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
Editorial summary (not a verbatim transcript)
·Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Court of Appeal — refusal of leave to appeal (24 May 2024)

The Court of Appeal's refusal of leave to appeal the 2023 convictions. Critically, this judgment pre-dates the February 2025 Shoo Lee Panel report and the vast majority of the independent expert reports now filed with the CCRC. The judgment addresses the specific grounds then advanced by Ms Letby's legal team; it cannot be read as a ruling on the post-February-2025 evidence that the CCRC is now examining.

Last updated

Editorial summary — not a verbatim transcript.

This page is a summary written for this site. It is not a mirror of the primary document, and nothing on it should be quoted as the words of any person. An earlier version of this page carried quotations that could not be verified against the primary record; those have been removed. For the underlying record, consult the primary source at judiciary.uk. See our corrections policy.

Status: Editorial summary written for this site — not a mirrored document

Publisher: judiciary.ukThis links the publisher’s site, not the document itself — we have not yet established a direct link to it.

Context

The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) refused Lucy Letby’s application for leave to appeal against conviction on 24 May 2024. The judgment addresses the specific grounds then advanced by Ms Letby’s legal team, which were principally that the statistical presentation of the shift-rota chart was unduly prejudicial and that certain expert evidence ought not to have been admitted in the form in which it was.

The application was heard before the International Expert Panel convened by Dr Shoo Lee reported in February 2025, and before the majority of the independent expert reports subsequently filed with the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The Court of Appeal did not have, and could not have had, sight of the post-February-2025 material. That is why the CCRC is now the relevant body.

Key passages

What to read alongside this

The judgment pre-dates the February 2025 Panel report. See our pages on the air-embolism evidence, the insulin assay, the shift chart, and the Dr Evans methodology. A CCRC application was filed in October 2025; the Commission’s review is ongoing.