In an exclusive episode of the Daily Mail's Trial podcast, veteran court reporters Liz Hull and Caroline Cheetham conducted a revealing interview with Dr Sandie Bohin, a neonatologist who served as a pivotal expert witness during Lucy Letby's ten-month murder trial in 2022. The conversation delved into the medical evidence that led to Letby's conviction and addressed growing claims of a miscarriage of justice.
Background and Role in the Trial
Before the trial commenced, Dr Bohin was commissioned by the National Crime Agency to independently review the reports of Dr Dewi Evans. Dr Evans's findings had concluded that babies under Letby's care had been injected with air and deliberately overfed with milk. After largely agreeing with these conclusions, Dr Bohin was called upon by the prosecution during the trial, which culminated in Letby receiving 15 whole life orders following her conviction for seven counts of murder and seven counts of attempted murder in 2023.
Rising Claims of Miscarriage of Justice
Since Letby's conviction, a significant number of high-profile commentators have emerged, arguing that the nurse is the victim of a massive miscarriage of justice. These critics have been galvanised by Letby's new defence team, led by outspoken barrister Mark McDonald, who was appointed in September 2024 and has since waged a very public campaign to overturn her conviction.
During the podcast, Dr Bohin directly rebutted claims disputing the medical evidence used to convict Letby in court. She explained that many of Letby's defenders likely have not read the thousands of pages of case notes that led her to conclude the babies had been deliberately harmed.
Addressing Key Claims
Claim: 'No Evidence the Babies Were Injected with Air'
One of the central pieces of medical evidence cited during the trial was a 1989 academic paper by Canadian neonatologist Dr Shoo Lee, which examined how air embolisms present in babies. After the conviction, Dr Lee claimed his paper had been misrepresented by Dr Bohin and Dr Evans, and he later appeared for the defence at the Court of Appeal, though his evidence was dismissed.
Dr Lee has since promoted his theories of Letby's innocence in multiple documentaries. In February 2025, he chaired a panel of 14 international neonatologists and paediatricians who asserted there was no medical evidence that Letby had deliberately harmed any of the babies in her care.
Dr Bohin responded by stating, 'We did not just use the skin changes that were in his paper to diagnose air embolism. Lee founded his theory on that. But he hadn't been given all the case notes, so he didn't know we had used other evidence too.' She added, 'The whole press conference thing, I thought, was beyond dreadful for the parents. I don't agree with their conclusions. I don't think they're informed and I wonder if they had all the notes.'
She further explained that doctors who gave evidence at the trial noted unusual skin changes during resuscitation efforts, which they had never seen before in similar medical situations.
Claim: 'The Babies Died Because of Substandard Care'
A frequently repeated defence claim is that the babies in Letby's care died due to a dangerously understaffed and poorly run neonatal ward at the Countess of Chester Hospital, rather than murder. Dr Lee's panel supported this allegation, linking several deaths attributed to Letby to systemic failures at the hospital.
Weighing against the medical evidence she examined, Dr Bohin said accusations of negligence levelled against the hospital are desperately unfair. 'I feel incredibly for the staff at the Countess of Chester,' she said. 'The doctors and nurses have come into a huge amount of criticism for their care of these babies. People saying that they only collapsed because of substandard care.'
She emphasised that no neonatal unit is perfect and staffing shortages are common, but she found nothing substandard in the resuscitation or care approaches used by the hospital staff.
Claim: 'The Babies Were Very Sick and Would Have Died Anyway'
Another argument from Letby's defenders is that the babies were extremely premature and sickly, with their deaths being natural and unfairly attributed to her. Dr Bohin countered this as an oversimplification of the complex medical evidence presented during the trial.
While many babies were unwell, she argued they were medically stable and receiving appropriate care, and should not have suddenly collapsed. 'The babies were not all really poorly,' Dr Bohin stated. 'They were stable, if you looked at their heart rate, respiratory rate, saturations - all the parameters we would normally use. You get a trend if a baby is becoming more unwell. These babies did not have that. They were for the most part, doing well. They were stable on a neonatal unit. They certainly were not expected to collapse and die.'
The full interview with Dr Sandie Bohin is available by subscribing to The Crime Desk, which offers access to the Trial+ podcast, ad-free listening, and other member benefits.
