Shaken Babies and Wrongful Convictions

An excellent new article in The Crime Report by Maurice Possley examines convictions based on medical evidence of Shaken Baby Syndrome and assembles a strong argument that wrongful convictions are common in these cases.

In the last three decades, Possley writes, there have been "thousands of successful prosecutions ... of parents and other care-givers who have been found guilty of charges ranging from manslaughter to murder, based on findings of what is known as the triad—retinal hemorrhage, bleeding in the brain and brain swelling. Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) is one of the few instances in the criminal justice system where the diagnosis is the basis for prosecution."

Efforts to closely examine shaken baby cases are in no way intended to undermine prosecutions of legitimate child abuse, which is of course a real concern. But people working on issues surrounding wrongful convictions have long questioned whether the science in SBS cases was so clear that a doctor's diagnosis could be enough for a conviction. Like other fields of forensic science, where empirical data is not available to quantify the strength of evidence, much is left to a doctor's determination in SBS cases and defendants without the resources to challenge prosecution experts are more likely to be convicted.

About 1,500 babies are diagnosed with SBS each year in the U.S., but no one knows how many of these cases result in criminal prosecutions. An analysis of criminal appeals, however, shows the number of defendants challenging such convictions has grown in recent years and continues to grow.

Possley points to an upcoming law review article by University of Maine School of Law professor Deborah Tuerkheimer, which questions the validity of evidence we've been using in shaken baby convictions for years.

“Given the scientific developments…we may surmise that a sizeable portion of the universe of defendants convicted of SBS-based crimes is, in all likelihood, factually innocent,” Tuerkheimer writes, adding that a far greater number of defendants among the group were likely convicted on legally insufficient evidence.

“While we cannot know how many convictions are ‘unsafe’ without systematic case review, a comparison of the problematic category of SBS convictions to DNA and other mass exonerations to date reveals that this injustice is commensurate with any yet seen in the criminal justice arena,” Tuerkheimer writes.

Grits for Breakfast has more commentary on this great article by Possley. Scott Henson writes at Grits:

When you think about it, the death of a baby is already such a terrible event, how much more would it compound the tragedy to then falsely accuse a parent or child care worker of homicide? But to judge by the latest research, that appears to be exactly what's happened in many of these cases since the diagnosis was first popularized in the '70s.

Read Possley's full article at The Crime Report.