Forensic expert raises doubts over handwritten 'confession' notes used in Lucy Letby convictions

A leading forensic psychologist has told the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) that handwritten notes seized from nurse Lucy Letby's home were unreliable as evidence of a confession or criminal intent, raising fresh questions about the evidence used to secure her convictions for the murder of seven newborns and the attempted murder of seven others.

Professor Gisli H. Gudjonsson, an emeritus professor of forensic psychology at King's College London who has been involved in overturning historic miscarriages of justice including the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six, prepared a report for Letby's legal team after interviewing her twice. He told the commission the documents found by police — dozens of Post-it notes and scraps of paper — could not be taken at face value as admissions of guilt.

Detectives discovered a range of handwritten items in searches of Letby's home, including one note reading, "I killed them on purpose because I am not good enough to care for them," another stating, "I haven't done anything wrong," and a fragment with the word HATE ringed. One scrap has been widely reported as saying, "I AM EVIL I DID THIS." Those notes were relied upon by prosecutors at trial in the absence of forensic or CCTV evidence and amid questions about motive, according to court reporting and the new expert commentary.

Gudjonsson, regarded internationally for his work on false confessions, concluded the notes were "unreliable as evidence of a 'confession' or criminal intent." He said the documents were consistent with what clinicians and other psychologists describe as therapeutic or distress-driven writing — material produced by people trying to externalize intrusive thoughts or emotional noise rather than to record an admission of wrongdoing. Other experts cited by Letby's lawyers have made similar points, arguing that so-called therapy notes can reflect trauma and rumination and should not be treated as straightforward confessions.

Letby, 38, is serving a whole-life tariff after a trial in which a jury convicted her of the deaths of seven infants and the attempted murders of seven others at the Countess of Chester Hospital. Her legal team has submitted an application to the CCRC asking for further review of the convictions; the dossier includes Gudjonsson's report along with about 25 other expert reports, according to statements from the defence.

Letby's solicitor, Mark McDonald, said Gudjonsson's intervention was central to the appeal effort. "Professor Gudjonsson is the world's leading expert on confession evidence," McDonald said. "It is now clear this was not a confession, it is wholly unreliable evidence and as Professor Gudjonsson says should never have been allowed before the jury. This alone, without the other 25 expert reports, should be enough to return this case back to the Court of Appeal."

The prosecution's case at trial included medical and other expert evidence related to the babies' deaths and collapses, and the jury found Letby guilty on multiple counts. But defence teams have long argued there was no direct forensic linkage, no CCTV showing criminal acts and no clear motive established at trial. The newly highlighted expert analysis focuses on whether the handwritten material admitted as evidence met appropriate forensic thresholds and whether jurors were properly cautioned about its interpretive limits.

The CCRC, an independent public body that reviews potential miscarriages of justice, has confirmed it received the application and that it is examining the materials. The commission may decide to refer the case to the Court of Appeal if it considers there is a real possibility the convictions would not be upheld.

Forensic psychologists caution that written material created in states of distress can be ambiguous and shaped by intrusive thoughts, self-reproach, or therapeutic exercises, rather than by deliberate attempts to record criminal admissions. Gudjonsson's report underscores that such distinctions have substantial legal significance when documentary fragments are presented to jurors without broader corroboration.

The Letby case has been the subject of intense public scrutiny, debate in medical and legal circles, and numerous expert interventions since the convictions. Any decision by the CCRC to refer the case would trigger further judicial scrutiny in the Court of Appeal. At this stage, the commission's consideration is ongoing and no date has been set for any potential referral.

The legal team has indicated it will rely on the body of expert reports, including Gudjonsson's, in any subsequent proceedings. The prosecution has not issued a new statement responding to the Gudjonsson report while the CCRC completes its review.

The case has drawn attention to the intersection of mental health, clinical practice and criminal evidence, with defence experts stressing the need for caution when interpreting personal writings produced in distress and calling for forensic protocols that account for the therapeutic context of such material.

The CCRC's outcome will determine whether the Court of Appeal receives the case for re-examination of the convictions and the admissibility and weight of the handwritten notes in light of the new expert analysis.