UK - Nurse Lucy Letby Faces 22 Charges - 7 Murder/15 Attempted Murder of Babies #3

[Whitehall 1212]

Yes, looks that way.

When he confirmed he retired from clinical practice in 2009, I thought 'oo-er I know where this is going'

Mr Myers has done his homework. I'd expect no less.

 

[arrogantcat]

It does make me wonder why they chose Dr Evans as their expert, seeing that he hasn't had extensive recent hands-on experience on a neonatal ward.

Yes, an interesting choice.
But on paper he does appear to be a founding father of much of current neonatal care, and an experienced court witness. Perhaps there aren’t many others with the same level of experience who can hold their own in a witness box for as long as this case will require.

Attaching to this case may also pose problems for anyone in current practice.

 

[Tortoise]

It does make me wonder why they chose Dr Evans as their expert, seeing that he hasn't had extensive recent hands-on experience on a neonatal ward.

Perhaps because he had the time for it?

 

[Whitehall 1212]

4:06pm

"I have not retired, I should remind everybody," Dr Evans adds, as he reiterates his experience, adding it would be difficult for him to be present in court if he was working five days a week in a neonatal unit in Swansea.
He is able to give an "objective and clear" opinion on the evidence presented.
Mr Myers: "Being an expert witness as been your chief activity [since 2009]?"
Dr Evans: "Yes, I suppose it has."

 

[Marantz4250b]

Yes, an interesting choice.
But on paper he does appear to be a founding father of much of current neonatal care, and an experienced court witness. Perhaps there aren’t many others with the same level of experience who can hold their own in a witness box for as long as this case will require.

Attaching to this case may also pose problems for anyone in current practice.

My money is on the defence having found one! Possibly more than one.

 

[arrogantcat]

Sounds like Dr Evans is giving as good as he gets! Strong answers. I can see why they chose him.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

4:09pm

Mr Myers adds one of the training courses is in expert witnesses and 'how to avoid pitfalls'.
Dr Evans: "It's to help prepare for court."
Dr Evans is asked about being 'an expert' in being 'an expert witness'.
Dr Evans: "I think that's far too flash for me. My role is to assist the court on some extremely challenging issues.
"I call myself an independent medical witness, not an expert."

 

[merrypason]

The gist of the defence questioning seems to be that Dr Evans is out of date.

"DrE: "If you can tell me of any new approach, then do so, but babies...do not change in the approach of their conditions, and that has not changed in the past 10 years."

His experience in fairness will only be a point of contention if the defence with come up with new developments that have actually impacted these cases, he isn't aware of.

The other medical expert is a current consultant neo natologist in any case, and she's had similar conclusions so this might be irrelevant when she takes the stand.

 

[May72031]

I agree with your points and would be curious to know more. Was the note submitted as a piece of declared evidence that will be referred to and examined by the defence in the future? It seems odd it went to the press at this early stage and it would be catastrophic for the prosecution if it transpired to be inauthentic.

I don't think the defence are challenging the authenticity (as in claiming it wasn't written by LL) of the note.

They will probably try to show that the note has been misinterpreted (i.e. it is just the confused writings of a distressed and anguished woman).

The police and prosecution would have tested and scoured that note over and over. They are sure LL wrote it. The issue is what does it demonstrate.

 

[notsure]

Mr Myers's remarks seem quite scathing.

 

[JosieJo]

I agree totally...

Sounds like Dr Evans is giving as good as he gets! Strong answers. I can see why they chose him.

Totally agree ..imo based on reading updates only of course ..Mr Myers did not succeed with his aim

 

[Whitehall 1212]

4:11pm

That concludes the trial for today.
The case will resume on Monday, expected to open at the slightly later time of 11am.

Source MSM: LIVE: Lucy Letby trial, Friday, October 14

 

[cuecard]

I think if the defence are going to try and rattle Dr. Evans they will need to do a lot better than that. Unflappable.

 

[arrogantcat]

My money is on the defence having found one! Possibly more than one.

Without a doubt! Will be interesting to see who they have.

This is always my issue with any ‘expert testimony’, especially in the medical field. Lay people tend to assume medical science is made up of black and white answers, but so much of our current understanding and practice deals in shades of grey.
The same test results can get 5 different interpretations from 5 different doctors, and that’s before you add the weight of a high profile court case to the process.

It’s why we call it ‘a second opinion’ - because medicine is as much an art as a science.

So it usually comes down to ‘which expert did the jury like best’, which never feels entirely rational and objective to me.

 

[1345]

Mr Myers: "Being an expert witness as been your chief activity [since 2009]?"
Dr Evans: "Yes, I suppose it has."

Are we to infer his primary income depends on how many days he can bill clients for his expertise and a case that goes to court can be quite profitable.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

I agree totally...

Totally agree ..imo based on reading updates only of course ..Mr Myers did not succeed with his aim

It may create a little nub of doubt with the jury as regards Dr Evans current expertise and hence the reliability of his 'expert opinion'.

 

[gc105]

Mr Myers's remarks seem quite scathing.

In what way?

I can understand why the prosecution have called upon Dr Evans since he has experience in providing evidence in challenging cases. Also, although he is no longer ‘clinical’, he will likely keep himself up-to-date with changes in practice/guidelines etc. I’m sure this is an ‘issue’ the prosecution will have foreseen (the defence calling into question his relevancy/being ‘outdated’)

His answers to me seem very well thought out thus far.

 

[Marantz4250b]

What I think I spotted in there was a point about the fact that the machine in question could indeed introduce air into the stomach as a simple consequence of its use. That air would be bled out through the NGC. If I'm recalling correctly as I've been skimming a lot of this stuff. Everything up to now has seemed to suggest that air being introduced was extremely rare. It would appear that that is not the case.

Also perhaps significant is that this doctor has zero experience with the machine in question.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Off the top of my head, Libby Squires CCTV released during trial, Penelope Jackson murdered husband during lockdown - police bodycam footage released during trial, CCTV and police bodycam footage in the case of Logan Mwangi released during trial, ongoing trial for the murder of Mee Chong CCTV footage released yesterday. It's commonplace these days.

I agree but there's a big difference between CCTV footage or stills images as opposed to this note in question which is highly nuanced and open to debate and requires more attention. As I already said, it would be a catastrophe if it transpired this note was, say, not even written by LL - I am not in anyway suggesting it's inauthentic, it has yet to be discussed in court and I assume at the very least it must have been agreed and verified by both sides - but just pointing out the risk of doing such a thing.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Without a doubt! Will be interesting to see who they have.

This is always my issue with any ‘expert testimony’, especially in the medical field. Lay people tend to assume medical science is made up of black and white answers, but so much of our current understanding and practice deals in shades of grey.
The same test results can get 5 different interpretations from 5 different doctors, and that’s before you add the weight of a high profile court case to the process.

It’s why we call it ‘a second opinion’ - because medicine is as much an art as a science.

So it usually comes down to ‘which expert did the jury like best’, which never feels entirely rational and objective to me.

Very good points.