Lucy Letby has been denied permission to appeal her conviction for the attempted murder of a baby girl, as judges determined that she received a fair trial. The former nurse, currently serving 14 whole-life prison sentences, sought to overturn her conviction, claiming she faced overwhelming media scrutiny and negative coverage before her trial.
During a two-hour hearing at the Court of Appeal in London on Thursday, senior judges rejected her legal challenge. Letby, who is 34, listened to the proceedings via video link from HMP Bronzefield, a women's prison in Surrey, without visibly reacting to the judges' decision.
Her new barrister, Mark McDonald, plans to request a comprehensive review of her convictions by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Letby was previously convicted of murdering seven infants and attempting to murder six others in the neonatal unit at Countess of Chester Hospital in north-west England. She was found guilty of attempting to murder a seventh baby, referred to as Baby K, during a retrial in June.
Letby has consistently claimed her innocence. Her legal team argued that the media's portrayal of her before the trial included "highly prejudicial" comments. They cited instances where police described her as "evil" and a senior prosecutor labeled her "devious" and "manipulative."
Benjamin Myers KC, representing Letby, contended that such public statements were unprecedented and questioned the appropriateness of allowing the retrial to proceed amid such negative publicity. He presented 62 examples of biased media coverage, including a segment on ITV's Loose Women that posed the question, “Was Lucy Letby born evil?”
However, Lord Justice Davis, along with Lord Justice Baker and Mrs. Justice McGowan, dismissed Letby's appeal. They stated that the trial judge had rightly determined she could still receive a fair trial despite the media coverage. Their ruling, delivered even amid a brief fire alarm interruption at the Royal Courts of Justice, indicated that most of the complained-about media coverage occurred shortly after her initial convictions, suggesting its impact would have diminished over time.
The judges deemed it unrealistic to expect police and prosecutors to refrain from making emotional comments immediately after a conviction. They concluded that the possibility of a retrial did not significantly alter the situation.
This ruling was limited to Letby’s argument about the retrial's fairness and did not address the broader implications of her convictions. Nick Johnson KC, the prosecutor, countered Letby's claims, asserting that most public discontent was directed at hospital management rather than Letby herself for permitting her to remain in a position of responsibility amid serious concerns.
Johnson pointed out that much of the media criticism occurred shortly after the August 2023 convictions, long before the retrial. He referenced a pro-Letby article published in the New Yorker before the retrial, suggesting it demonstrated that public sentiment had shifted, undermining Letby's claims of prejudice influencing the jury.
In closing, he remarked that the fleeting nature of media attention means that what is front-page news today may soon be forgotten.
No comments:
Post a Comment