Iain’s Blog

Hi,

Looking at this piece by the steaming Prof Risdon, sorry that should be esteemed….silly me. Anyway I have added comments to his comment released after the ruling by the Courts after Lorraine Harris, Sally Clark, Angela Cannings etc. Mine are in italics… 

The country’s only paediatric forensic pathologist (how can you be the ONLY one….hmmmm I smell a rat),Professor Anthony Risdon, responds to the Court of Appeal decision today.

 As a doctor working in child protection, a crucial point in these verdicts is whether the court accepts the existence of shaken baby syndrome, which is supported by an overwhelming majority of practitioners.  Regardless of the decisions in each case, it is absolutely clear from the written judgement that the court does accept that diagnosis.  This is an important result for child protection (well that’s how you saw it and obviously some in the CPS but it looks like you all missed the trick about shutting the stable door).

Shaken baby syndrome (SBS) is a form of non-accidental injury to infants, recognised by the presence of acute brain damage, bleeding over the surface of the brain (subdural haemorrhage) and bleeding at the back of the eyes. It occurs in the context of an inappropriate or inconsistent explanation, and is commonly accompanied by other inflicted injuries (says you and the ’supposed’ majority, but WHEN exactly did this get proven - ooh that’s right it NEVER has and NEVER will).

Expert medical opinion (in something they have ‘expertly’ NEVER proven), particularly amongst doctors in child protection, overwhelmingly accepts this diagnosis (see if you say it enough it must be true, everyone believes me and anyone who doesn’t is a fool), particularly when the components of the injury have been properly evaluated so that the mechanisms involved can be studied (When Mr Risdon WHEN?).

The significant findings are the triad of a thin layer of subdural bleeding, visible by diagnostic imaging or by naked eye at post-mortem, extensive retinal haemorrhage and acute brain injury. In an infant, if these three findings are present, and particularly if there is also damage to the neck or spinal cord, there is no other plausible explanation beyond shaking or shaking/impact injury (That’s handy 1,2 and 3 must always add up to 5 cos we say so - but as you may have noticed the sums are wrong Mr R, what if thats the case and you have been putting innocent people into prison what then - but can’t you be wrong?).

It is regrettable that the tiny (sounds like someone has a tiny problem) number of medical witnesses who take a different view have been given equal exposure in the Appeal process (ever heard of a different opinion to yours Mr R? Not everyone believes it has to be SBS Mr R, some are brave enough to just simply say, ‘I can’t say’, but some like yourself are willing to be so Noble and allow the scales of justice to be fully balanced - but only in your favour). The concept that ‘hypoxic brain damage’ (injury caused by lack of oxygen) may give similar findings in the head  to SBS has never been satisfactorily demonstrated (Pot calling Kettle me thinks?),particularly the presence of extensive retinal haemorrhage and subdural haemorrhage visible to the naked eye. The fact that this scientifically flawed proposal (someone who is living in a glass house is doing a lot of rock throwing) has gained such prominence in legal proceedings is, in my opinion (don’t forget to say EXPERT opinion - you will get paid more that way), related more to the frequency that the proponents appear for the defence in cases of shaken baby, rather than to any support in the larger medical fraternity (who are you trying to convince - yourself?). The principal author of the ‘hypoxic’ theory has herself admitted that it is only an hypothesis (at least she admits things…..you ever looked in the mirror - by the way its cracking, maybe all those stones you have been slinging around).

It is clear that the injury in SBS may be inflicted rapidly after a sudden loss of temper in trying circumstances (changing a nappy is a trying circumstance then…to an experienced mother and minder - whatever suits eh…no evidence…Then just make it up. That’s NOT how Courts work or the Police or the CPS…well, maybe they do nowadays, everyone gets a result with you); anyone who has cared for a fractious and demanding baby will  have some insight into how this might occur (yeap, and how many of them have killed their children Mr R? Your own argument shows how flawed it is, but you conned the Police - who really should look for the truth, facts and not just go along with the CPS’s desire to win or your personal motives). A murder charge with a mandatory life sentence on conviction may not be the appropriate solution, and I personally welcome attempts to reform the Law on this point (What would you like, ducking stool’s to go along with your logic - it must be true cos I say so). However, it does no service to child protection to pretend that SBS does not exist (or to sling innocent people into prison it breaks down the public faith in you, the Police, the CPS, the Courts etc etc etc).

Professor  Anthony Risdon

When cracks appear in the ivory towers its a bit like when a boat is holed and the rats start leaving the sinking ship. But this ship appears to be wanting to go down fighting…suits me.

I don’t care who you bring in (you have roped Mr Pollards replacement in, Klein? Have you told him the truth the whole truth).

Have you still not smelt the coffee? 

Your time is up boat 13. Time to come in.

If you want to go down with a fight…bring it on, but I won’t be in the mood to be generous, I will go with the Gurkha’s policy to take NO prisoners. there’s alot to come out in this story. There’s an awful lot of embarrassment to come out for some of you, your behaviours, tactics, professionalism etc.

Your call…

See you in December.

Iain

P.S.

Pride is an awfully expensive commodity.

Hi,

What a surprise the other day reading through the times, it mentioned about fees to Barristers may now change, but linked into that story was the mention of ‘Expert’ witnesses also having to have their fees looked into to.

Not sure if the boys realise that yet. I wonder if they will be able to rake in the fees from peddling this nonsense theory too much longer? The Fatima Miah case recently seems to be another case of sending out a message to all concerned that they need to proceed with great caution in these sort of cases or NOT at all maybe when there is NO evidence.

But now their fees could be looked into, then who knows they may not crawl out as much to destroy peoples lifes. But then someone I know is still having to wait for their nightmare to end, even though they have been found innocent in a Court of Law. You would hope that if one court learns the lesson, that the other would take notice. 

But then that would be too easy and we like to make things difficult.

Its a bit like the Government generally, as soon as they start to interfere in things, too many complications come in. It makes me laugh that a leaked report has come out saying how much the MOD screws up Equipment Contracts….Pot kettle calling black or something like that! Why haven’t we got any Aircraft Carriers yet for example?

 They always seem to be experts in things they really don’t have much of a clue about. Hence we spend 34 Billion more than we need to! Meanwhile more troops die. The people of Wootton Basset are a great bunch though, God bless em.

Hull City won their first home game in an age and England seem to be doing okay in the Ashes so far. So there are good things happening.

Oooh and theres some large yellow thing in the sky. Seen it before not too often in a British summer….

Hi,

 Just back from the hols and the blues were the Sky and the Sea, even with a bit too much wet stuff in the first week. We managed to get away for the first time in a while and have a great time.

But even whilst away we picked up on the radar about yet another case that was thrown out by Judge Pontius. Fatima Miah was subjected to a couple of bites of the cherry, last time out the judge said she should not be convicted of Murder and the jury couldn’t agree on Manslaughter.

This time the judge did the right thing and said (I am sure this is what was supposed to happen in all cases) ‘that suspicion and no more can never be enough’.

Well I am suspicious. As to what the CPS and Police and of course the beloved ‘hexperts’ got up to before and during our trial. Not just ours of course but all the others, now there is a Triad that needs breaking up.

I am currently reading a book on Bent Coppers and the work of Ghost Squad, who bring them to justice. Just something I picked up to read on holiday, not my normal read, but WH Smiths were totally out of Peter and Jane books.

The ironic thing for me was how many times the term, noble cause corruption came up. Something I feel happens in these cases all too often and all too easily because of the very nature of them.

The holiday is over and the work begins again and the waiting.

Then we will see who will be judged.

Iain