On reflection a paradox exists.
The prosecution of LL for Baby A is a judicial paradox. In 2016, Senior Coroner Nicholas Rheinberg delivered a final verdict of "unascertained". Under the Coroners Act 1988, this is a final judicial determination. To prosecute for murder, the CPS was legally required to apply to the High Court under Section 13 to quash that verdict. They didn’t. They bypassed the law, leaving a "not suspicious" judicial record active while trying her for murder.

The Letby case is heading toward a massive legal paradox. If a Coroner’s inquest officially upholds the original "natural causes" pathology reports for these infants, the UK justice system faces a total stalemate. Here’s why this matters. In the criminal trial, the jury found "unlawful killing" based on specific medical theories of air embolism and poisoning. But if a Coroner—conducting an independent investigation—records a verdict of "natural causes," we have two conflicting official truths.