Lucy Letby: Who to Believe review - Baffling probe of convicted neonatal nurse's case
Lucy Letby
was convicted in 2023 of the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of six more at a hospital in Cheshire, the consensus was that a monster had been put behind bars – that the world was a safer place. But what if Letby (35) was the victim of a miscarriage of justice – or, worse yet, an institutional stitch-up?
The possibility that Letby might be innocent after all is explored in Panorama: Lucy Letby – Who To Believe (
BBC
One, Monday, 8pm) – albeit to wildly inconclusive effect.
The BBC isn't the first to raise questions about the conviction. Panorama airs just a week after Lucy Letby: Beyond Reasonable Doubt, likewise unpacked the case for and against her conviction on ITV – and a year after the New Yorker asserted that, 'in the rush to judgement, serious questions about the evidence were ignored'.
The death of children is quite obviously an emotive issue, and it can be hard to come to a case such as this in a neutral state of mind. But even viewers who do their best to be impartial will have found the BBC's take on Letby's trial overwhelming and befuddling, with reams of evidence presented and then either debunked or supported by the prosecution or defence. By the end, I find myself knowing a lot more about the charges against her, while being many times more confused as to Letby's guilt or innocence.
READ MORE
A cast of dozens is assembled by Panorama reporters Judith Moritz and Jonathan Coffey, who have made two previous documentaries and written a book about Letby. In Letby's corner is her barrister, Mark McDonald, who is working pro bono to have her conviction overturned and who points to the findings of an international panel of medics (assembled by him) who say Letby has nothing to answer for.
But other experts remain convinced about her guilt, including prosecution expert Dewi Evans, a retired consultant paediatrician. Then there are the parents of the babies, who say that giving a platform to critics of the conviction has caused them fresh trauma.
The case is ever twisting and turning and, without medical knowledge, it's hard to know who to believe. That said, a report from another hospital where Letby worked that reveals babies' breathing tubes were removed at a far higher rate when she was on duty feels damming. But when her lawyer, McDonald, demands to see the evidence in black and white, your doubts spiral again.
Lucy Letby: Who to Believe is important journalism – but it is also overwhelming, and some viewers may feel that too much is squeezed into the modest 60-minute run-time. By the end, the two sides are farther apart than ever, and Moritz and Coffey seem baffled – and they've literally written a book about Letby.
Shortly before the end credits, McDonald stands outside the women's prison where she is serving multiple life sentences and predicts she will eventually be freed. Evans, meanwhile, has no doubts whatsoever about where she belongs. 'Good god no,' he says. 'She's as guilty as they can be.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
10 hours ago
- Irish Times
Former Premier League referee David Coote given eight-week ban over Jürgen Klopp comments
Former Premier League referee David Coote has been given an eight-week suspension and told to attend an education programme over abusive words he used about ex- Liverpool head coach Jürgen Klopp . Coote was charged by the English Football Association in June after the comments about Klopp came to light in a video circulated on social media last November. The FA said he had subsequently admitted the charge. Coote's misconduct was defined as an aggravated breach under the FA's rules because there was a reference to Klopp's nationality. Coote was sacked by Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) last December, a month after the video filmed in July 2020 came to light. READ MORE PGMOL said in confirming Coote's dismissal last December that his position had become 'untenable'. In it, Coote is heard saying it had been 's**t' to be fourth official at a Liverpool match in the summer of 2020, describing Klopp as a 'German c**t'. He also said Klopp was 'f*****g arrogant'. When the FA charged him over the Klopp comments in June, the governing body said Coote would face no further action in regard to separate allegations of gambling misconduct, which he had strenuously denied. The FA said those allegations had been fully investigated. Coote was banned by European football's governing body Uefa in February until June 30th, 2026 after a different video emerged of him snorting a white powder through a bank note while in Germany for last summer's Euros. In January, Coote came out as gay in an interview with the Sun and said that a lifelong struggle to hide his sexuality had contributed to the rant about Klopp, and to his drug use. 'My sexuality isn't the only reason that led me to be in that position. But I'm not telling an authentic story if I don't say that I'm gay and that I've had real struggles with hiding that,' he said. 'I hid my emotions as a young ref and I hid my sexuality as well – a good quality as a referee but a terrible quality as a human being. And that's led me to a whole course of behaviours.' Coote's formal response to the FA charge was detailed in the regulatory commission's written reasons which were published alongside the confirmation of the sanctions imposed. He accepted his words about Klopp were 'crass, inappropriate and unworthy of the role that he held within the game' and asked the commission to accept that his decision not to attend the hearing was not made out of avoidance, but due to his mental state. Coote said the words did not respect his true view of Klopp, for whom he had always had a deep professional respect. The panel wrote: 'DC [Coote] stated that he felt an immense sense of shame. He had lost a career that formed the very core of his identity. He had lost all his income and the media attention had deepened his sense of humiliation and despair. 'He was trying to piece his life back together, from a place of near total collapse.'
Irish Times
13 hours ago
- Irish Times
Lucy Letby: Who to Believe review - Baffling probe of convicted neonatal nurse's case
When former neonatal nurse Lucy Letby was convicted in 2023 of the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of six more at a hospital in Cheshire, the consensus was that a monster had been put behind bars – that the world was a safer place. But what if Letby (35) was the victim of a miscarriage of justice – or, worse yet, an institutional stitch-up? The possibility that Letby might be innocent after all is explored in Panorama: Lucy Letby – Who To Believe ( BBC One, Monday, 8pm) – albeit to wildly inconclusive effect. The BBC isn't the first to raise questions about the conviction. Panorama airs just a week after Lucy Letby: Beyond Reasonable Doubt, likewise unpacked the case for and against her conviction on ITV – and a year after the New Yorker asserted that, 'in the rush to judgement, serious questions about the evidence were ignored'. The death of children is quite obviously an emotive issue, and it can be hard to come to a case such as this in a neutral state of mind. But even viewers who do their best to be impartial will have found the BBC's take on Letby's trial overwhelming and befuddling, with reams of evidence presented and then either debunked or supported by the prosecution or defence. By the end, I find myself knowing a lot more about the charges against her, while being many times more confused as to Letby's guilt or innocence. READ MORE A cast of dozens is assembled by Panorama reporters Judith Moritz and Jonathan Coffey, who have made two previous documentaries and written a book about Letby. In Letby's corner is her barrister, Mark McDonald, who is working pro bono to have her conviction overturned and who points to the findings of an international panel of medics (assembled by him) who say Letby has nothing to answer for. But other experts remain convinced about her guilt, including prosecution expert Dewi Evans, a retired consultant paediatrician. Then there are the parents of the babies, who say that giving a platform to critics of the conviction has caused them fresh trauma. The case is ever twisting and turning and, without medical knowledge, it's hard to know who to believe. That said, a report from another hospital where Letby worked that reveals babies' breathing tubes were removed at a far higher rate when she was on duty feels damming. But when her lawyer, McDonald, demands to see the evidence in black and white, your doubts spiral again. Lucy Letby: Who to Believe is important journalism – but it is also overwhelming, and some viewers may feel that too much is squeezed into the modest 60-minute run-time. By the end, the two sides are farther apart than ever, and Moritz and Coffey seem baffled – and they've literally written a book about Letby. Shortly before the end credits, McDonald stands outside the women's prison where she is serving multiple life sentences and predicts she will eventually be freed. Evans, meanwhile, has no doubts whatsoever about where she belongs. 'Good god no,' he says. 'She's as guilty as they can be.'
Irish Daily Mirror
17 hours ago
- Irish Daily Mirror
Horror as father shoots himself in head live on TV as children watch
A mum from Arizona in the US and her children were compelled to watch in horror as her partner and their dad took his own life live on television. JoDon Romero, 33, had been engaged in a lengthy police pursuit back in September, 2013, which was being broadcast as it happened live on Fox News. As coppers surrounded Romero he made the tragic choice to end his own life. Angela Rodriguez, the mother of JoDon Romero's youngsters, was viewing at home with their children, aged nine, 13 and 15. After seeing the distressing footage she launched a lawsuit claiming the children endured severe emotional and psychological trauma from witnessing the horrific death. The mother of three alleged infliction of emotional distress, according to the BBC, reports the Express. Fox News was covering the pursuit with a live helicopter feed and transmitted the shooting. After a commercial break the news presenter apologised saying: "We really messed up, and we're all very sorry." Fox News has apologised for the broadcast, putting it down to 'human error' (Image: Fox News) Later, a Fox News executive also apologised and attributed the broadcast to "severe human error" after showing the slightly delayed live suicide. The broadcaster has apologised for the "severe human error" that resulted in the death's transmission. On September 28, 2013, Romero shot himself in the head at the conclusion of an hour-long police pursuit after nicking a car at gunpoint, as a news helicopter hovered overhead. Police officials said he had an extensive criminal record and was sought for parole breaches. Rodriquez has filed a lawsuit against Fox News Channel and its parent company, News Corp, alleging that on the day in question, Romero's children heard whispers at school about a suicide broadcast live on television. They returned home and sought out the footage on YouTube, only to discover it was their father they were watching. Rodriguez claims her children "have been, and continue to be, severely traumatised" by the footage, exhibiting symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, including flashbacks and sleep disturbances. Phoenix police reported that the man who seemingly shot himself on live TV was being pursued by officers following a carjacking of a 2008 Dodge Caliber. Officers stated the man commandeered the car at gunpoint in west Phoenix around 11:00am local time and was trailed through city streets and a state highway. The man fired shots at officers and a police helicopter at one stage during the chase, but no other injuries were reported, according to Police spokesperson Sergeant Tommy Thompson. He confirmed the man died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound after abandoning the car on a dirt road. American Fox News stated: "We took every precaution to avoid any such live incident by putting the helicopter pictures on a five-second delay. "Unfortunately, this mistake was the result of a severe human error and we apologise for what viewers ultimately saw on the screen." The Samaritans are available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. If you require an immediate response, it's advisable to ring them directly. You can get in touch by dialling 116 123, sending an email to jo@ uk or visiting their website at
