ANONYMOUS evidence from nine key witnesses in the trial of baby killer Lucy Letby has fuelled conspiracy theories about the case, experts warn.
The doctors and nurses at the Countess of Chester Hospital won the right and claims that public identification would harm their evidence.
But media specialist partner Martin Soames, of firm SMB, told The Sun on Sunday: “Anonymity takes away the human aspect.
“It may also give rise to a suspicion that professionals are not being called to account. Any erosion of open justice is bad news.”
Now, can reveal that the used in the trial are widespread across the justice system.
We analysed publicly available data and can reveal that the number of such orders issued by in England and Wales has rocketed in six years, sparking concerns for open justice.
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary database shows orders granted, mainly in High Court cases, soared from 54 in 2019 to 1,479 last year — a 2,638 per cent rise.
Others were allowed at inquests, tribunals and public inquiries, so the true total is likely much higher.
The Government has not published official statistics on witness anonymity orders since 2009, when 232 applications were made in Crown, Magistrate and Youth Courts — with 206 granted and 26 refused.
Leading barrister Geoffrey Robertson KC blasted “tender-hearted judges” for being easily swayed by lawyers.
He said: “The open justice principle is fundamental to all trials, and that includes the right to report the names and evidence given by witnesses unless, like rape victims, they are especially vulnerable.
“The decision to anonymise some of the witnesses in the case was wrong, especially the professional witnesses who had a duty to explain themselves publicly.
“We need judges to not allow witnesses to withhold their names.
“Many judges today are tender-hearted and easily swayed by advocates who exaggerate the danger that witnesses in controversial cases may be demonised by the media.”
Goldsmiths media professor Tim Crook insisted one of the “justice purposes” of identifying witnesses in criminal trials was “that public scrutiny enhances the qualities of veracity and integrity”.
In his briefing, , he wrote: “One of the risks of too much secrecy in criminal trials and the anonymising of trial participants is that the lack of key and specific information undermines the credibility and confidence of the public in the trial process.”
This week, there were l after an exclusive Sun and questioned whether the nurse — currently serving 15 whole life terms — was made a scapegoat.
The unprecedented decision to grant lifelong anonymity to nine key witnesses was made after medical professionals claimed public identification would harm their evidence or cause extreme workplace distress.
Judges allowed the orders to remain in place after and during the Thirlwall Inquiry into why she was able to murder seven babies and attempt to murder seven others at the hospital between 2015 and 2016.
Only one witness has since been identified: , previously referred to as Doctor U or Doctor A.
He was granted lifetime anonymity after being described as Letby’s “boyfriend” and permitted to give evidence from behind a screen at Manchester Crown Court.
from suspected “unnatural causes” in July, he can now be named.
Crossbench peer Lord Walney, a former government adviser on political violence, said: “It is troubling so many witnesses in the Letby trial were given anonymity.
“Intimidation and harassment can be real, but so many scandals in recent decades have been made much worse by clinicians closing ranks to save their own skin.
“Social media ridicule or trolling is grim, but it should not trump the principle of open justice, which is vital to protect confidence in our increasingly battered justice system.
“If people in public positions like doctors and nurses are routinely granted anonymity, it will further increase the sense that the NHS circles the wagons to protect itself when things go wrong and shuts out patients who have been failed.”
Last week, three set to give evidence at the inquest into the death of murdered ten-year-old had a bid to protect their identities rejected.
Sara was found dead in bed at home in Woking, Surrey, in 2023. and stepmother — jailed for murder the next year — were already known to social services.
A review found s, who visited the wrong address the day before Sara died and failed to question why she suddenly wore a hijab to cover bruising for “fear of causing offence”.
The council lost its bid to shield the workers’ identities when they testify at Sara’s inquest next year.
Children and sexual offence victims automatically get anonymity in UK courts.
Some witnesses, such as undercover or those in the Omagh and Bloody Sunday inquiries, are protected from retaliation.
However, legal experts warn adults fearing a social media backlash are increasingly using anonymity orders to protect personal reputations.
Anonymity on medical grounds was also granted to 59 witnesses by chair Sir Brian Langstaff during the Infected Blood Inquiry, which issued a 2024 report exposing systemic failures in a scandal where 3,000 people died.
Anonymity orders were also granted in the , launched after 900 sub- postmasters were wrongly prosecuted for theft due to a faulty computer system.
Chair Sir Wyn Williams allowed at least nine “core participants” to testify anonymously.
Some parents of surviving victims in the — in which three girls were killed by in July 2024 — said that anonymity orders at the trial left them feeling sidelined.
The mother of Daisy, who was seven when stabbed 33 times, said: “It’s more comfortable to forget these girls survived because remembering what they went through is really horrendous.”
Dawn Alford, chief executive of the Society of Editors, warned routine anonymity risks eroding public scrutiny. She said: “Some people plainly need their identities protected, including children and victims of sexual offences.
“Others may face a genuine risk if they are named. But anonymity should not become a routine feature of a trial, tribunal or inquiry because giving evidence may be difficult or attract attention.”
The Sun on Sunday’s analysis reveals over 500 anonymity orders have been granted since 2019 in asylum seeker deportation cases.
Among them is “XAG”, a Ghanaian migrant with convictions for battery, fraud, shoplifting, and possessing extreme pornographic images, granted anonymity while fighting deportation.
Meanwhile, an anonymised Eritrean small-boat migrant is fighting placement in adult housing after social workers determined he was “significantly over 18,” despite claiming to be 16.
However, Richard Garside, Director of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, said social media makes anonymity essential, adding: “It doesn’t serve the interests of justice if witnesses do not come forward or refuse to testify for fear of social media exposure, threats and rumour.
“Given this, lifetime anonymity orders decided on a case-by-case basis might be the price we have to pay.”
It is understood the Ministry of Justice does not publish overall figures on anonymity orders as they span differing jurisdictions.
