Attorneys for defendants in 2 separate cases join hands.
Trials of two separate cases in a Michigan court have led to a debate over the validity of Shaken Baby Syndrome.
Leo Ackley and Anthony Ball who were charged with felony murder and first-degree child abuse for the deaths of their girlfriend’s daughters in two different incidents have questioned the reliability of the diagnosis on the basis of which they were convicted, reported The Washington Post.
Ackley was convicted in 2012 for the death of his girlfriend’s 2-year-old Baylee Stenman and Ball was charged in 2014 in the death of his fiancee’s 20-month-old daughter, Athena Ramey. Ackley’s second trial started this week after the Michigan Supreme Court canceled his earlier conviction and ordered a new trial last year following the failure of the former defense attorney in producing a witness to challenge prosecution’s claims. Ball’s trial is also scheduled to begin in the same court next week.
As the two cases of similar nature are ready for trial in the same court, the attorneys of both the accused have joined together to direct their efforts to prove that the prosecution has drafted the murder case on the basis of the erroneous science of Shaken Baby Syndrome, reported Washington Post.
The arguments of the defense attorneys are focused on the validity of the medical reports. According to them, the injuries pointed out by the medical experts such as bleeding behind the eyes, bleeding on the surface of the brain, and brain swelling is not sufficient to prove that the babies died of Shaken Baby Syndrome.
“Nobody is absolutely and medically certain or scientifically certain what produces that triad of injuries and what type of force is necessary to produce those injuries. The triad alone is not sufficient,” Ball’s attorney, Kimberly Schroder, told The Washington Post.
The defense attorneys suspect some other reasons may have led to the death of the toddlers. The child in Ball’s case had met with an accident days before death and in Ackley’s case, the child was nauseous a week and had an injury.
But, Calhoun County Prosecutor David Gilbert told The Post that the prosecution’s arguments are not about Shaken Baby Syndrome. “This is not a Shaken Baby Syndrome case. It implies that if you shake a baby hard enough, injuries occur. That’s not the argument in this case. We’re not claiming that the baby was shaken. We’re claiming the baby was injured.” Gilbert said.
According to Washington Post, in 213 of 2000 cases involving Shaken Baby Syndrome since 2001, charges were dropped against the accused.
1 Comment
May good science prevail! There are hundreds of conditions that can cause the findings that child abuse “experts” claim are indicative of abuse. Check out some of them at http://www.pediatricaccountability.com.