"NewsChannel 13 has learned that McElheny and his wife Melinda were already back in court today, this time family court in Bennington where they live now. They were waging a new legal battle to bring their remaining daughter home, a child that was placed in foster care shortly after birth.
When McElheny walked out of jail a free man last night, he said something that might help him in his next legal battle.
“We are good, down to earth people so justice prevails and I’m going home,” said McElheny.
That optimism about the court system may serve him well in Vermont Family Court, now that he and his wife Melinda are trying to regain custody of their second daughter, who was placed in foster care a day after her birth."
REPORTER BETH WURTMANN; WNYT.-----------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: Doctor Patrick Barnes, a pediatric radiologist testifying for the defence testified during the trial that infant Ina Jane McElheny's numerous broken bones were caused by congenital rickets and not by abuse from her father. Barnes, a pediatric radiologist from Palo Alto, Calif., said that the 18 fractures found on the baby postmortem happened because the child was vitamin D deficient in the womb and shortly after birth, causing brittle bones. "Such a baby can get broken bones during diaper-changing and broken ribs just from someone picking her up with their hands on both sides of her torso," Barnes said. Testimony has been heard that the baby's birth was very difficult, and Barnes said the fractures may also have been caused during the birth process. Rensselaer County Assistant District Attorney Elizabeth Kennedy got Barnes to admit that congenital rickets is not accepted by the medical community and that babies who suffer broken bones during birth are a very small percentage of all births. "Well, I can tell you that it is under-reported because doctors don't want to get sued," Barnes said. (Times-Union);
----------------------------------------------------------
"BENNINGTON- The fall out continued following the eight not guilty verdicts handed down by a Rensselaer County jury in the Joseph McElheny case," the WNYT story by reporter Beth Wurtmann published on October 13, 2011 under the heading, "McElheny back in court to bring daughter home," begins.
"Now, the question is will the couple regain custody of their second infant daughter," the story continues.
"NewsChannel 13 has learned that McElheny and his wife Melinda were already back in court today, this time family court in Bennington where they live now. They were waging a new legal battle to bring their remaining daughter home, a child that was placed in foster care shortly after birth.
When McElheny walked out of jail a free man last night, he said something that might help him in his next legal battle.
“We are good, down to earth people so justice prevails and I’m going home,” said McElheny.
That optimism about the court system may serve him well in Vermont Family Court, now that he and his wife Melinda are trying to regain custody of their second daughter, who was placed in foster care a day after her birth.
That was when McElheny faced murder charges in their death of their first daughter Ina, but even after his acquittal in Troy Wednesday on eight of nine counts, one legal expert says it may not clear the way in Vermont to bring their remaining child home.
“The burden is lighter in a civil prosecution, you don't have to prove as much. That's why getting off on this criminal charge, while it's great for him, it's no slam dunk in the family court," said Barbara King, Esq. of theTully Rinckey Law Firm.
Family law expert King says the couple will most likely have to prove all over again that McElheny did not kill Ina, and that his wife did everything in her power to protect the child.
‘The good side is that the risk of losing liberty isn't there anymore, he's not looking at long term incarceration. On the downside, there's the continued separation from the child," said King.
McElheny will be back in Rensselear County Court on Tuesday, to learn whether the ninth and final charge will be thrown out, or if the district attorney will try that count again.
That is after the jury deadlocked on the misdemeanor charge of endangering the welfare of a child."
http://wnyt.com/article/stories/S2327910.shtml?cat=300
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 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:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
