Skip to content

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.

Lucy Letby Facts

Legal explainer

What 'unsafe conviction' means

On a referral from the CCRC, the Court of Appeal asks whether the conviction is 'unsafe' — would the conviction have been returned by the jury if the new material had been available at trial? It is not the same as a finding of innocence.

Legal explanation1Court/official
Last updated

Why it matters in the Letby case

If the CCRC refers the Letby convictions, the Court of Appeal will apply the unsafe-conviction standard, not retry the case.

Prosecution position

The convictions stand and were upheld on direct appeal, so the starting point before any court is that the verdicts were safely returned.

Expert challenge / post-conviction reading

The post-conviction argument is that material now available — chiefly the expert evidence on air embolism, insulin and the statistical presentation — would have been capable of affecting the jury's conclusion had it been before them.

What remains uncertain

'Unsafe' is a judgement about the conviction, not a determination of what happened. A quashed conviction leaves the underlying question legally unresolved unless a retrial follows.

Common questions

What does 'unsafe' mean in this context?

That the Court of Appeal cannot be sure the jury would have convicted had it heard the material now available. It is a judgement about the safety of the verdict, not about innocence.

Is quashing the same as acquittal?

No. A quashed conviction may be followed by a retrial. Where no retrial follows, the person is not convicted — but the court has not found them innocent.

Does the Court of Appeal retry the case?

No. It reviews the safety of the conviction in light of the trial process and any fresh evidence. It does not re-weigh the evidence as a jury would.

How does this differ from the CCRC's test?

The CCRC asks whether there is a real possibility the Court would not uphold the conviction. The Court then asks directly whether the conviction is unsafe.

Found an error or missing source? Send a correction with the page URL and supporting source.