Internet Sleuths Working to Prove Lucy Letby’s Innocence Insist Evidence Against Baby-Killing Nurse Doesn’t Add Up

A 10-month investigation led to the lifelong incarceration of a British nurse who murdered 7 babies in her care, but it's not enough to convince a group of internet sleuths that Lucy Letby is actually guilty.

Despite extensive cross-examinations and evidence presented at trial against Letby, 33 — who was handed multiple life sentences for her crimes — several court watchers are instead persuaded by a number of conspiracy theories, the Telegraph reports.

One American woman has even reportedly set up a campaign to fundraise for Letby’s appeal.

She claims the killer nurse’s conviction “may represent the greatest miscarriage of justice the UK has ever witnessed.” The woman apparently has no connection to Letby or the hospital Letby worked at, but still fervently fights for her freedom.

Some supporters of Letby don’t even necessarily argue that she is innocent — but rather that the evidence presented in the case against her was flawed in some ways, The Telegraph says.

Richard Gill, a 72-year-old statistician, believes that Letby’s case should be retried. He successfully helped campaigned for a retrial for a Dutch nurse who was convicted of 4 murders in 2003 and was later exonerated in 2010. 

Letby’s case was apparently all too familiar for Gill, who told the Telegraph that once he heard about the prosecution of Letby he thought: “Oh no, it’s all going to happen again.” 

Gill says Letby’s case was “a trial which would never have taken place if anybody had talked to a statistician.”

He emphasized that twisted data was presented by the prosecution to show Letby was the only nurse on shift when the babies died.

“The data is very selective,” Gill told the Telegraph. “[It] only looked at events that happened when Lucy Letby was on duty.”

“How can you find out if the deaths that happened when Lucy was there are different from the deaths that happened when she wasn’t there?” Gill asked, suggesting that it’s mathematically impossible to draw a conclusion from the provided data.

A lawyer from Edinburgh, Neil Mackenzie KC, believes the “zealous” prosecutor in Letby’s case basically insisted that there was a “guiding author” behind the children’s deaths instead of it possibly being simply chance, the Telegram reports.

Both Mackenzie and Gill co-authored a report, along with others, that outlines how judges and lawyers should ethically and effectively approach data in court cases.

“Seemingly improbable clusters of events can arise by chance without criminal behavior,” wrote the the authors of the Royal Statistical Society report. “Consequently, evidence involving event clusters may be less probative than people assume for distinguishing criminality from coincidence.”

Letby, who is considered the United Kingdom’s most prolific child killer in modern times, enjoyed “playing God” at the hospital where she worked, argued prosecutors in her case.

Prosecutors said that she injected babies with air, milk and insulin during her time at the hospital, and that she horrifically was “enjoying what was going on” as the infants died.

It’s unclear if Letby’s legal team is seeking to appeal her conviction at this time.