I was part of the committee that reviewed the case of Lucy Litteni. I think the trial was mainly defective Nina Modi

IIn August 2023, a newborn nurse, Lucy Litty, was convicted of killing seven children at Chester Hospital, and attempted to kill seven others. Last week, at a press conference in London, a review results of cases were launched by an international committee consisting of 14 experienced doctors, which I am one, of which. We identified issues at the level of individuals and teams, and regular issues within NHS, but our conclusions were that there was no evidence of misunderstanding, and there were very reasonable causes of death or deterioration in each of the cases that were not identified or managed optimal. We have provided examples of these possible causes of death or deterioration, and we will provide complete details related to all cases to the legal team Lucy Letby.

The effects of these opposition conclusions completely left the nation with a deep sense of uncomfortable. My fear arose for the first time when I was contacted during the trial by many journalists who asked my opinion about the alleged causes of death. I was then invited by Dr. Show Lee to join the international painting, and on official instructions that received full details of all cases. The story that arose from reading medical records and witnesses of witnesses was quietly, and is completely different from that introduction in court. The miscarriages of justice are the issue of a record; Think of Sally Clark, Andrew Malcinanson, Hilzburo, and falsely convicted coach. Could letby be another addition to a painful roll call, and if so, how can this happen? Certainly, there appears to be a series of errors, each of which follows from before.

The newborn Count of Chester was a 2 -level service, in other words, not employees or equipped to deal with children most seriously ill. Acceptance instructions are usually based on the possibility of a child’s need for intensive care, and thus premature degree or a complex condition. Since the need for intensive care is precisely unpredictable, the judgment is often required when planning the place of birth.

However, since some cases of high risk pregnancy, it is legitimate to ask about the cause of the birth of these children in Chester when the best practices are transferred to a center of 3 level before birth. Have discussions between the generation and newborn teams were held on the delivery plan, and were the parents participating in the decisions? Regardless of the answer, what happened is that consultants and other newborn employees have had to provide care for newborn complex cases outside their experience. Their contemporary notes in the child’s condition records reveal errors in recognizing and managing problems. However, credit for this, Chester Badrology was the first to draw attention to the deaths that could not be explained.

In the positions of unexpected or unaccounted medical events, the standard procedure is to conduct a detailed review of the case that includes all specialized specializations concerned (obstetricians, pediatricians, nurses, radiologists, clinical chemists, surgeons, pathologists, etc.), in addition To independent doctors with the required experience. This was one of the recommendations of the investigation of the Chester service for the birth conducted by the Royal College of Children and the Health of the Children in 2016. I was head of the Royal College at that time, but I was not aware of this recommendation or any of the results, since the reviews were confidential and not known to anyone Outside the investigation teams and the customer. Many reviews seem to take place, but the depth and breadth of experience and experience of the people concerned is unclear. If there were sufficiently detailed reviews with appropriate experienced doctors and other experts at first, and I think it is likely that the conclusions that are consistent with those in the Independent International Committee have been accessed.

Instead, given that local doctors of local Paediatrics were unable to determine the causes of deaths and deterioration, they started, In their words“Thinking about what an unimaginable” was referred, and the issue was referred, after a great delay, to the police. In the collection of their case, the police relied mainly on the opinions of Dr. Dewey Evans, a long -graduated pediatrician with experience in newborns that were written to the National Crime Agency to provide his services.

In the view of our painting, extracted selective conclusions that were not consistent with the full range of evidence. (Since the press conference, Evans said he was not selective and that he had identified “many problems” in childcare.) Other experts have been directed to “review the peers” in his views. Not all of them were asked to go Through cases in detail. It takes a specialized knowledge of judging the experience or experience of medical practitioners, and there is no necessity in the police or legal teams. If they take advice or have guidelines available to them on how to assess the suitability of the “expert”, they could have requested alternative opinions that could reach different conclusions.

The defense team has invited any expert witnesses to consider evidence, and although the judge had advised him by the Letby lawyer The main witness of the prosecution was unreliable, yet it was his opinion that formed the basis for his summary. The jury was told that the children were often in good health and that deaths and deterioration were unexpected. This is not the case. Children were either well in public, or at a high risk of developing complications. Moreover, the importance of decisive information from medical records and examinations after death has not been recognized. Therefore, the jury reached their ruling on the basis of information that was incomplete and misleading. This cannot be any basis for a fair trial.

This tragic situation calls for national thinking on multiple charges. How can NHS be restored to its previous location of superiority between global health systems? What is the best institution or institution for advice on the efficiency of medical experts, and will it rise to this responsibility? The Court of Law is not a place to determine the complex cases of medical causation, and victims or accused are not presented well through a hostile process.

So, how is the multidisciplinary experience to provide advice on such matters directly to the court, not on behalf of the prosecution or defense? The parents of children have passed nearly a decade of uncertainty, distress and sadness. The same is the case with Lucy Litty’s parents. Their daughter, a young woman, was imprisoned, destroyed her life, and is now at risk of infection. Where is the responsibility for the duty of care due to them? We each of us wants and we have to be able to trust our legal operations, and therefore you should face the possibility of horrific abortion of fairness and treatment quickly. Another mistake will not make the right.

• Nina Modi, a professor of newborns at the London Empire

• Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you want to provide a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered to be published in our messages section, please click here.