Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-tsvsl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T16:23:39.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 21 - Ptolemy Rather Than Copernicus

The State of Shaken Baby Syndrome in the British Legal System

from Section 5 - International

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 June 2023

By
Clive Stafford Smith
Edited by
Keith A. Findley ,
Cyrille Rossant ,
Kana Sasakura ,
Leila Schneps ,
Waney Squier  and
Knut Wester
Keith A. Findley
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Cyrille Rossant
Affiliation:
University College London
Kana Sasakura
Affiliation:
Konan University, Japan
Leila Schneps
Affiliation:
Sorbonne Université, Paris
Waney Squier
Affiliation:
John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford
Knut Wester
Affiliation:
Universitetet i Bergen, Norway
Get access

Summary

This chapter highlights problems with SBS cases in UK courts. Unlike Daubert in the USA, the British legal system does not have a protocol for the validation of scientific techniques. Intimidation of experts who question the SBS hypothesis has led to a dearth of experts. There is a lack of transparency with no right to a complete and public transcript of a trial. Publicly reported decisions are available in only around 5% of cases. A preliminary study of public decisions in UK SBS cases showed that the ‘triad’ continues to be deemed relevant. Just four medical experts providing 48.5% of all expert testimony referenced, while the great majority of legal players have little significant expertise in SBS, most appearing in just one case in this study. Several lessons emerge: there is need for a more comprehensive study; a need for full transparency and for copies of all SBS judgements to be made available. The government should establish an official inquiry into the science behind SBS. Experts, from the UK and abroad, who honestly and legitimately question current SBS theories should be encouraged. Training should urgently be offered to all lawyers and medical experts on SBS.

Keywords

flawed forensic sciencevalidating expert evidenceintimidation of medical expertstransparency of courtsjudicial inexperience
Type
Chapter
Information
Shaken Baby Syndrome
Investigating the Abusive Head Trauma Controversy
 , pp. 321 - 332
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Wojtyla, KJ. Address by Pope John Paul II for the commemoration of Albert Einstein. 1979. https://bit.ly/3NDyfeb.Google Scholar
Wojtyla, KJ. Pope John Paul II on the Galileo Affair. 1992. https://bit.ly/3Td3wFP.Google Scholar
Chadwick, DL, Kirschner, RH, Reece, RM et al. Shaken baby syndrome: A forensic pediatric response. Pediatrics. 1998;101(2):321–3. https://bit.ly/3UylRhx.Google Scholar
Guthkelch, AN. Problems of infant retino-dural hemorrhage with minimal external injury. Houston Journal of Health Law and Policy. 2012;12(2):201–8.Google Scholar
Stafford Smith, CA, Goldman, PD. Forensic hair comparison analysis: Nineteenth century science or twentieth century snake oil? Columbia Human Rights Law Review. 1996;27:227–91.Google Scholar
Bevill v State, 556 So. 2d 699, 707 (Miss. 1990).Google Scholar
Gaudette, B, Keeping, ES. An attempt at determining probabilities in human scalp hair comparison. Journal of Forensic Science. 1974;19(3):599–606.Google Scholar
Gaudette, B. Probabilities and human pubic hair comparisons. Journal of Forensic Science. 1976;21:514–17.Google Scholar
Fries, T. In the know: FBI admits flaws in microscopy testimony. 2016. https://bit.ly/3DK73FN.Google Scholar
Daubert v Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 113 S.Ct. 2786, 2796 (1993).Google Scholar
Plunkett, J. Fatal pediatric head injuries caused by short-distance falls. American Journal of forensic Medicine and Pathology. 2001;22(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000433-200103000-00001.PMID:11444653.Google Scholar
Findley, KA, Risinger, DM, Barnes, PD et al. Feigned consensus: Usurping the law in shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma prosecutions. Wisconsin Law Review. 2019;1211–67. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3328996.Google Scholar
Narang, SK, Estrada, C, Greenberg, S, Lindberg, D. Acceptance of shaken baby syndrome and abusive head trauma as medical diagnoses. Journal of Pediatrics. 2016;177:273–8.Google Scholar
House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. Forensic Science on Trial Seventh Report of Session 2004-5. 2005. https://bit.ly/3zObYES.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. Battlelines drawn as shaken baby syndrome controversy set to run. The Guardian. 2016. https://bit.ly/3zRJcDg.Google Scholar
Crown Prosecution Service. Non Accidental Head Injury Cases (NAHI, formerly referred to as Shaken Baby Syndrome [SBS]) – Prosecution Approach. 2018. https://bit.ly/3E7k0Lo.Google Scholar
Luttner, S. Dr John Plunkett, champion of justice, 1947–2018. 2018. https://bit.ly/3E6Jt7S.Google Scholar
Geddes, J. Neuropathology of inflicted head injury in children. Brain. 2001;124:1290–8, 1299–1306.Google Scholar
R. v Harris [2005] EWCA Crim. 1980 (Lord Gage).Google Scholar
A Local Authority v S [2009] EWHC 2115 (Fam) (King J.).Google Scholar
Oyediran [2010] EWCA Crim. 1269 (Moses, L.J.).Google Scholar
Hayes, A. Understanding medical diagnosis: Why it’s all ‘best guesses’. 2020. https://bit.ly/3t1IGib.Google Scholar
French, A. GMC in John Radcliffe consultant Dr Waney Squier accused of bias. 2015. https://bit.ly/3NDSXdM.Google Scholar
Squier v General Medical Council [2016] EWHC 2739 (Admin).Google Scholar
Hardy v United States, 375 U.S. 277 (1964) (the accused has the right to ‘a transcript of the testimony and evidence presented by the defendant and also the court’s charge to the jury, as well as the testimony and evidence presented by the prosecution’).Google Scholar
Girvan-Dutton, E, Parrett, A, Stafford Smith, C. A preliminary study on shaken baby syndrome in the UK: Must Galileo wait another 377 years? 3D Centre (7 January 2022). https://bit.ly/3t1PgoM.Google Scholar
McKinney, CJ. Social mobility fail: two thirds of top judges went to private schools (25 June 2019). https://bit.ly/3zNY71b.Google Scholar
Beiser, V. Discredited shaken baby science sent this father to jail for 15 years. His ordeal could end this week. 2017. https://bit.ly/3E2uagh.Google Scholar
Clarke, M. ‘Shaken baby syndrome’ diagnoses discredited, convictions questioned. 2018. https://bit.ly/3FKBXRg.Google Scholar
Wrennall, L, Bache, B, Pragnell, C et al. Open letter on shaken baby syndrome and courts: A false and flawed premise. Argument and critique. January 2015. https://bit.ly/3TewuoK.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×