July 2026: Government declines to widen the Thirlwall terms of reference (16 July) · new 100-page insulin report to the CCRC challenging the trial evidence (9 July) · Thirlwall report still expected no earlier than September · inquests relisted to 2027 · Shoo Lee Panel: no medical evidence of deliberate harm.
Legal explainer
Under section 13 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, the CCRC can refer a conviction back to the Court of Appeal only if it considers there is a real possibility that the Court of Appeal would not uphold the conviction. The threshold is lower than 'more likely than not' and higher than 'fanciful'. The CCRC refers approximately 3% of applications it receives.
The Letby case is now in the CCRC's hands. The application (received 3 February 2025; publicly announced 4 February) plus the nine subsequent entries on the CCRC's published chronology, the last filing recorded on 11 December 2025, are evaluated against this test.
The Crown's position is that the convictions were properly returned by two juries and upheld on direct appeal in 2024. The CCRC is not asked whether the Crown was right, but whether the Court of Appeal might now think the convictions unsafe.
The application filed on Letby's behalf argues the post-conviction expert material — the Shoo Lee Panel report, the Joint Insulin Report on Babies F and L, and the further reports on the Commission's published chronology — meets the section 13 threshold.
The Commission publishes no timetable for a live review and has not indicated when it will decide. The threshold itself is deliberately imprecise: lower than 'more likely than not', higher than 'fanciful', and applied case by case.
Under section 13 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995 the CCRC may refer a conviction to the Court of Appeal only if it considers there is a real possibility the Court would not uphold it. The bar sits below 'more likely than not' and above 'fanciful'.
It refers roughly 3% of the applications it receives.
No. A referral sends the case to the Court of Appeal to be re-examined. It is not a finding about guilt, and neither is a refusal to refer.
Received on 3 February 2025 and publicly announced the following day, with nine further entries on the Commission's published chronology, the last filing recorded on 11 December 2025. The Commission published that chronology on 21 January 2026 as an unprecedented transparency step.
There is no published date. The Commission does not publish timetables for live reviews, and complex medical-evidence cases run well beyond its median.
Found an error or missing source? Send a correction with the page URL and supporting source.