A solicitor serving life for murdering her two baby sons lost her appeal against conviction yesterday.
The Court of Appeal in London rejected fresh expert evidence said to support Sally Clark's claim that her babies were victims of cot death, or at least ''unascertained death''.
Lord Justice Henry, Mrs Justice Bracewell, and Mr Justice Richards said the case against Clark was ''overwhelming''.
Clark, a 35-year-old corporate lawyer who was given two life sentences at Chester Crown Court last November, has always denied killing 11-week-old Christopher, and Harry, aged eight weeks, at the luxury home she shared with her lawyer husband Stephen in South Oak Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire.
She insisted that Christopher, who died in December 1996, and Harry, who died in January 1998, were victims of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), known as cot death.
Clark, a policeman's daughter, originally from Devizes, Wiltshire, told the jury during her three-week trial that she had found both boys ''limp and lifeless'' and was in ''complete disbelief'' at having lost two children.
Sitting in the Court of Appeal dock, Clark burst into tears as yesterday's decision was announced.
At an appeal hearing earlier this year, the judges heard new evidence challenging some of the findings made by pathologist Dr Alan Williams, who carried out post mortem examinations on the children.
And two statisticians were called in relation to the prosecution's assertion that the odds of two cot deaths in the same family were 73 million to one.
Clark's lawyers argued that the jury might well have translated this statistic as meaning the chances of innocence were 73 million to one against. The appeal judges said the fresh medical evidence ''does not have any possible effect on the safety of the convictions''.
In fact, had the evidence been heard by the jury, it might even have undermined the defence case, as it was capable of affirming the credibility of Dr Williams.
The judges agreed that the prosecution adopted an erroneous approach to the statistical evidence, and that approach appeared to have been endorsed by the trial judge, Mr Justice Harrison, in his directions to the jury.
But in the context of the trial as a whole, the point on statistics was of minimal significance and there was no possibility of the jury having been misled.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article