Peter Ranke: Iowa; Shaken baby syndrome comes under scrutiny once again as judge rules, "Frankly, I have some serious doubt whether a crime was even committed here" - and sharply criticizes a doctor for mishandling the investigation into the child's injuries. The Associated Press. (Published by the Bradenton Herald);

STORY: "Judge criticizes doctor for shaken baby diagnosis," by Associated Press Reporter Ryan J. Foley,  published by The Bradenton Herald  on December 24, 2014. (Thanks to the Wrongful Conviction Blog for drawing our attention to this story. HL);

PHOTO CAPTION: This 2012 photo provided by the Scott County Jail in Davenport, Iowa, shows Peter Ranke. A judge has found Ranke not guilty of shaking and injuring his newborn baby, sharply criticizing a doctor at University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics for mishandling the investigation into the child's injuries."

GIST: "A judge has found an Iowa man not guilty of shaking and injuring his newborn baby, sharply criticizing a doctor at University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics for mishandling the investigation into the child's injuries. Prosecutors failed to prove former Davenport resident Peter Ranke abused the 3-week-old  - child, whose injuries to the brain and bones may have been caused by other medical conditions, District Judge John Telleen ruled "Frankly, I have some serious doubt whether a crime was even committed here," Telleen said from the bench in October after overseeing the trial, finding Ranke not guilty of child endangerment charges. A transcript was included in a written decision this month dismissing the case against Ranke, now 31 and living in Chicago. Telleen's said UIHC pediatrician Resmiye Oral, director of its child protection program and an expert in shaken baby syndrome, rushed to judgment and failed to investigate other plausible causes of the injuries.  The science behind shaken baby syndrome has come under scrutiny by defense lawyers, judges and some doctors. Some caregivers who were convicted of shaking babies have had convictions overturned........Patrick Barnes, a pediatric radiologist at Stanford University, testified that the baby's injuries may have been caused by rickets, blood clotting and thrombosis but that none of those causes were investigated. Barnes has been at the forefront among experts who have concluded that many injuries once attributed to shaking have other explanations......... Ranke was arrested in November 2012 after he and his then-wife took the child to a hospital emergency room. Doctors said the child was suffering from a subdural hematoma — which can be caused by trauma that ruptures blood vessels near the brain — and a broken clavicle and possible rib fractures. Doctors believed the injuries were consistent with abuse. Ranke, who had been watching the child earlier that day, was arrested. The baby was later given treatment at UIHC by Oral, who later mistakenly told police the head injuries were "acute subdural hematoma," Telleen said. In fact, a UIHC radiologist had diagnosed it as "subacute," a crucial difference because that means the injuries were less serious and likely caused 3 to 10 days earlier when Ranke wasn't alone with the child, Telleen wrote.
Telleen rejected as "hogwash" Oral's claim that the radiologist had previously told her it was acute and criticized her for failing to consult with other UIHC experts. "Frankly as much as I hate to say with regard to the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, I think there was a lack of evidence-based medicine in this case," he said. Telleen said the baby, who survived the injuries, had been crying since birth and may have been born with some of the injuries. He said prosecutors offered "virtually no evidence" to establish facts proving any abuse."

The entire story can be  found at:

http://www.bradenton.com/2014/12/24/5548591_rejecting-shaken-baby-claim-judge.html?rh=1

See the related Wrongful Conviction Blog post: "Another shaken baby syndrome acquittal: (By Phil Locke);  An Iowa District Judge has dismissed the case against Peter Ranke, who was accused of injuring his 3-week old baby by shaking.  And further, the judge sharply criticized the diagnosing doctor for mishandling the investigation into the child’s injuries. This case highlights the proclivity of child abuse pediatricians to jump immediately to an SBS diagnosis; without giving due consideration to possible differential diagnoses.

 http://wrongfulconvictionsblog.org/2014/12/25/another-shaken-baby-syndrome-acquittal/

 PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;