Letby v Rex (Rev3) [2024] EWCA Crim 748 (02 July 2024)

Letby v Rex (Rev3) [2024] EWCA Crim 748 (02 July 2024)

None of the grounds advanced by the applicant were arguable. The trial judge's rulings on the admissibility of expert evidence, the rejection of the submission of no case to answer, and the jury directions were correct. The investigation of the alleged jury irregularity was adequate. The criteria for admitting fresh...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 748
Parties
Applicant: Lucy Letby; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused.
Legal Topics
Murder, Attempted Murder, Expert Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Jury Directions, Fresh Evidence, Unsafe Conviction
Criminal Law Murder Attempted Murder Expert Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Jury Directions Fresh Evidence Unsafe Conviction

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lucy Letby

Applicant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting and failing to exclude the evidence of Dr Dewi Evans as an expert witness
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in rejecting the submission of no case to answer at the close of the prosecution case
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury regarding the need to be sure of the precise harmful act on each count

Ratio Decidendi

None of the grounds advanced by the applicant were arguable. The trial judge's rulings on the admissibility of expert evidence, the rejection of the submission of no case to answer, and the jury directions were correct. The investigation of the alleged jury irregularity was adequate. The criteria for admitting fresh evidence were not met. The convictions are safe.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused.

Orders

  • All applications, including the application for leave to adduce fresh evidence, are refused.