Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
Online event: An update on recovery in the civil, family courts & tribunals
HM Courts and Tribunals Service has announced that it is holding an online event to discuss its recovery plan for the civil, family courts and tribunals, which was published on 9 November 2020...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
Focusing on behaviour and attitudes of separating parents
I am sure that if this year's Family Law Awards were an in-person event as usual, rather than this year’s virtual occasion, much of the chatter among family law professionals would be...
View all articles
Authors

SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME/ EVIDENCE: R v Arshad [2012] EWCA Crim 18

Sep 29, 2018, 21:29 PM
Slug : 2012EWCACrim18
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 16, 2012, 11:37 AM
Article ID : 97889

(Court of Appeal (Crim); President of QBD, Griffith Williams J, Sharp J; 24 January 2012)

The mother was found guilty of manslaughter in respect of her 13-week-old son. The mother appealed in light of R v Henderson whether the directions given by the judge were correct.  The consultant forensic pathologist found evidence of 'the triad' and only credible explanation of the child's death was a shaking/impact injury. There was  extensive medical evidence by the prosecution and defence. After the trial the Royal College of Pathologists held a meeting with the prominent experts in the field, many of which had given evidence at the trial. The discussion left unresolved many of the well-known disagreements including the significance of the triad of injuries. The mother appealed, and argued that the judge should have directed the jury that this is a developing area of medical science and that they had to consider the realistic possibility of the injuries being due to an unknown cause.

Appeal dismissed. The judge's summing up had been entirely fair in a manner the jury could understand, the jury could have been in no doubt that in an area where medical science was uncertain in light of the findings made by the doctors, they could only convict if they were sure on the evidence the death had been caused in the manner alleged by the Crown and other possibilities had been excluded.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from