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)
2023–2025·Prof. Jane Hutton; University of Warwick

Prof. Jane Hutton — public commentary on the Letby shift-rota chart

A summary of Prof. Jane Hutton's public commentary on the Letby shift-rota chart. Hutton's operational analysis identifies four specific failures: the chart conflates rate and count; the denominator is wrong (all events vs selected subset); no null-hypothesis comparison; pattern-matching in retrospect against selected events cannot rule out chance or cluster-of-correlated-events. Her medical-statistics expertise brings operational precision to the statistical critique.

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 warwick.ac.uk. See our corrections policy.

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

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

Context

Prof. Jane Hutton, Professor of Medical Statistics at the University of Warwick, has made detailed public commentary on the Letby shift-rota chart across 2023–2025. Her specific area — statistical evidence in medical-legal contexts — makes her analysis operationally precise in a way general-purpose statistical commentary sometimes is not.

The four specific failures Hutton identifies

  1. Rate vs count conflation. A nurse who works more shifts will be present at more events. The chart did not adjust for attendance rate.
  2. Wrong denominator. Should be all events on the unit; was selected-as-suspicious subset. Texas-sharpshooter problem in statistical-evidence form.
  3. No null-hypothesis comparison. Statistical inference requires comparison to a null model. Chart presented pattern without baseline comparison.
  4. Pattern-matching against selected subset. Cannot rule out chance or cluster-of-correlated-events explanations.

Why medical-statistics expertise matters

Medical-legal statistical cases require more than general statistical competence. They require understanding of clinical data generation, of institutional data handling, of how hospital records are structured, and of what medical decision-making can and cannot be inferred from recorded events. Hutton’s research track record is at this specific intersection.

Read alongside

Prof. Jane Hutton — biography, The Bayesian framework, The base-rate problem, Statistics deep-dive.