Monday, May 26, 2014

Commentary: Quentin Stone; California; Shaken baby syndrome acquittal: Refreshing analysis by commentator David Greenwald in a feisty non-mainstream blog; Prosecution's case featured a physician who had no doubt that the injuries were not caused by a fall. Dr. John Plunkett testifed otherwise for the defence. One of the jurors made clear to a newspaper that the doubts and uncertainty of shaken baby syndrome played a role in his decision to side with the defence. (Must, Must Read. HL);

POST: "Vanguard analysis: Jury finds reasonable doubt in Stone acquittal," by David Greenwald, published by The People's Vanguard of Davis" on May 22, 2014. "The People's Vanguard of Davis" has been described as "a political blog that was launched in July 2006. It is dedicated to exposing what it calls "the dark underbelly of the People's Republic of Davis" by writing about things that aren't completely reported in the mainstream press. It's updated daily with news, opinions, and commentary focusing on politics in Davis and environs, with occasional forays onto the state and national stages. It also features Yolo Judicial Watch, a section devoted to the activities of the judiciary in Yolo County and the surrounding areas." (Thanks to the Wrongful Convictions Blog for drawing my attention to this case by referring to a post  published by "On SBS." Link below);

GIST: "When the prosecution began their case several weeks ago, they attempted to focus the jury on the serious injuries that their experts testified caused the death of the young baby. One by one, day after day, these experts would testify to what they saw in the x-rays, blood work, and what was found in the autopsy.
The prosecution’s case was based on the notion that the injuries were a direct result of shaking the baby violently on more than one occasion. However, the science of shaken baby syndrome has been called into question in recent years. The key prosecution expert, Dr. Bennett Omalu, testified that there was no doubt that the baby died of a severe traumatic brain injury. He would testify, “Sam’s injuries were not sustained from a fall. It was non-accidental. An infant’s motor abilities are very small and the injuries incurred would require a lot of mass and energy.” However, Dr. John Plunkett, a critic of shaken-baby theory, would testify a few days later that it is was just as likely that Samuel’s injuries resulted from a fall from a three-foot-high bed onto the hardwood floor. He would tell the jury that even landing on a carpeted floor could produce a devastating injury if the baby landed on his head. He also testified that if the baby had been shaken violently enough to cause death, the neck should have shown signs of injury or a break—which it did not. When asked about the rib fractures, he noted that “normal handling” with a child who has a Vitamin D deficiency, which Sam did have, could result in rib fractures.........One of the jurors indicated in an interview with the Enterprise that he sided with the defense out of the belief that Mr. Stone did not fit the profile of a child abuser. Moreover, the doubts and uncertainty behind the science of SBS played a role. He told the paper, “Medical science is not exact at all.” He added, “I think this family just had a really bad day — that’s what this is about.”"
The entire story can be found at:

See also the "On SBS" account: "A jury in Yolo County, California, has found 40-year-old Quentin Stone not guilty of child endangerment and abuse, in a case that highlights the limitations of common knowledge about both the potential danger of short falls and the timing of symptoms following infant head injury." (The post contains excerpts from Dr. John Plunkett's report." HL);


Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.

The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;