This is an exclusive excerpt of our Trial Plus episode about Lucy Lettby's expert panel's findings that no murders took place.

Our interview with a senior independent neonatologist has cast serious doubt about what's become the cornerstone of her defence case.

It also questioned how her panel's exhaustive research

missed numerous papers, which appear to prove a key aspect of the prosecution case.

We're bringing this, especially for our newsletter subscribers. We publish exclusive episodes

every week to get these, as well as access to hundreds of exclusive episodes and

series, including the award-winning trial of Lucy Lettby, visit thecrimescdisc.com.

For members only, the trial price.

Here's where Paul objects. He says he doesn't believe that what Professor Lee said there to be true.

And the reason for that is because he's found evidence, actual cases reported by other doctors in the medical literature that already exist. Those cases suggest air can pass between the veins and arteries and manifest

itself in the rash. What Paul is saying, essentially, is that these cases were either missed

or misinterpreted by Professor Lee when he announced those findings to the press

conference. His contention is, and his panel's contention, it must be said, is that if a baby

has ur-injected or inadvertently gets into the venous system, then it can never result in a rush

or an immediate rush. That's essentially what are you saying.

So sure babies can come to harm, may die from ur-embolism if it's confined to the veins.

But without it being an arterial ear-embolism, you're never going to see this unusual rush

or indeed any blotchy, patchy skin discoloration.

First of all, he was saying it can't flow across the

heart, across that for Amnavali. But secondly, it would say most of that herb bubble, if it gets into,

whether willfully or inadvertently, into the venous blood, it would be pumped by the right ventricle

up to the lungs. And he was also saying that if any herb bubbles reach the lungs,

...