Is Lucy Letby Innocent? | Criminal Defence lawyer Paul Britton | GB News

Last week on GB News, Paul Britton and Tom Harwood discuss "jury fatigue", the stress and mental exhaustion that jurors experience while serving on a jury, particularly in long hearings. In this video Paul Britton states this was a very short case, "only a four-week trial." In FACT, it was a 10-month trial. Therefore, the opposite would be relevant: that "jury fatigue" is an important factor to consider.

The rest of the discussion with Tom Harwood about Lucy Letby’s appeal to the Criminal Cases Review Commission was thought-provoking and eye opening.

This is a complex case with significant implications for the justice system if she is successful. Paul Britton shares his legal perspective on the potential grounds for review and the importance of ensuring fairness in all legal proceedings.

We would love to hear your thoughts on the matter in the comments below, If you disagree, agree or aren't sure please share!

[ruthbashford]

How can babies that had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes suddenly become murder victims?

[azzygreg]

Paul Britton's 5 mins of fame.
Lot of high profile individuals looking into this conviction.

[jmckeev]

i kinda feel a bit bad for the people who believe she's innocent. i imagine they're gonna be very angry when she's guilty for a second time :(

[historextamiya]

The guy comes across as the type of bloke who assumes you are guilty and you have to prove you are innocent. Laughing at hanging miscarriages doesn’t look good!

[JustSean]

Shame you didn't think it appropriate to mention the 7 babies that died at the same time on the same ward but when Lucy Letby was not on shift, who killed them then? Also the courts have found a lot of innocent people guilty down the years the Birmingham 6 and Guildford 4 springs to mind.

[matth]

These two are so bias. Their smug arrogance and limited objective arguments are very irritating

[notawalnut]

As hard as it is to accept, but it doesn't actually matter whether she is guiltily or not. There was simply not enough evidence to convict her.

[TheWalrusWasDanny]

Just because there are grieving parents that want to grieve...it doesn't make the evidence against LL as solid. This person who is being interviewed is spinning against the case for innocence...Who knows why? Is he mates with the prosecution team? Or mates with the CPS? Trying to slant Public opinion against a retrial using this "Tax payers pocket" palaver...he begins by dismissing her new barrister as some kind of Kook...dismissing the appeal as trite (1000 cases a year)....we then get the jury's decision argument...er...Juries are not always right!! I would trust this guy as far as I could throw him.

[nickdandel]

Stupid lawyer saying stupid things to protect his friends and the CPS

[KingBee]

These two don't know much about this case. There are many factual inaccuracies in this clip. Very poor.

[Pmrace]

if this guy is defending you in the next few months sack him now or look forward to spending the next decade in prison

[karenwall]

What a farce of 2 supposed 'news' professionals. They haven't got a clue.

[ianmerrill]

quite bizarre and incoherent analysis. the notes, for example, are utterly meaningless and contradictory, and this guy is saying 'what else do you need?'. amateur !

[DepakoteMeister]

It doesn't matter how often juries get it wrong at all, the fact that it is proven they do is enough. Now, look at all the incorrectly presented evidence in this case.

[craigshackleton]

They fail to mention that no medical expert would risk their career for a defence case focused on babies. As for the arguement of listening to the doctors at the countess. One of those guys loves the media limelight just a little bit too much. Maybe if he had been at the hospital a little bit more instead of swanning off to do tv work for this morning and others, the hospital might have done better.

[neilsmith]

My god. What a disgrace of an interview .GB News should be ashamed .I can't say any more as it has all been said by many more expert than me as well as thousands of concerned intelligent knowledgeable members of the public.One thing I will say is that I dont believe that Mark McDonald will be receiving any public funds for his representation. He has been defending other cases for years without funding because the CCRC have not been doing their job properly.I believe he is a genuinely good man and can recognise a dodgy case when he sees it. He knew before the end of the original trial that there were similarities with other miscarriages of justice . These two seem determined to hide and deny the evidence which has now come to light. Shameful.

[JMB]

Now, there is reciprocal confirmation bias playing out. It was like an echo chamber of a conversation. This is not out the bounds of possibility she may be innocent, and I'd suggest you remove both your clear bias.

[stuartlee]

Remember colin stagg wrongly convited of murder, barry george, the birmingham four, the guildford six, and sally clark whos case mirrors the case of lucy letby in some respects

[pharynsorour]

Regardless of the amount of time and money spent, the flaws in the case have to be addressed. She deserves a new trial

[andyMSH]

if the letter had been considered as a confession then by law it automatically would warrant that lucy be assessed by a psychiatrist otherwise it would be considered an unsafe confession...this case is nearly identical in many aspects to Asta Juskauskiene (mother of three children) who was also found guilty and is currently serving 24 years in prison despite being was not even at the murder which is not contested by the police. Prosecution used a lot of fantasy and the defence rolled over as evidence was created against her during trial....it’s disgusting actually and a full investigation needs to happen around unsafe trials in the UK as they move away from evidenced based convictions to fantasy. It is not at all funny and one day they will have to answer for their actions. A university has worked on her case for four years now and has not found one piece of evidence which connects her to the murder yet the prosecution the CPS and police all managed to convict her with no evidence...all unsafe circumstantial evidence.