Yet another crucial development has emerged in the Lucy Letby case, raising fresh questions about the evidence given by Dr Ravi Jayaram. Let me explain what happened, and when.
58
232
635
93,407
During Miss Letby's first trial in 2022, the prosecution relied on electronic door-swipe records to show which members of staff came in and out of the neonatal unit, and when. The prosecution was later forced to admit that records for one of the doors had been misrepresented at the trial. Events recorded as staff 'leaving' the neonatal unit were actually staff 'arriving' onto the unit, and those recorded as 'arriving' were actually 'leaving'. That matters. The swipe data was used to establish which nurses were where at given points in time. The data was therefore vital to the prosecution's case.
11
69
293
20,689
Because, if the timeline relied upon by the prosecution was based on incorrectly labelled data, it could have important implications for individual allegations, as was the case with the allegation concerning Baby K, for which Miss Letby was re-tried in 2024. At the first trial, the prosecution claimed that Jayaram found Lucy Letby standing by Baby K's incubator as the baby deteriorated at 3.50am on 17 February 2016. Crucially they claimed the door-swipe records showed that Baby K's designated nurse, Joanne Williams, had left the intensive care unit at 3.47am. But this was wrong. The swipe data, corrected for the retrial in 2024, instead indicated that Joanne Williams had actually returned to the unit at 3.47am. This meant Lucy Letby was not alone with Baby K when they deteriorated in the way originally suggested.
4
33
198
9,078
I therefore wrote to Sarah Hammond, Chief Crown Prosecutor of Mersey-Cheshire CPS, in August 2024, asking for clarification about the errors in the door-swipe evidence presented during the first trial.
3
24
163
8,030
In her response, Sarah Hammond described this as "not [having] a significant impact” upon her convictions. Frankly I find this an extraordinary claim.
14
40
232
10,447
After Cheshire Police realised the swipe data used at the first trial had been presented the wrong way round, they interviewed Dr Ravi Jayaram again. Crucially, this interview took place before Miss Letby's retrial in 2024. During that interview, the officer said to Jayaram: "We can't change the data... But we can change the interpretation of it." Jayaram, upon being confronted with the errors in the swipe data, abandoned the precise timings he had previously given, citing the difficulties of "retrospective documentation".
11
50
227
13,580
It is deeply troubling to see what appears to be the police and a key witness reshaping the interpretation of the evidence to Lucy Letby's disadvantage in advance of her retrial. It reinforces that the investigation was driven by a fixed theory and a degree of complicity between the police and some of the consultants.

Jul 31, 2026 · 10:29 AM UTC

9
60
297
11,897
Jayaram's evidence seems to change to fit the prosecution's case. I have previously argued that those apparent inconsistencies should be investigated as potential perjury. I maintain that view.
18
80
389
16,776
Sort replies: Relevant Recent Liked
Replying to @DavidDavisMP
Deeply troubling. How was this allowed?…Xxx
5
Replying to @DavidDavisMP
🚨 Lucy Letby - On 30th July 2025, three members of the senior leadership team at the Countess of Chester Hospital (COCH) were arrested for Gross Negligence Manslaughter. They were interviewed and bailed. What has happened to this investigation?
BREAKING: Three members of the senior leadership team at the hospital where Lucy Letby used to work have been arrested. trib.al/kdXA2Dr 📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube
2
6
379
Replying to @DavidDavisMP
I think he wasn't actually saying what we think he was saying. I reckon he actually meant " we can't change the data but we can still fit her up."
1
4
99
Where are you Detective Hughes? Stand up and be counted.
1
1
4
138
Replying to @DavidDavisMP
Not just troubling. Its perverting the course of justice, pure and simple. Its CRIMINAL .
1
3
36
Replying to @DavidDavisMP
8/5/12 Guardian: Why lawyers can not coach witnesses Prof Richard Moorhead Witness coaching may amount to attempting to influence a witness & so misleading of a court... witness should give his/her own evidence... uninfluenced by what anyone else has said. theguardian.com/law/2012/may…
2
20
Replying to @DavidDavisMP
Lies lies, and more lies, but you dont do facts, do you Davis, because you are too bloody lazy! THOSE are SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS!!
1
1
58
Replying to @DavidDavisMP
What's deeply troubling is that you with your slit eyes and big effing ugly nose cares more about the rights of a serial killer than he does about people in jail for facebook posts and a gazillion immigrants, legal and illegal, destroying your country.
3