QUOTER OF THE DAY: "It is nothing less than groundbreaking for this area of practice,'' Lomurro said of the ruling. "What I mean by that is, the world is listening. The New Jersey Supreme Court has historically been held at the highest level for their decisions on (scientific) reliability cases, so I think there's going to be an enormous ripple effect.''
———————————————————————
SECOND QUOTE OF THE DAY: "With the ruling in the Nieves and Cifelli cases, all people whose convictions were based on shaken-baby syndrome "are certainly going to be examined for any possible motion to reopen their conviction, if that's the theory under which they were convicted or if an expert testified to that now-debunked theory,'' said Rue, who argued the appeal for Nieves. She now serves as executive director of investigations and police accountability for the state Public Defender's Office. Rue couldn't say how many cases may actually be impacted by the Supreme Court ruling, but she said it would include not only people impacted by criminal convictions, but also families separated in family court proceedings. "I don't have a number,'' she said. "I frankly can't imagine how many people in the last 40 years have been not allowed to see their children or have been criminally convicted based on this theory that is unscientific.''
--------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Heale's is one of those cases. Her trial was essentially a battle of medical experts, with the state's witnesses espousing shaken-baby syndrome as Mason's cause of death, and a defense expert attempting to debunk it."
-----------------------------------------------------
STORY: "What's next for shaken-baby convictions, after NJ high court's ruling?, by Reporter Kathleen Hopkins, published by Ashbury Park Press, on November 22, 2025. (Kathleen Hopkins, a reporter in New Jersey since 1985, covers crime, court cases, legal issues and just about every major murder trial to hit Monmouth and Ocean counties.)
FREEHOLD -- Michelle Heale sobbed and professed her innocence when she was sentenced to 15 years in state prison on June 26, 2015, for the aggravated manslaughter of a toddler left in her care.
Mason Hess, the 14-month old for which Heale regularly babysat, fell lifeless on Aug. 28, 2012, while she was watching him in her Toms River home. The boy died four days later at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.
At her trial in Superior Court in Monmouth County in the spring of 2015, Heale testified she did not abuse the child, but gave him several hard blows to his back to dislodge applesauce from his throat when he began choking on it.
Prosecutors argued Heale violently shook Mason, causing fatal injuries.
The jury acquitted Heale of murder, but convicted her of aggravated manslaughter.
"I did what I thought was best for Mason,'' Heale, now 57 and still in state prison, said at her sentencing hearing.
"Shaken-baby syndrome is a flawed theory that has divided the medical community for many years, but has also divided family and friends,'' she said at the time. "This needs to stop.''
On Nov. 20, a 6-1 majority on the state Supreme Court agreed, ruling the science behind shaken-baby syndrome is unreliable, and expert testimony about it is inadmissible in the case of two men, Darryl Nieves and Michael Cifelli, who are facing child abuse charges in Middlesex County.
Freehold attorney Richard Lomurro, who submitted an amicus brief in the case on behalf of the Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey, said that while the ruling applies only to those two cases, he expects it to have a widespread impact not only in New Jersey but nationwide.
"Across the nation, everyone has been waiting for this,'' Lomurro said. "State supreme courts in other states have been waiting for this decision.''
He noted that amicus briefs were submitted to New Jersey's high court on behalf of numerous groups throughout the nation keenly interested in the outcome.
"It is nothing less than groundbreaking for this area of practice,'' Lomurro said of the ruling. "What I mean by that is, the world is listening. The New Jersey Supreme Court has historically been held at the highest level for their decisions on (scientific) reliability cases, so I think there's going to be an enormous ripple effect.''
The Supreme Court's decision debunked the "long-held belief that the only explanation for certain injuries is shaking,'' Lomurro said. "By saying this in this particular case, it opens the floodgates to all these other cases where a conviction was similarly obtained.''
Heale's is one of those cases.
Her trial was essentially a battle of medical experts, with the state's witnesses espousing shaken-baby syndrome as Mason's cause of death, and a defense expert attempting to debunk it.
The Mayo Clinic defines shaken-baby syndrome, also known as abusive head trauma, as a serious brain injury that results from violently shaking an infant or toddler.
Subdural hematoma, retinal hemorrhages and encephalopathy have come to be known as the triad of symptoms associated with shaken-baby syndrome.
The court's majority opinion said expert testimony that violent shaking is the only explanation for such injuries is inadmissible.
Heale is serving her sentence at the state's Edna Mahon Correctional Facility. She is not eligible for release on parole until Jan. 15, 2028, according to the state Corrections Department's website.
Danica Rue of the state Public Defender's Office said Heale has an application for post-conviction relief pending in Monmouth County Superior Court, awaiting a decision in the cases of Nieves and Cifelli.
Post-conviction relief applications usually ask for reversals of convictions and new trials on the basis of issues not raised in direct appeals, such as ineffective assistance of counsel, discovery of new evidence and changes in the law.
With the ruling in the Nieves and Cifelli cases, all people whose convictions were based on shaken-baby syndrome "are certainly going to be examined for any possible motion to reopen their conviction, if that's the theory under which they were convicted or if an expert testified to that now-debunked theory,'' said Rue, who argued the appeal for Nieves.
She now serves as executive director of investigations and police accountability for the state Public Defender's Office.
Rue couldn't say how many cases may actually be impacted by the Supreme Court ruling, but she said it would include not only people impacted by criminal convictions, but also families separated in family court proceedings.
"I don't have a number,'' she said. "I frankly can't imagine how many people in the last 40 years have been not allowed to see their children or have been criminally convicted based on this theory that is unscientific.''
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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 Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
-------------------------------------------------------------------
