Why could Ben Myers find no expert witnesses to defend the insulin poisoning theory, whereas Mark McDonald has found plenty? Letby’s fate was effectively sealed at the pre-trial expert meeting, when experts on both sides agreed exogenous insulin had been given to two babies, alongside a theory as to how Letby might have secretly spiked nutrition bags. The jury never heard expert explanations of the unreliability of the tests, particularly in neonates, and the far more plausible causes for the prolonged hypoglycaemia in these two particular neonates. The judge knew about the expert agreement on exogenous insulin before the trial started, the jury found unanimous guilt on the insulin cases and were then directed by the judge to use this finding of guilt in making judgements on other cases. Even if the CCRC concludes there is reasonable doubt in the insulin cases, having been given very detailed experts reports that the jury never saw, Letby may not get an appeal because these experts could have given their evidence at the original trial. Which comes back to my first question. Why couldn’t Myers find experts prepared to challenge the insulin poisonings when McDonald can? My full report on the pre-trial joint expert meeting is below. Other reports at private-eye.co.uk/special-re…

In today’s @PrivateEyeNews I reveal how Countess of Chester Consultants framed the arguments against Letby to “pique the interest” of the police, & what they disagreed about. It reveals the danger of allowing doctors to investigate collapses and deaths which may implicate them.