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)
October 2022·Benjamin Myers KC (defence); R v Letby

Defence opening statement — R v Letby (2022)

The defence opening statement at the original trial, delivered by Mr Benjamin Myers KC. Frames the defence position at the outset of proceedings: Ms Letby was doing her job on a unit under strain, medical evidence of deliberate harm is absent, the statistical case is circular, and the Post-it notes are self-blame under stress rather than a confession.

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 lucyletbyinnocence.com. See our corrections policy.

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

Original source: lucyletbyinnocence.com

Context

The defence opening at the original trial was delivered by Mr Benjamin Myers KC in late October 2022 after the prosecution opening. It set out the defence framework the jury was asked to hold in mind throughout the following eight months of evidence.

Key themes of the opening

  • Ms Letby denied every allegation. She maintained her innocence throughout her arrest, her interviews, the charges, and would do so in evidence.
  • The unit was under strain. Understaffing, plumbing and pharmacy incidents, and a pattern of late transfers of extremely preterm babies were part of the clinical context that explained the cluster of deterioration.
  • The medical evidence is not what it appears. Skin signs, X-ray findings, and resuscitation marks are non-specific; the prosecution’s expert was applying criteria that did not fit.
  • The shift chart is circular. Events were selected for the chart in part because Ms Letby was present. That is not evidence of her guilt; it is a feature of the methodology.
  • The notes are self-blame. They were written by a young nurse who had been told, repeatedly, that she was the suspect in every unexplained death on her unit.

What to read alongside this

the defence closing speech (how the same themes were summed up after eight months of evidence), Ms Letby’s own testimony, the evidence page on unit conditions.