Thirlwall inquiry should have been delayed until CCRC has reported, says Lucy Letby’s lawyer

Lucy Letby’s lawyer, Mark McDonald has said the Thirlwall inquiry should have been delayed until after the Criminal Cases Review Commission has reported back.

Speaking on GB News, he said: ”When this inquiry was first discussed at cabinet, at the time Secretary of State for Health for Stephen Barclay, and he wanted to move very quickly and set up this inquiry.

“But there were others, I understand, in cabinet that felt that things should slow down a bit. Of which one of them was the previous Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, who has publicly come out and said that he feels that this may be a miscarriage of justice.

“And I think he’s right from the point of view when he was in cabinet that this matter should not have gone to an inquiry immediately. I think it was too quick because within months of the inquiry being set up, evidence started emerging that counts its doubt upon the safety of the conviction.

“And in the last two years, I’ve gathered now nearly 30 expert reports from across the world that has looked at all the evidence that went before the jury and really questioned whether that evidence was accurate, whether the jury was misled.

“And more importantly, the international panel of 14 experts that looked at all this evidence blind came to the conclusion that no crime was committed.

“There’s a disagreement between two groups of experts. They both say, by the way, that they feel that the jury were misled and that it’s on the component of insulin, and that exogenous insulin was not given. So they’re both in agreement on that.

“But there’s a disagreement in relation to the science. So one team has has withdrawn, but in fact their research and their papers are before the CCRC [Criminal Cases Review Commission] and are being considered and are being taken seriously,

“So the withdrawal of them, albeit sad, and I wish they hadn’t have done so, and I wish they hadn’t have done so so publicly, my takeaway is: a) they still say that she, she’s, you know, she’s this is a miscarriage of justice, and b) their papers and their evidence is still before the CCRC.

“But that’s one small part of the evidence that’s before the CCRC. There’s so much more that really demolishes the prosecution cases.

“But how does that impact upon what’s happened today? The whole premise of this inquiry was on the basis of her guilt. So everything that followed from that, all the findings of fact and all the recommendations are polluted with the fact that if she is innocent, that everything that’s taken place in this inquiry could potentially be wrong.

“I ask for the inquiry to be paused. I ask for the report not to be published just yet. Just wait a few months, because I think we’re coming to the end stage of the CCRC’s examination of this evidence, and I think we’re going to hear very soon. I hope we’re going to hear.

“They don’t tell me, they don’t give me a running commentary, but I suspect we’re going to hear fairly soon whether or not this matter is going to be referred back to the Court of Appeal. So I asked for it to be paused, and that was rejected.

“And I also asked for the government not to rush into any findings in relation to this report. That was rejected as well. But let’s just break down. For example, the one recommendation, CCTV, that Lucy Letby was said to have murdered babies, but it was months, if not years, later that they started looking back on the babies and saying, “Hold on, something something may have gone wrong here.”

“Now, what are they going to do with this CCTV data? They’re going to have a camera on an incubator, and they’re going to keep the data from this film for months and months and years and years. Where are they going to keep all this data?