive interview with Newyddion S4C, a Welsh-language news program produced by the BBC, Dr Evans remarked that he was “surprised how little he changed his mind” throughout his involvement in the case. He also highlighted that it is customary for an expert witness to adjust their perspective “as evidence changes and evolves”. Dr Evans clarified that the sole alteration in his testimony pertained to the death date of a child identified as Baby C, but he maintained that this was merely a straightforward error on the part of the prosecution. He characterized Mr McDonald’s assertions as “remarkable, baseless, and incorrect”. Earlier, Mr McDonald stated he had “nothing to add” in reply to Dr Evans. Letby is currently serving 15 whole-life imprisonment sentences for the murder of seven infants and the attempted murder of seven others, offenses committed between June 2015 and June 2016. The 34-year-old, who originates from Hereford, made two attempts on the life of one of her victims. On Monday, Mr McDonald informed a news conference in London that Dr Evans had revised his opinion concerning the manner in which infants had died at the unit. He stated: “Remarkably, Dr Evans has now changed his mind on the cause of death of three of the babies: Baby C, Baby I and Baby P.” The barrister further added: “Dr Evans had said to the jury that Lucy Letby had injected air down a nasal gastric tube and this had led to the death of the three babies.” He continued: “This was repeated to the Court of Appeal, who may have been misled when they ruled on the application for leave against the convictions.” He mentioned that Dr Evans had “revised his opinion in relation to Baby C” and had authored a new report, which he had provided to the police several months prior. However, he noted that “despite numerous requests,” the prosecution had “yet to give this report to the defence.” “The defence will argue that Dr Evans is not a reliable expert, and all the convictions are not safe,” Mr McDonald declared. Letby received convictions in August 2023 for the murder of seven infants and the attempted murder of six others. Earlier this year, she was also found guilty of attempting to murder a seventh infant. Permission for her to appeal against her convictions has been denied on two occasions. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) stated that the Court of Appeal had previously dismissed Letby’s contention that the expert witness evidence presented by the prosecution was “flawed.” Dr Evans commented: “The only place appropriate to deal with any potential appeal is the relevant court. “If required I would be pleased to give evidence in the usual way; on oath, subject to cross examination, and where my evidence is placed in the public domain.” Dr Evans drew attention to remarks in a report from the three Appeal Court judges. He stated: “They were supportive of my evidence,” and “They supported the verdict… unreservedly.” He added: “I am not in receipt of any information that indicates that the Appeal Court judges were mistaken.” He also mentioned being “mindful” of two current developments. The first is the Thirlwall Inquiry, which is investigating the circumstances related to Letby’s offenses. Hearings in Liverpool are scheduled to recommence in January, and the public inquiry’s conclusions are anticipated in the autumn of 2025. Secondly, Cheshire Police disclosed earlier this month that detectives had questioned Letby under caution while she was in prison, as part of their investigation into additional infant deaths. Dr Evans stated: “I believe we owe it to them also to complete their investigation without any distractions.” Responding to Dr Evans’s statement, Mr McDonald asked: “Dr Evans has written a new report on Baby C, 12 months after Lucy Letby was convicted, please can this be disclosed to the defence?” He continued: “This issue of reliability of any prosecution medical expert is now a matter for the Court of Appeal and Criminal Cases Review Commissions but certainly the disclosure of this new report may help them in deciding this question.” In a statement, Cheshire Constabulary affirmed that its primary concern was “to maintain the integrity of our ongoing investigations and to support the many families who are at the heart of these.” The police force added: “There is a significant public interest in the reporting of these matters.” It further stated: “However, every story that is published, statement made or comment posted online that refers to the specific details of a live investigation can impede the course of justice and cause further distress to the families concerned.”