The expert witness whose evidence helped to convict Lucy Letby is at the centre of an extraordinary row after claiming that the nurse’s supporters were motivated by a sexual attraction to ‘pretty young blonde females’.
The bizarre outburst by Dr Dewi Evans, 75, the prosecution’s chief expert witness, comes amid mounting doubts about the reliability of the evidence used to convict Letby of killing seven babies and attempting to murder seven more at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
The retired paediatrician launched his tirade earlier this month against a statistical expert who had quizzed him over apparent anomalies in his testimony.
Dr Evans responded to the expert, who has critiqued the case against Letby on the triedbystats.com website, by claiming that his interest in the case was sexual. He said: ‘You seem very intense, and it’s not unusual for men to have the hots for pretty young blonde females. A nursing uniform is a turn-on for some by all accounts.
‘I would suggest you need to get out more, find yourself an available pretty young blonde female, with/without nursing credentials. But one who doesn’t go to work intent on murdering her patients.’
Since Letby lost her appeal last year a mass of evidence undermining the prosecution’s case has been gathered by her new legal team, raising questions about the claim she was on duty for every suspicious incident – and over Dr Evans’ testimony.
The Criminal Cases Review Commission, which deals with potential miscarriages of justice, is studying the new material, which includes evidence that Dr Evans changed his mind over the mechanism of death for three of the children, Babies C, I and P.
Last night, the expert – who has asked to remain anonymous because of the nature of his professional work – told The Mail on Sunday: ‘When I first heard about Letby’s conviction, I had assumed she was guilty. I don’t believe that any more. This has nothing to do with her appearance but everything to do with the trial transcripts I’ve since read.
The expert witness whose evidence helped to convict Lucy Letby (pictured) is at the centre of an extraordinary row after claiming that the nurse’s supporters were motivated by a sexual attraction to ‘pretty young blonde females’
The bizarre outburst (pictured) by Dr Dewi Evans, 75, the prosecution’s chief expert witness, comes amid mounting doubts about the reliability of the evidence used to convict Letby
The retired paediatrician (pictured) launched his tirade earlier this month against a statistical expert who had quizzed him over apparent anomalies in his testimony
‘Dr Evans’ evidence, in particular, is astounding. In several alleged incidents, it turned out Letby wasn’t even on shift. On the stand, Evans spontaneously changed his medical opinion, abandoning five years of pretrial reports and producing new theories conveniently aligning with times he now knew Letby had been present.
‘Since the trial, an overwhelming number of highly qualified medical experts have described Dr Evans’ evidence as absurd theories. But the most absurd of all is the idea that any questioning of the verdict is motivated by Letby being a blonde nurse.’
Letby’s lawyer, Mark McDonald, said: ‘I am increasingly concerned by the erratic behaviour of Dr Evans. His credibility and lack of independence was raised by the defence at the trial and in the Court of Appeal.’ And Tory MP David Davis said: ‘This extraordinary outburst does nothing but undermine Mr Evans’ credibility, and thereby his authority as an ‘expert’ in this case.
‘When people lash out in this offensive way, it implies that they do not have enough confidence in their argument to rely on the facts. That is unsurprising as every revelation in this case has served to undermine virtually every aspect of the prosecution case, including Mr Evans’ testimony.’
Dr Evans provided the bedrock of evidence used to convict Letby.
Her conviction leant heavily on the statistical likelihood of her being on duty at the time of 25 deaths and collapses at the Countess of Chester Hospital.
In the absence of any forensic evidence or plausible motive, that statistical correlation became the key plank of the case against her. However, it has since emerged that Dr Evans originally looked at 28 cases of suspicious incidents – and Letby was absent for ten of them. The jury were not told about other deaths and collapses during the same period. Furthermore, door-swipe evidence in one case was wrong, showing Letby was on the ward when she wasn’t.
The Royal Statistical Society has criticised the way the figures were used by the prosecution.
Dr Evans provided the bedrock of evidence used to convict Letby (pictured, during her arrest at home in Chester on July 3, 2018)
Her conviction leant heavily on the statistical likelihood of her being on duty at the time of 25 deaths and collapses at the Countess of Chester Hospital (pictured, file photo)
In the absence of any forensic evidence or plausible motive, that statistical correlation became the key plank of the case against her. Pictured: Court artist sketch of Letby giving evidence in the dock at Manchester Crown Court in August 2023
Doubts have also been raised about tests which purported to show Letby used insulin poisoning and the injection air into veins, to murder already sickly babies.
It has also emerged that a statement given to police which disputed Dr Evans’ evidence was not disclosed to her defence team.
Dr Astha Soni, a paediatrician at the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital, disputed his claim that the poor health of one baby there, Baby Y, was linked to insulin poisoning by Letby.
Dr Soni’s statement – which was never passed to Letby’s defence by the Crown Prosecution Service – said Baby Y’s high insulin levels were due to a genetic condition, contradicting Dr Evans’ belief that Baby Y had been given ‘insulin from an external source’.
An international panel of medical experts convened by neonatologist Professor Shoo Lee concluded that Letby had not murdered or attempted to murder any babies.
Earlier this year, barrister Adam Kin told The Mail on Sunday: ‘This is a rare instance of a case that needs to be considered by the Court of Appeal for a second time.
‘The ever-growing doubt about the Crown’s star expert’s reliability alone warrants that course. We’re almost certainly looking at an unsafe conviction.’
Lord Sumption, a former Supreme Court judge, has said he believes Letby is ‘probably innocent’.
Dr Evans, who stands by his evidence, did not respond to a request for comment.
Expert who was damned by Appeal Court judge
One of the reasons for the unease about Dewi Evans’ evidence in the Lucy Letby case is that he actively lobbied to play a role in the investigation, rather than being sought out for his expertise.
After being told about a spate of premature baby deaths at the Chester hospital, Dr Evans wrote to a contact at the National Crime Agency to argue that it was ‘my kind of case’.
That is debatable: over the course of 30 years he had given expert evidence in criminal and civil cases on clinical negligence and child safeguarding – but had never specialised exclusively as a neonatologist. He admitted to this newspaper that he had not been responsible for the care of a premature baby since 2007.
What is not in doubt is that his involvement helped to boost the coffers of his business, Dewi Evans Paediatric Consulting, which he set up after retiring from clinical work. He spent seven lucrative years working for Cheshire Police reviewing the clinical notes of all 30 babies who died or suffered unexplained collapses on the unit where Letby worked, before being appointed by the Crown Prosecution Service.
Asked on a podcast with celebrity psychiatrist Dr Raj Persaud why he took on medical witness work he replied: ‘To keep my son in cars and my daughter in horses.’
One of the reasons for the unease about Dewi Evans’ evidence in the Lucy Letby case is that he actively lobbied to play a role in the investigation, rather than being sought out for his expertise. Pictured: Dr Evans arriving at Manchester Crown Court to give evidence at the Lucy Letby trial in October 2022
His evidence in the Letby case has come under sustained attack by a battery of medical, forensic, psychological and statistical experts, while doubts about his competence and integrity have been raised at the highest levels of the legal system. During Letby’s trial, the judge was warned by Appeal Court judge Lord Justice Jackson that in a previous case, Dr Evans had decided on the outcome he wanted before ‘working out an explanation’ to achieve it.
Speaking of a ‘partisan’ report Dr Evans compiled, he added: ‘He either knows what his professional colleagues have concluded and disregards it, or he has not taken steps to inform himself of their views.
‘Either approach amounts to a breach of proper professional conduct. No attempt has been made to engage with the full range of medical information or the powerful contradictory indicators.’
Dr Evans has said he stood by his report in this case, explaining: ‘I have prepared dozens of reports for the Family Court.
‘I’m in huge demand for opinions because of my track record as a witness. This is a one-off for me.’
