Lucy Letby's new expert supporters claim no babies were deliberately harmed. Who should we believe?

Lucy Letby's new expert supporters claim no babies were deliberately harmed. Who should we believe?

Barrister Mark McDonald claims he has the backing of a panel of world class experts who say there is no evidence any babies were deliberately harmed. Who should we believe?

Truth Analysis

Factual Accuracy
3/5
Bias Level
3/5

Analysis Summary:

The article's primary claim, that some experts question Lucy Letby's guilt and believe no deliberate harm occurred, is supported by multiple sources. However, the article presents this viewpoint without fully acknowledging the overwhelming evidence that led to Letby's conviction, indicating a moderate bias. The article title itself frames the situation in a way that could be perceived as creating doubt where little exists.

Detailed Analysis:

  • Claim: Barrister Mark McDonald claims he has the backing of a panel of world class experts who say there is no evidence any babies were deliberately harmed.
  • Verification Source #1: Confirms the claim that experts say there is no evidence any babies were deliberately harmed.
  • Verification Source #2: Confirms the claim that experts say there is no evidence any babies were deliberately harmed.
  • Verification Source #3: Supports the claim that some experts question the evidence, with one expert quoted as saying, 'I can see no proof of guilt'.
  • Verification Source #4: Confirms the claim that experts say there is no evidence any babies were deliberately harmed.
  • Verification Source #5: Supports the claim that some experts believe Letby's conviction was unsafe and that the deaths were caused by a series of failures, not deliberate harm.
  • Assessment: Supported. Multiple sources confirm that some experts question the evidence and believe no deliberate harm occurred.

Supporting Evidence/Contradictions:

  • Source 3: 'I wasn't there, so I can't say Letby was innocent, but I can see no proof of guilt'.
  • Source 5: Experts believe Letby's conviction was unsafe - but that there was no murder or deliberate harm. Instead they said the deaths had been caused by a series of failures.