SBS: Glynn Johnson found not guilty of injuring baby whose brain bled

​A young father from Keyham has been found not guilty of shaking his 10-week-old son causing bleeding to his brain.

Glynn Johnson sat silent and calm as the jury of eight men and four women returned the verdict to the court.
The jury took less than an hour to return the verdict at Plymouth Crown Court yesterday. Thursday
The 21-year-old was accused of inflicting grievous bodily harm on Alfie, leaving him with four bleeds in the membrane around the brain.
On Wednesday he told the court he ‘violently’ shook his son to ‘jolt’ him after the baby collapsed and vomited.
Johnson denied the charge, and also the lesser charge of actual bodily harm offered to a jury as an alternative verdict at Plymouth Crown Court on Wednesday.
On Wednesday the court heard that Alfie was admitted to Derriford Hospital in July 2008. Johnson allegedly found Alfie collapsed in his baby bouncer and had shaken the child to revive him.
Johnson told the court that on the afternoon in question, Alfie had started to ‘whinge’.
Johnson, of Royal Navy Avenue, had picked Alfie up; the baby projectile-vomited and went limp. Johnson said he panicked and shook Alfie before going to the kitchen, collapsing to his knees and then spotting the neighbours who came to help.
The court heard from doctors that Alfie had suffered subdural collections of blood.
During a court hearing on Tuesday Dr Neil Stoodley, a consultant neuroradiologist who studied CT and MRI scans of Alfie, told the court he believed the child’s damages were ‘non-accidental injuries caused by shaking’.
The defendant, the court heard, was in a relationship with Stacey Neville for six weeks when she found she was she pregnant.
When Alfie was born the couple were no longer together but Johnson was keen to be involved as a father.
The trial lasted four days.
http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/news/Youg-father-guilty-injuring-shaken-baby/article-2915472-detail/article.html

SBS: rib fractures, Burridge Appeal, England

A BABY boy whose tragic death led to his father being jailed for murder may instead have suffered from abnormally weak bones, a top scientist has told the Court of Appeal.

Rees Burridge was only eight weeks old when he died in September 2006 after suffering a catalogue of injuries, allegedly as a result of his dad, Michael, violently shaking him.
In March 2008, the now 30-year-old Burridge, of Tavistock, was found guilty of murder by a jury at Plymouth Crown Court and sentenced to life behind bars.
But he is now appealing and yesterday judges heard the evidence of the histopathologist whose opinions form the backbone of Burridge's challenge to the guilty verdict. Professor Archie Malcolm, an expert in the microscopic examination of tissues, told the judges that examination of Rees suggested he may have suffered from weakened bones.
At the trial, the prosecution evidence said the newest of the several rib fractures would have required "considerable force", beyond that used in CPR techniques, to inflict.
Prosecutors said that Burridge must have been responsible for that later injury and, by inference, was much more likely to have inflicted earlier fractures to Rees' ribs.But Professor Malcolm believes there may be another explanation for the fractures, which would not rule out the possibility of Rees having suffered a fracture to his fifth rib during attempts to resuscitate him.
"If the fifth rib was normal, I think the risk of it fracturing in CPR would be extremely unlikely," he told appeal judges, Lord Justice Leveson, Mr Justice Irwin and Mr Justice Holroyde.
"But because the rib is abnormal, and I believe is less strong, I feel you have to entertain the possibility that CPR could have fractured through the abnormal rib.
"My opinion is that the bone is not normal, it is weaker than normal. It could be a non-accidental injury, or it could be fairly zealous CPR."
When pressed on the matter by Burridge's counsel, Henry Blaxland QC, the professor said it was "reasonable" to consider that CPR as the cause of the fracture.
Earlier this week, Mr Blaxland described Professor Malcolm's evidence as "absolutely critical" in the case and urged the judges to rule that it renders the conviction "unsafe".
There was no evidence that Burridge caused the earlier rib fractures, leaving only the well-known "triad" of shaken baby syndrome injuries as evidence against him.
Although those injuries – eye damage, brain dysfunction syndrome and blood on the brain – pointed towards non-accidental head injury, they did not confirm it, he said.
But yesterday another expert in the professor's field, Professor Tony Freemont, said he found it very unlikely that CPR had caused the "key" fracture to a bone that, he said, was essentially normal.
Professor Freemont, who gave evidence at the trial, agreed that Professor Malcolm is an "extremely respected" professional with a valid opinion, but said differences of opinion do still occur.
"I do not think the CPR of the type we have heard described would fracture a bone that was practically normal," he told the appeal judges.
Lawyers for the Crown, led by William Boyce QC, are contesting Burridge's attempt to clear his name in the appeal, which is expected to continue until the end of the week.
http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/news/Appeal-hears-baby-weak-bones/article-2758191-detail/article.html