Thousands nationwide have been prosecuted for harming or killing small children in this way.The scales of justice in these cases often tip on the word of doctors who say they can discern that intentional shaking took place by the nature of the injuries suffered by the young victims.Douglas County Judge Peter Irvine found in July that Mc Gee gave false testimony about infant skull fractures and about an accident that occurred six days before the baby died. The prosecutions experts, doctors with the University of Chicago’s Comer Children’s Hospital, insisted that retinal bleeding meant the baby had been beaten, even though he had no bruises or fractures. Waney-Squier, a prominent British neuropathologist, re-examined the criteria she had used as a prosecution expert and realized it was wrong, she became the target of vicious personal and professional attacks.(Yes, they get paid expert witness fees.) Fortunately, jurors are beginning to see through the lack of evidence that permeates SBS cases. The quasi-diagnosis of Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) started in the UK, and became a cottage industry for prosecution experts there before leaping like a wildfire across the Atlantic to the U. And, as with the SBS "diagnosis" itself, Scotland Yard has carried the fight to the US.
Mc Gee's testimony helped secure the conviction of Michael Hansen for the murder of his infant daughter in 2004. It took a jury only 2 hours to acquit former daycare provider Deborah Parlock, of Chesterton, Indiana, of shaking a 6-month-old child in her care and causing his death.More importantly, the Medical Examiner who testified against him changed his mind.The Arizona Court of Appeals has tossed Drayton's conviction, and barred the state from retrying him. In 1999, Pamela Jacobazzi, a Bartlett, IL day care provider, was convicted of killing 10-month-old Matthew Czapski after the child lapsed into a coma while in her care and later died.Aspelin, who was accused of causing the death of his infant son, had one thing in his favor: He had enough money to pay for medical experts who cast doubt on the prosecution's theory.Dismissed case raises questions about shaken baby diagnosis.