Appeal vs CCRC — why May 2024 does not settle the conviction-safety question
Prosecution claim
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal the Letby convictions in May 2024. This, on some framings, settles the conviction-safety question — the appellate system has reviewed and upheld the convictions.
Counter-evidence
The May 2024 direct-appeal refusal decided only that the specific grounds then advanced did not meet the leave-to-appeal threshold on the evidence then available. It did not decide that the convictions are safe on all possible future evidence. Critically, the May 2024 evidence did not include: the Shoo Lee Panel report (Feb 2025), the Joint Insulin Report (May 2025), the paediatric-pathology re-readings (Oct 2025), the Thirlwall Inquiry evidence (2024-2026), the clinical-psychology reports, the Fenton Bayesian analysis, the Heneghan EBM critique, or the July 2025 executives' arrests. The CCRC route, under section 13 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, exists specifically to enable review where subsequent evidence has changed the evidential picture. The Donna Anthony precedent (2005) is directly analogous: first appeal dismissed, CCRC referral on subsequent framework-shifting expert evidence, Court of Appeal acquittal. The May 2024 refusal does not foreclose the CCRC route; the Anthony precedent establishes it does not weaken it.
The direct-appeal route was tried on one set of evidence and failed. The CCRC route is now being tried on a materially different set of evidence. These are separate proceedings with separate questions.
What the jury heard
Not applicable — this is appellate-procedure. But the public-commentary claim that May 2024 settles the question is a misreading of the appellate architecture the CCRC review now engages.
What the Panel says
The Panel's report was published in February 2025 — after the May 2024 direct-appeal refusal. The Panel's methodology and conclusions were not before the Court of Appeal in May 2024.
What independent experts add
- The direct-appeal system addresses the evidence then available on specified grounds.
- The CCRC system addresses new evidence that emerged after direct appeal.
- The real-possibility threshold under section 13 is lower than the leave-to-appeal threshold.
- Anthony's first appeal was dismissed; CCRC referral led to acquittal.
- The evidence now available to the CCRC did not exist at the May 2024 Court of Appeal.
- The 'appeal was refused' argument misreads the procedural architecture.
- Mark McDonald KC's specialist CCRC-application practice is distinct from Ben Myers KC's trial/direct-appeal practice.