Tag Archives: Audrey Edmunds

Shaken Baby Conference 2016: Defending a Crumbling Theory

FifteenthNCSBSProgramAs registration opened this spring for the Fifteenth International Conference on Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma, coming up in September in Montreal, the National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome (NCSBS) also revamped its web site with a dynamic new design that features bold graphics, clickable factoids, and easy access to resources for both families and professionals. The published conference program shares the new look and embraces the organization’s commitment to fighting criticism of shaken baby theory through public relations.

In a keynote address on opening day, for example, the program promises advice from an executive at the global PR firm Weber Shandwick on “How to Craft a Message,” with this elaboration:

“The media’s reporting of abusive head trauma/shaken baby syndrome (AHT/SBS) over the last several years has focused on wrongful convictions and alleged ‘new science’ that challenges the existence of AHT/SBS. Despite the efforts of many individuals and organizations to re-frame the discussion and educate the media about the realities, the press increasingly covers the subject this way. Ranny Cooper, former Chief of Staff for Senator Ted Kennedy and an expert in strategic communications, will discuss why the media reports the way that they do and what we can all do to ensure that the messages we want get to the public.”

A later keynote will deliver the NCSBS’s preferred message regarding the 2008 exoneration of child care provider Audrey Edmunds, released after 11 years in prison based on an appeal by the Wisconsin Innocence Project arguing that medical thinking about shaken baby has evolved since her 1996 trial. Assistant District Attorney Tom Fallon, from the county that convicted Edmunds, will revisit the case from this perspective:

“Some media, some legal commentators, her lawyers and Ms. Edmunds herself claim exoneration… Is that what really happened? You decide whether this is fact or whether you are being misled.”

Storytelling is a recurring theme in the conference program—another keynote, titled “Power of the Narrative,” features this description:

“In this panel presentation, three child abuse pediatricians will talk about SBS/AHT cases that have resonated with them and the importance of talking about these cases with other professions and with the media to inform everyone about the realities and devastating consequences.”

I welcome the new note of reconciliation offered in this blurb for a plenary session by two mothers with a unique, unthinkable bond:

“Tami Revering lost her patience and reacted by shaking her best friend’s, Angela Pengelly, baby. Now, Tami and Angela work together to share their personal experience of the impact this has had on each of them and how their experience has led them to educate others about how this can happen to anyone, and that forgiveness, while not easy, can help with the healing process.”

oneshake.org

from the babble.com treatment

A treatment of the women’s story on babble.com listed a skull fracture among the baby’s injuries, which raises the question in my mind but not in the article of whether the incident the caretaker reported, shaking the boy and then throwing him on the bed, fully explains the findings. The Guiding Star Project, a holistic mothering web site, ran the care provider’s first-person account of her tale. I’m extrapolating that the NCSBS has hired a PR firm to help place these stories on the web.

The conference program also lists dozens of breakout sessions, including one that promises a case report from Australia of a fatal shaking with an independent witness. I look forward to learning more.

TheSyndromePoster

I am guessing that in the session “The Medium Is the Message: Journalists and Documentary Filmmakers Distort the Child Abuse Story,” law professor Joëlle Moreno will dismiss Debbie Cenziper’s 2015 exposé of shaken baby in The Washington Post as well as the documentary “The Syndrome,” which she scorned based on the trailer at the fourteenth shaken baby conference in 2014 in Denver, a few weeks before the film premiered. In her 2014 keynote, Prof. Moreno also discounted the work of law professor Deborah Tuerkheimer, who Moreno said is “confusing causation with culpability,” and pointed out that the documentary “Scenes of a Crime,” which ultimately led to a new trial and an innocent verdict for convicted father Adrian Thomas, is not about the shaken baby controversy but about the “lengthy interrogation” in that one case. “Part of our job,” Moreno said in 2014, “is to explain to the media that AHT is not newsworthy because it’s controversial. It’s newsworthy because it’s real and it’s deadly.” (For a link to Prof. Moreno’s condemnation of the minority opinion in the Shirley Ree Smith decision, please see “Dissent Into Confusion: The Supreme Court, Denialism, and Shaken Baby.”)

overcomingDefenseCloserThis fall, Maryland assistant state’s attorney Dermot Garrett is scheduled to run a session titled “Overcoming Defense Expert Testimony in Abusive Head Trauma Cases,” also the title of a document by him that’s available on the National District Attorneys Association web site. Garrett’s talk with the same title at the 2014 Denver conference focused on rebutting the jury’s innocent verdict in the 2006 trial of Miles Ferguson, an accused father who enjoyed massive support from his family and church community. Garrett argued that Ferguson’s likability had obscured the medical facts, and he criticized the “handful of defense experts” who testify in these cases for what he said are “financial incentives.”

I’ve attended nine conferences organized by the NCSBS over the past 18 years, and I have never heard a speaker revisit a lost or overturned case with the thought that the child abuse doctors might have been wrong. Instead, I’ve heard reviews of the prosecution’s case, presented with indignation at the loss. This mind-set offers no mechanism for the diagnosing doctors to even acknowledge let alone learn from past mistakes.

wheatAt the upcoming conference, Dr. Christopher Greeley is scheduled to offer his review of the published shaking research in a session titled “Demystifying the Medical Literature: Separating the Wheat From the Chaff.” I’m guessing he will include his criticism of the 2003 paper by Dr. Mark Donohoe, who reviewed the shaken baby literature through the lens of evidence-based medicine and concluded that shaken baby theory has no scientific foundation. In a keynote at the 2012 NCSBS conference, Dr. Greeley condemned the search criteria Dr. Donohoe used to identify the papers he examined, but did not offer a list of the additional papers that would have provided more scientific evidence. For a good example of Dr. Greeley’s approach to the literature, I suggest reading his analysis of Dr. Steven Gabaeff’s 2011 paper questioning the connection between the brain findings and a shaking diagnosis.

I found in the program two breakout sessions that promise to present the defense perspective. In “Cognitive Bias in SBS/AHT Diagnosis,” innocence project attorneys Barry Scheck, Keith Findley, and Katherine Judson will share the dais with Dr. Mark Graber, whose specialties include diagnostic error, and Prof. Stephen Feinberg, PhD, a statistician at Carnegie Mellon University. And the second segment of the two-part session “What Do We Do When the 911 Call Comes In?” could be lively, as it features both child-abuse prosecutor Leigh Bishop, who argued the case against Hang Bin Li in Queens, and independent attorney Heather Kirkwood, who has worked on a number of successful appeals, including those on behalf of Julie Baumer, Ernie Lopez, and Ostwelt Millien.

I also see a handful of sessions on prevention, and one on an effort to create a reliable instrument for diagnosing abusive head trauma based on evidence-based criteria. I do wish these researchers well, as I think we all share the goal of preventing abusive head trauma and improving our ability to identify it accurately.

If you are not familiar with the debate surrounding shaken baby theory, please see the home page of this blog. Sue Luttner does not believe that shaking a baby is safe, only that the brain findings do not prove abuse.

copyright 2016, Sue Luttner

Leave a comment

Filed under abusive head trauma, AHT, National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome, SBS, shaken baby, shaken baby syndrome

Does the Brain Injury Prove Abuse, or Not?

Demonstration at the sentencing in the spring

Demonstration at the sentencing

The two shaking convictions in the news this season, ironically, are both based on brain findings alone, with no bruising, bone injuries, or other signs of assault—at least five years after the experts started saying that they never diagnose shaken baby based on the triad alone. In the widely reported case of Joshua Burns in Michigan, in fact, the diagnosis was based on only two of the three markers, retinal hemorrhages and subdural  hematoma.

BurnsProtestJune

Demonstration at CS Mott Children’s Hospital

A commercial airline pilot active in his local church and community, Joshua Burns was convicted of child abuse in December of 2014. Supporters immediately launched a web site and media campaign protesting his innocence, and now the Michigan Innocence Clinic is appealing his conviction.  Naomi Burns, now 18 months old, seems to have recovered fully. Her mother Brenda Burns has regained custody, but Joshua has been denied any contact with his daughter since April of 2014.

Michelle Heale sentencing reorted on Asbury Park Press

Michelle Heale sentencing, Asbury Park Press

In New Jersey, meanwhile, child care provider Michelle Heale has been sentenced to 15 years in prison, with the requirement that she serve at least 85% of her sentence. She was convicted of aggravated manslaughter and child endangerment in April.

Michelle said 14-month-old Mason Hess choked while eating a tube of applesauce, but doctors concluded from the brain findings that he had been shaken to death. The only visible evidence of trauma was a bruise on his forehead, suffered several days earlier in a fall in his home. He had been sick with coughing and copious mucous, and had just started taking medication the day before.

The coverage of the sentencing last week brings home how an abuse diagnosis amplifies the pain for everyone. The child’s mother asked the judge to impose the maximum sentence for “the monster who stole our son’s life,” and her husband addressed Michelle directly:

We truly believe that you should die for what you did to Mason, just not yet. But when you do, your true sentence will begin. We know that the devil himself has saved a special place in hell for you because only the most evil being would hurt an innocent child, an innocent child who cannot protect himself.

Judge Francis J. Vernoia imposed only half the maximum sentence of 30 years, but he chastised Heale for refusing to “take responsibility” for Mason’s death. Kathleen Hopkins at the Asbury Park Press wrote:

Vernoia noted, however, that Heale is at risk of committing another offense because she has refused to take responsibility for her actions. The judge said that despite overwhelming evidence of her guilt, Heale told a doctor during a mental examination that her conscience is clear.

The judge saw overwhelming evidence of her guilt, but I don’t.

The prosecuting attorney told the court that the child suffered “severe brain, spine and retinal damage,” but the injury to the spine was microscopic blood identified at autopsy, a finding consistent with the time the boy spent on a respirator. In fact, the prosecution was based on subdural hematoma, retinal hemorrhage, and brain swelling.

The historical context:  In 1998, after Judge Hiller Zobel released convicted British au pair Louise Woodward with a sentence of time served, several dozen child abuse experts signed a letter to the journal Pediatrics protesting media coverage sympathetic to the defense. The letter made this statement about the diagnosis of infant shaking:

The shaken baby syndrome (with or without evidence of impact) is now a well-characterized clinical and pathological entity with diagnostic features in severe cases virtually unique to this type of injury—swelling of the brain (cerebral edema) secondary to severe brain injury, bleeding within the head (subdural  hemorrhage), and bleeding in the interior linings of the eyes (retinal hemorrhages). Let those who would challenge the specificity of these diagnostic features first do so in the peer-reviewed literature, before speculating on other causes in court.

Whether or not you accept that guideline—which I don’t—the prosecution of Michelle Heale is consistent with it.

In about 2010, however, after the Audrey Edmunds reversal, I started hearing a different message at child abuse conferences.

At the Eleventh International Conference on SBS/AHT, for example, Dr. Robert Block, then the incoming president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, rejected “the so-called triad,” with the comment:

Only people who are not active physicians working with children, naïve journalists, and professors with a biased agenda would propose that only three signs and symptoms support a diagnosis.

And in 2011, Dr. Carole Jenny presented at the New York Abusive Head Trauma/Shaken Baby Syndrome Training Conference, using a PowerPoint that featured this statement:

No trained pediatrician thinks that subdural hemorrhage, retinal hemorrhage and encephalopathy equals abuse. The “triad” is a myth!

But the conviction of Michelle Heale seems to be based on the presence of the triad, combined with faith that the effects of a serious shaking assault are always immediate. My best guess is that the diagnosis rested largely on the extensive bleeding in the child’s retinas, bleeding that the child abuse experts insist is caused only by abuse. During the trial, pediatric ophthalmologist Dr. Alex Levin was quoted in USA Today as saying, “This is a victim of abusive head trauma. I can’t think of another explanation.”

Josh Burns with his daughter Naomi

Josh Burns with his daughter Naomi

Retinal hemorrhages were also behind the diagnosis in the Joshua Burns case, where the eye exam did not take place until 11 days after the presumed shaking. The Torn Family web site, about the Burns case, offers both prosecution and defense expert opinions, making it possible to unravel some of Naomi’s complex medical history.

Her delivery was prolonged and difficult. Four times, the doctors attached the vacuum-extractor to Naomi’s head and pulled, and four times, the cap popped off. Finally, she was delivered by C-section.

She had difficulty latching onto the breast, and she was gaining weight slowly, so Brenda was pumping breast milk and feeding her daughter with a bottle, which was easier for Naomi to suck on. The girl’s  head circumference was growing at a faster rate than the rest of her body.

Bruising on newborn Naomi from the vacuum-extraction cap

Bruising and abrasions at birth from the vacuum-extraction cap

Then one Saturday afternoon when Naomi was about 11 weeks old, Joshua was at home alone with her, holding her on his lap. Brenda had gone to the hair salon, where the computer asked for a PIN number to go with the credit card. She called her husband, who gave her the number and then, he says, while putting the phone down, almost dropped Naomi, catching her by the head and face before she hit the coffee table.

The scratch on Naomi's left temple, after her near fall

The red mark on the left side of Naomi’s forehead, after her near fall

When Brenda got home, Joshua told her what had happened and showed her the red mark on Naomi’s face. Brenda says she thought it looked like a fingernail scratch, something she’d seen many times in her years as a nurse. (She had quit her job at a local hospital just a few months earlier, in preparation for Naomi’s birth.)

Their daughter seemed fine that night, Joshua and Brenda say, but over the next several days they took her again and again to the doctor and hospital for vomiting, pallor, and uneven breathing, only to be reassured and sent home. On the third day, when she had a seizure during an examination, she was admitted to the hospital. The first reading of the intake MRI identified only “benign enlargement of the subarachnoid spaces” (BESS), which means there was a little more room than usual between the brain and the skull, a not-uncommon condition of infancy that usually resolves on its own. It does, however, predispose to subdural hematoma.

Naomi and Brenda Burns

Naomi and Brenda Burns

Doctors attributed the infant’s seizures to an unidentified gastro-intestinal virus, and after a week in the hospital she was sent home, with anti-seizure medication. Her parents brought her back within hours, though, worried about more vomiting, fussiness, and pallor. At that point, while following up on a possible metabolic disorder, doctors performed a dilated eye exam and were surprised to find what the child abuse report identified as “bilateral multilayer retinal hemorrhages extending to the periphery,” the pattern considered by most child abuse experts to result exclusively from shaking.

“The retinal hemorrhages were an incidental finding,” Brenda says, “but they changed everything.”

Radiologists re-examined the initial MRI and reached a new conclusion:  They still determined that Naomi had BESS, but they also saw old subdural bleeding, possibly dating back to her traumatic birth, and a small amount of fresh subdural blood. Naomi was diagnosed as a shaken baby, and prosecutors targeted Joshua as the abuser.

The defense brought in pediatric ophthalmologist Dr. Khaled A. Tawansy, a retina specialist, who wrote in his report:

The retinal hemorrhages that were seen by the ophthalmologist at University of Michigan and documented by Ret-Cam imaging were predominantly superficial (sub internal limiting membrane or nerve fiber layer or intra-retinal)… [These types of hemorrhages] occur regularly with abrupt elevations of intra-cranial pressure (as in acute subdural hematoma) when the pressure in the cerebrospinal fluid surrounding the optic nerve exceeds the pressure of venous return in the retina as it drains into the optic nerve.

The child abuse doctor in the Burns case asked for advice from the same pediatric ophthalmologist who testified against Michelle Heale, Dr. Alex Levin in Philadelphia. In an email exchange posted on the Torn Family web site, the child abuse doctor summarizes Naomi’s medical history, acknowledging but discounting the traumatic birth. She reports the eye findings in detail and notes that the child has “persistent thrombophilia,” a clotting disorder.

Dr. Levin’s response:

Impressive documentation. Very well done.

Not sure what the question is. I can’t think of another diagnosis other than abuse assuming no obvious coagulopathy or other event.

Apparently Dr. Levin missed the mention of thrombophilia in the original note, because later in the thread, when the pediatrician asks him about it, he writes:

Do you mean thrombocytosis?
Either way we have no idea what this might do re retinal bleeding and could be considered to throw the retinal findings into question. We just don’t know

I don’t know what was said about all of this in court, but it seems to me that retinal hemorrhages are starting to play a very large part in these diagnoses. In this case, the retinal hemorrhages themselves are suspect, and the only other evidence of abuse is subdural hematoma in a child with BESS.

Now the state is trying to terminate Joshua’s parental rights. Those hearings wrapped up in June, and the family is waiting for the judge’s decision.

I don’t understand why the child abuse doctors are so sure Naomi was abused, and I’m even less clear on why the state has decided that her father and not her mother must be guilty. The accident Joshua reported—presumed to be a lie invented to cover up abuse—happened 11 days before doctors ever considered the possibility of head trauma.

I am sorry that another family has been caught up in this tragedy, but I am heartened by the enthusiastic support that Joshua and Brenda Burns are receiving from their community. And I have high hopes that the ongoing coverage will bring more light to the debate about the reliability of a shaken baby diagnosis.

September 2015 update: The court has adopted a treatment plan that allows for reunification of the Burns familly, which is good news if you ignore the irony that the only thing between  the Burns family and reunification is the court.

copyright 2015, Sue Luttner

If you are not familiar with the debate surrounding shaken baby syndrome, please see the home page of this blog.

6 Comments

Filed under abusive head trauma, AHT, parents accused, SBS, shaken baby syndrome

Forward, Into the Book Stores

audreyCover

Audrey Edmunds’s book was released in late 2012.

Just three years ago, the only books I could find about shaken baby syndrome told the prosecution’s story: Medical texts offered confident advice about  symptoms and  timing [1]. One  guide for practitioners, The Shaken Baby Syndrome: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach, specifically recommended the kind of seamless co-operation among hospitals, social services, and the police that has been winning convictions in these cases for thirty years and counting [2]. And a number of personal books told the stories of families ravaged by the loss of a precious child to presumed shaking [3,4].

Now the other storyline is hitting the shelves: Two women have already published books about their experiences as exonerated baby-shakers, and more works are on the horizon.

It Happened to Audrey

It Happened to Audrey is the memoir of Audrey Edmunds, a wife, mother, and child care provider who spent a decade in prison before her conviction was overturned in 2008 after an appeal by the Wisconsin Innocence Project.

AudreyQuoteWritten with her friend Jill Wellington, a journalist, the book traces Audrey’s harrowing journey, from her horror and feelings of guilt the day a 6-month-old girl fell unconscious in her care, through the unimaginable accusations, trial, and years in prison for an assault that she knew had never happened. The experience not only shattered Audrey’s world but gave everyone around her a new perspective. In this excerpt, for example, a seasoned reporter sees a new side to the crime beat:

Meanwhile, my journalist friend, Jill Wellington, was working at a television station in Michigan the day after the verdict came in. Her hands trembled as she punched in the phone number for the Dane County Courthouse. “Hello, I’m a news reporter in Michigan and I’d like to get the verdict in the Audrey Edmunds case.”

“Well, of course, she’s guilty,” the woman who answered the phone replied tersely.

Jill was stunned at this abrupt, ill-considered comment. One of Jill’s coworkers knew a producer at Dateline, NBC. Jill called him and asked if he would investigate my case. A week later, she called the producer again and was shocked at his reply.

“I talked to some of the newspaper reporters who covered Audrey’s case,” the producer said. “They all say she’s guilty.”

Anyone who has been falsely accused of injuring a child will resonate with this book.  I hope it’s also read by social workers, investigators, and people who assume that an innocent person cannot be convicted in our justice system.

When Truth No Longer Matters

heather'sCroppedMeanwhile in Britain, accused parent Heather Toomey has written a remarkable account of her historic battle with social services, When Truth No Longer Matters.

Through unwavering focus and the support of extended family, Heather managed to keep herself, her husband, and their two young sons together while she and her husband fought accusations of shaking the younger boy. Seven years later, the child was diagnosed with a bleeding disorder that explained the subdural hematoma behind the original shaking diagnosis.

At the time, however, the Toomey family was branded as child abusers, under constant pressure to “tell the truth” so as to “clear up” what had happened to their baby. They abandon their home and move in with relatives, so as to satisfy the supervision requirements. They struggle to stay ahead of the financial burdens and attend unending court-imposed appointments. They tolerate frequent, intrusive visits; evaluations; interrogations; and bureaucratic hurdles, all while trying to maintain the kind of positive attitude the social workers demand.

“The authorities have taken a capable mother and turned her into a paranoid mess,” Heather writes, convincingly.

Finally, she and her husband give in to the pressure and sign a “threshold agreement,” in which they admit to failing their young son in return for having their case closed. She writes:

We still firmly believe that the cause is medical, but we have no doctor prepared to back up our belief . . .  whichever way we look at it, it is less of a leap to admit to failing him than it is to admit to abusing him.

With the parents subdued, their children’s names are removed from the “at risk” register, and the constant interference comes to an end. They are allowed to return to their own home. “The case conference concludes that there were never any concerns raised about us as parents or about the children’s welfare during the entire time of their involvement,” Heather recounts. “Our children have never been at risk from us, only from those who failed to  investigate anything other than suppositions and accusations.”

heatherToomehyTheir son’s bleeding disorder was diagnosed years later, after they’d been badgered into capitulation—but at least they’d kept their family intact.

Like Audrey’s story, Heather’s from-the-heart narrative will validate the experiences of accused parents and caregivers. Again, I hope the book also finds an audience among social workers, investigators, and prosecutors, who need to listen to the child-abuse experts, but not without keeping an open mind to the bigger picture.

You can read more about Heather’s story on her web site, at http://www.searchfortruth.co.uk/index.html

Edges of Truth: The Mary Weaver Story

Exonerated babysitter Mary Weaver has collaborated with ministerial writer Deb Brammer on a book about Mary’s ordeal, Edges of Truth: The Mary Weaver Storyscheduled for release in the fall of 2013. Weaver was one of the first babysitters convicted of shaking an infant in her care, in the early 1990s, and one of the first exonerations.

The tag line for the book is:

“When a baby is brutally murdered, an innocent babysitter is accused and uncertainty forces experts to define the edges of truth.”

Fall 2013 Update: Edges of Truth: The Mary Weaver Story is now available. I’ve posted this blog entry about it.

Vaccine-Induced Encephalitis

And a couple of years ago a physician and a journalist together published a book questioning one aspect of shaken baby syndrome, Shaken Baby Syndrome and Vaccine-Induced Encephalitis: Are Parents Being Falsely Accused? By Harold Buttram, MD, and journalist Christina England (AuthorHouse, 2011).

Spring 2014 update:  Law professor Deborah Tuerkheimer has now published her academic treatment of the subject, Flawed Convictions:  “Shaken Baby Syndrome” and the Inertia of Injustice.

copyright 2013, Sue Luttner

If you are not familiar with the controversy surrounding shaken baby syndrome, please see the home page of this blog.

Footnotes:

[1] Shaking and Other Non-Accidental Head Injuries in Children, by Drs. Robert A. Minns and J. Keith Brown, Mac Keith Press, 2006

[2] The Shaken Baby Syndrome: A Multidisciplinary Approach, edited by Drs. Stephen Lazoritz and Vincent J. Palusci, The Haworth Maltreatment & Trauma Press, 2001

[3] Grandma’s Baby: A True Story of One Family’s Struggle with “Shaken Baby Syndrome” and what they call “Shaken Family Syndrome,” by Karen Wise, R.N., Trafford Publishing, 2006

[4] What Happened to Christopher? by Ann-Janine Morey, Southern Illinois University Press, 1998

4 Comments

Filed under abusive head trauma, AHT, Falsely accused, Innocence Network, parents accused, SBS, shaken baby syndrome

Cracks in the Stone Wall

audreyCoverAs ill-considered and improbable shaken baby convictions accumulate, the stories of injustice find their way out.

It Happened to Audrey

Headlining this week’s good press, Audrey Edmunds’s book has hit the shelves. It Happend to Audrey, written with journalist Jill Wellington, is a from-the-heart dispatch from the front lines of the struggle.

Edmunds recounts her horror the morning a baby she was caring for seemed to choke on a bottle and quit breathing—and then her disbelief and terror as a diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome sent her to prison. Anyone who has been accused will recognize the warping of reality as investigators, social workers, and the courts accept the diagnosis, ignoring actual evidence that should have raised questions.

Four years after Edmunds’s conviction, the same medical examiner autopsied another little girl, who had been brought to the hospital with recurrent vomiting in the mid-morning. When the breathing problems and seizures started 17 hours later, medical imaging revealed a brain injury that had gone unnoticed all day by a series of medical professionals—a documented case of the “lucid interval.” Dr. Robert Huntington reported this case to a medical journal, and was forced to reconsider having testified to immediate symptoms at Edmunds’s trial. A state appeals court ultimately overturned her conviction in 2007, after years of work by law students under the direction of Keith Findley at the Wisconsin Innocence Project. Edmunds recalls her thoughts during a hearing along the way, as a series of child-abuse experts reiterated why they believed seven-month-old Natalie Beard had died from a violent assault at the hands of her last caregiver:

“No matter what their research, theories, formulas or experience said about Natalie Beard, there was only one truth:  I did not shake or inflict traumatic brain injury on that child. The state’s presentation was pure conjecture. I was always thoroughly beaten by the ongoing lies.”

katie

Katie Couric

Edmunds and Findley have taped a segment with Katie Couric, and are scheduled to appear on the Katie program tomorrow, Monday, December 10, at 3 pm, at least in my time zone.

Montana Innocence Project

Meanwhile in Montana, reporter Jessica Mayrer has published a well researched article in the Missoula Independent that considers the cases of three state inmates convicted of shaking infants.

Robert and Gabriel Wilkes, 2008

Dave Wilkes with Gabe, 2008, courtesy the Wilkes family

  • Robert James “Dave” Wilkes said his 3-month-old son Gabriel started making gurlging noises and then stopped breathing while lying on the floor of their new apartment. The prosecution convinced a jury that Wilkes had shaken his son to death. Now the Montana Innocence Project says their doctors have found evidence the boy suffered from a liver disease that could have caused his melt-down.
  • Michael Reim of Helena requested a trial by judge this year instead of by jury, because of the complex medical evidence against him. After listening to prosecution doctors who said Reim’s son had been shaken, and to defense doctors who said the boy suffered from a clotting disorder, the judge ruled that Reim was guilty of abusing his son.
  • Young mother and infant-care provider Nevada Ugalde of Billings said she left an 8-month-old in a crib while doing laundry on a June day in 2008, and returned to find him on the floor. At her trial, doctors testified that she must have assaulted the boy, as he couldn’t have suffered fatal injuries falling out of a crib 32 inches onto carpet.

Cathy Lynn Henderson

And in Texas the Court of Criminal Appeals has vacated Cathy Lynn Henderson’s 1995 conviction, also based on testimony that a short fall could not cause fatal injuries.  At her trial, Medical Examiner Dr. Roberto Bayardo had called Ms. Henderson’s account of dropping the baby onto a concrete floor “impossible” and “incredible” as an explanation for his injuries.

In 2007, however,  after reading Dr. John Plunkett’s paper on short pediatric falls and the evolving biomechanical literature, Dr Bayardo told the appeals court that he would no longer call the infant’s death a homicide but instead would list the cause of death as “undetermined.” Dr. Plunkett and a number of other experts also testified at the hearing. The court ruled in favor of Ms. Henderson, writing:

The court further found that Dr. Bayardo’s re-evaluation of his 1995 opinion is based on credible, new scientific evidence and constitutes a material exculpatory fact. The trial court concluded that applicant has proven by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable juror would have convicted her of capital murder in light of her new evidence.

Interrogation Tactics Under Fire

Finally, with thanks to The Amanda Truth Project for the story, a teenage mother in Massachusetts whose videotaped confession was thrown out last year is now suing the city of Worcester. Police sergeant Kevin Pageau and his partner had bullied and lied to Nga Truong during hours of interrogation the day after the death of her toddler son. Reporter David Boeri at WBUR in Boston, which had sued for the release of the interrogation tapes, quotes the tapes and comments on them in his report:

Pageau: “Somebody hurt that baby, and we need to know who it was, and we’re going to find out who it was — either the hard way or the easy way.”

Truong: “I’m telling you everything.”

Pageau: “No, you’re not. Stop. Don’t lie to me.”

The detectives had no evidence. And the autopsy stated no cause of death. But the two detectives knowingly and deliberately told the teenager otherwise:

Pageau: “‘Cause that medical examiner told me that that baby was smothered. Does that change your story? We have scientific evidence that that boy was smothered to death.”

Pageau was not telling the truth, as he later testified. Lying to witnesses is often part of the playbook for detectives. But Superior Court Judge Janet Kenton-Walker would later rule that the detectives went beyond making knowingly false statements. She found they engaged in a pattern of deception, trickery and implied promises targeting “a frightened, meek, emotionally compromised teenager who never understood the implications of her statements.”

-Sue Luttner

If you are not familiar with the debate surrounding shaken baby syndrome in the courtroom, please see the home page of this blog site.

3 Comments

Filed under abusive head trauma, AHT, Innocence Project, parents accused, SBS, shaken baby syndrome