Looks like another issue with the case has come out of the woodwork now 
I still think she's guilty but I also think it warrants the question that if you convict a person based entirely on circumstantial evidence due to the sheer amount of it, then at which point does the amount of it shown to be flawed warrant a retrial.
unherd.com
www.dailymail.co.uk

I still think she's guilty but I also think it warrants the question that if you convict a person based entirely on circumstantial evidence due to the sheer amount of it, then at which point does the amount of it shown to be flawed warrant a retrial.
A bombshell statement given to police that supported Lucy Letby's claim to be innocent of murdering babies was not disclosed to her defence team, it was claimed yesterday.
The evidence from Dr Astha Soni, a paediatrician at the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital where Letby worked, disputed claims by prosecution experts that the poor health of one baby in the unit, Baby Y, was linked to insulin poisoning by Letby.
Dr Soni's statement said Baby Y's high insulin levels were due to a genetic condition which produces excess levels of the hormone.
This contradicted claims by Dewi Evans, the controversial retired paediatrician who played a central role in the prosecution, who told police that Baby Y had been given 'insulin from an external source'.
The statement by Dr Soni calls into question the prosecution's methodology and was never passed to Letby's defence by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).

How safe is the Letby verdict?


Statement supporting Lucy Letby's innocence 'was kept from her team'
The evidence from Dr Astha Soni, a paediatrician at the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester Hospital where Letby worked, disputed claims by prosecution experts.