Well yes, juries reach verdicts evaluated on the evidence provided and its presentation by the prosecution. With all the available evidence and full disclosure thereof, at the time. With the best will in the world juries have still got it wrong, sometimes with fatal consequence. Timothy Evans in his trial connected to serial killer John Reginald Christie's case. An innocent man hanged on the available evidence. It's now alleged that not all 'available' evidence was presented in Letby's trial; expert medical witnesses not called, statements unheard. Elements of 'hearsay' appear to've gone unchallenged.
I was like you @thommo2010convinced by the evidence and swayed by a very public demonisation of Letby. @woolley's and others' posts made me look a bit more closely at the case. Juries are far from infallible, and as has been stated, were they intellectually capable of understanding the nuances of the evidence they were presented with?
Not really a fan of Peter Hitchens but he can be succinct and convincing. A 21 minute video interview where he states his case, foe those genuinely interested. It may've already been posted but cba going back in the thread...
The interviewer does a reasonable impression of a 'devil's advocate', and Hitchens' words are quite compelling.