PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The petition noted that Gabaeff had advised Gonzalez’s defense attorney to seek out a neuroradiologist to review C.B.’s imaging results for evidence of viral encephalitis, but he had not done so. At a post-conviction hearing, Dr. Lawrence Hutchins, a neuroradiologist, testified that, after reviewing the records, he agreed that C.B. had suffered from viral encephalitis. Dr. Evan Matshes, a pathologist, also testified for the defense that there was evidence of a serious infection that likely developed into sepsis."
———————————————————————
SECOND PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "He went to trial a second time in February 2026. This time, the prosecution called more than 20 doctors from St. Vincent’s and OHSU. Defense attorneys Tiffany Harris, Janis Puracal, and Byron Lichstein presented the testimony of Hutchins, along with eight other experts, including: Dr. Julie Mack (radiologist), Dr. Niran Al-Agba (pediatrician), Dr. Dorothy Wong (hematopathologist), Dr. Guillaume Sébire (neurologist), Dr. Andre Loyd (biomechanical engineer), Dr. Ashley Saucier (pediatric emergency room specialist), Dr. Jeff Kukucka (cognitive bias), and Kysa Douglas (nurse legal consultant). The doctors who testified for the defense agreed that C.B. suffered from a serious viral infection that began as a respiratory infection, led to encephalitis, and ultimately developed into sepsis. On March 11, 2026, the jury acquitted Gonzalez of all charges."
POST: Timothy Gonzalez: Oregon: By Maurice Possley, published by The National Registry of Exonerations, on April 1, 2026.
GIST: On December 14, 2014, 26-year-old Timothy Gonzalez was caring for his 7-month-old daughter, C.B., in Portland, Oregon. At the time, Gonzalez had returned from Arizona where he had been temporarily living with his parents. In Portland, he was staying in the garage of a longtime family friend, 66-year-old B.W.
Years earlier, the garage had been converted into a living space for B.W.’s daughter, and later B.W.’s son. Two years earlier, B.W. had invited Gonzalez to live in the room, and his girlfriend later moved in with him.
In October 2014, he went to Arizona to help his aging parents. He returned to Portland in December for medical appointments and to see his daughter. And during that time, he cared for C.B. during the day while her mother was at work. On December 13, he and the child’s mother, 30-year-old J.P., agreed he would care for C.B. overnight for the first time. Four days earlier, on December 9, 2014, J.P. had taken C.B. to her pediatrician for her regular wellness check. J.P. reported that C.B. had a runny nose and was pulling at her right ear. The pediatrician gave her four standard vaccinations at that visit.
During the day and night, C.B. showed no signs of distress, although she had a cold, a runny nose, and was teething. However, shortly after 12:30 p.m. on Sunday, December 14, C.B. woke up from her nap with raspy, irregular breathing. Gonzalez was sitting next to her while she napped and heard her wake. He saw her arms and legs stiffen, and then immediately noticed her breathing wasn’t right. Gonzalez ran inside the house to ask B.W. for help. B.W. had raised her own children and had experience caring for young children in a pre-school setting.
B.W. picked up the child and heard C.B.’s labored mucousy breathing. She immediately told Gonzalez to turn on the shower in the bathroom in the main house to create steam to help C.B. breathe. B.W. held C.B. upright to help the mucous drain. Gonzalez also called J.P., who came over. Gonzalez and J.P. rushed C.B. to Providence St. Vincent Medical Center in Portland. C.B. was admitted at 1:39 p.m. Doctors noted she was hypothermic, a sign of a serious infection.
However, when a CT scan showed a small amount of blood in the layer around C.B.’s brain, the doctors reported possible abuse, stopped investigating the possibility of infection, and transferred C.B. by ambulance to Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) Doernbecher Children’s Hospital in Portland. A cervical collar was put on C.B.’s neck for the transport because of the report of possible trauma.
C.B. spent three weeks hospitalized at OHSU. During her hospitalization, doctors repeatedly reported fevers; radiologists repeatedly reported chest x-rays showing possible pneumonia; and the hospital lab repeatedly reported abnormal blood test results. A resident physician added meningitis to the differential diagnosis, although the doctors never tested for meningitis.
Dr. Tamara Grigsby, a child abuse pediatrician, reported that C.B. had suffered abusive head trauma (AHT). Once Grigsby made that diagnosis, it was copied into the medical records of the subsequent doctors who treated C.B.
Three weeks later, when C.B. was discharged, she was partially blind, required a feeding tube, and was diagnosed as having developed cerebral palsy. She continued to suffer seizures and as a result remained prone most of the time. J.P. was informed that C.B. would never walk normally, would never regain normal brain capacity, and would require a feeding tube.
Police had been notified after the CT scan at St. Vincent’s. Gonzalez had been interviewed and denied that he physically abused C.B. or that she had fallen.
On April 6, 2015, Gonzalez was charged with first-degree assault and first-degree criminal mistreatment. He was arrested and released on bond.
He went to trial in June 2016 in Washington County Circuit Court.
The prosecution’s case was based primarily on the testimony of Grigsby. Grigsby was the only doctor who examined C.B. who also testified at trial, although multiple physicians, including emergency room doctors, pediatricians, radiologists, and neurologists treated the infant at OHSU and St. Vincent’s.
Grigsby’s diagnosis was that, “to a reasonable degree of medical probability,” C.B’s condition was the result of “inflicted trauma.” Grigsby testified that there was no “accidental explanation” and no “medical explanation” like “some strange virus or some birth trauma or some biological issue” for C.B.’s condition.
Grigsby’s theory of “inflicted trauma” was that Gonzalez strangled C.B. and possibly slapped her, leading to massive bleeding in C.B.’s brain. Grigsby testified that C.B. was not a “classic“ shaken infant, but rather that C.B. suffered “a little bit of all of these mechanisms” that underlie the Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma (SBS/AHT) diagnosis, including “rotational acceleration,” with an additional element of asphyxiation. That diagnosis was based in part on the SBS/AHT triad of symptoms, including bleeding in the layer around the brain, retinal hemorrhage, and encephalopathy.
Grigsby testified that asphyxiation could be accidental or nontraumatic, but in C.B.’s case, she diagnosed “non-accidental” trauma based on a 2 to 5 millimeter bruise on one side of C.B.’s neck which Grigsby said was evidence of strangulation. Grigsby said that the bruise was only on one side of the neck and that when she first observed it she did not consider strangulation.
Although the bruise’s placement was not noted when C.B. was admitted to the emergency room at St. Vincent’s, and despite the size and location being consistent with the hard cervical collar that had been placed on C.B.’s neck, Grigsby testified that she was aware, because of her military training, of “types of strangulations…done by individuals trained not to leave any marks.”
As to “rotational forces,” Grigsby testified that a small bruise on the inner portion of C.B.’s ear, although not observed on her admission or initial treatment, was evidence that suggested C.B. might have been “slapped” with enough force to cause extensive bleeding in her brain without leaving other external injury.
She said that after continuing to observe C.B. in the 18 months since the baby’s discharge, “if there was another diagnosis that was missed, that would have—you know, that would have come to light. And my reading of the—of all the medical records since her discharge and talking with…some of her sub-specialists, not all of them, there’s no one that disagrees with that, that…the way she is today is because of the trauma she sustained back in 2014.”
Deputy District Attorney Kevin Barton questioned Grigsby for the prosecution.
“And what are your opinions about whether Chloe’s injuries were the result of inflicted trauma versus some medical explanation or some terrible accidental explanation?” he asked.
“Her conditions today are a direct result from the injuries she sustained in December 2014” Grigsby replied.
“Is there any set of accidental explanations, a fall off of a bed, or a trip and a drop, or accidentally rolling over on [C.B.] while sleeping, any set of accidental explanations that you’re aware of that would explain all of the injuries that she presented with?” Barton asked.
“No,” Grigsby said.
“Is there any medical explanation, whether it’s some type of strange virus or some birth trauma or some biological issue, any medical explanation that would explain all of the injuries that she presented with?” Barton asked.
“No,” Grigsby said.
Defense attorney William Redden called Dr. Steven Gabaeff as an expert witness. Gabaeff, a clinical forensic medical practitioner, testified that he had reviewed the 5,000 pages of medical records and concluded that C.B. had suffered from viral encephalitis.
Redden asked, “Is it possible for the medical findings that the hospital has reached to have been caused by the baby being picked up by the throat and then struck on the side of the head in such a way that it caused the bleeding on the brain?”
“No, it’s not possible,” Gabaeff said. “There’s not a sufficient amount of injury to the head. And the small bruises that were seen were explained for the most part. A little bruise on the ear, a bruise on the neck were caused—and this bruise caused by a collar that was put on during the transport…[The] bruise in this area would do nothing to the brain…The tiny little bruise that was in the ear…was totally insufficient.”
He added, “I’ve seen, you know, thousands of people that have been slapped, punched, you know, kicked in the face, had their faces, you know, damaged in car accidents and so forth.”
“[T]he vast majority of all those people, if they’re conscious and talking, do not have any significant brain injuries from things in which the external injuries are obvious,” he told the jury. “In this case, there was not external injuries other than these little bruises. There was no scalp swelling, no injury to the skull at all. The type of testing that was done can see the absolute bare, most minimum amount of swelling.”
Gabaeff said, “My belief is that the baby had viral encephalitis. It’s a brain infection caused by a virus. The baby had two positive viral probes at Doernbecher [Children’s Hospital], both of which are known to cause viral encephalitis. It’s a fancy word for brain infection, viral brain infection. The baby had been seen by the doctor and a virus was diagnosed,” Gabaeff said. “Viral encephalitis takes just about the same three, four, five days to manifest in some way that’s going to alarm people. So that came in right on schedule. The presenting symptom of seizures and stiffness is the most common presenting symptom of viral encephalitis. The… initial CT scan showing no evidence of traumatic injury to the skull at all really rules out, you know, trauma to the brain, in my opinion. I mean, viral encephalitis is a very serious disease. It causes brain damage in everybody. And when it’s extensive brain damage, you can end up with this tragic picture that you saw of [C.B.] with, you know, cerebral palsy and really in a terrible state.”
“Doctor,” Redden asked. “How confident are you in this diagnosis?”
“I’d say that I’m virtually 100 percent confident in my diagnosis,” Gabaeff said. “Due to the lack of physical injury, the sort of improbability of …the sort of alleged prosecution theory of what happened with the choking and holding the baby, the absence of physical findings and then, really, this complete conformance to a…standard sequence of events that occurs in viral encephalitis.”
He added, “What’s the probability that the baby was abused without having any of the findings that you would expect to see from that? It’s virtually zero.”
Grigsby was called in rebuttal by the prosecution. She testified that she had talked to a neuroradiologist at OSHU who told her that C.B’s MRI “most definitively” did not show evidence of viral encephalitis.
On June 17, 2016, the jury convicted Gonzalez of both charges. He was sentenced to 18 years and 4 months in prison.
In 2018, the Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions without issuing a written opinion. The Oregon Supreme Court denied review that same year.
In February 2022, Lindsey Burrows and Ryan O’Connor, from the law firm of O’Connor Weber, and Janis Puracal from the Forensic Justice Project, filed an amended petition for post-conviction relief. The petition claimed that Gonzalez’s trial defense attorney had provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to secure testimony from a neuroradiologist as well as failing to present evidence that Grigsby’s testimony, which essentially said C.B. was a victim of acute trauma or SBS/AHT, was based on false evidence and a faulty and misleading presentation of the medical records.
The petition noted that Gabaeff had advised Gonzalez’s defense attorney to seek out a neuroradiologist to review C.B.’s imaging results for evidence of viral encephalitis, but he had not done so. At a post-conviction hearing, Dr. Lawrence Hutchins, a neuroradiologist, testified that, after reviewing the records, he agreed that C.B. had suffered from viral encephalitis. Dr. Evan Matshes, a pathologist, also testified for the defense that there was evidence of a serious infection that likely developed into sepsis.
On July 11, 2022, Judge Lung Hung granted the post-conviction petition, vacated Gonzalez’s convictions, and ordered a new trial. “The evidence is convincing that a radiologist was the best medical expert to discuss viral encephalitis and failure of trial counsel to obtain such an expert was detrimental to the petitioner,” Judge Hung ruled.
On August 3, 2022, Gonzalez was released pending a retrial.
He went to trial a second time in February 2026. This time, the prosecution called more than 20 doctors from St. Vincent’s and OHSU. Defense attorneys Tiffany Harris, Janis Puracal, and Byron Lichstein presented the testimony of Hutchins, along with eight other experts, including: Dr. Julie Mack (radiologist), Dr. Niran Al-Agba (pediatrician), Dr. Dorothy Wong (hematopathologist), Dr. Guillaume Sébire (neurologist), Dr. Andre Loyd (biomechanical engineer), Dr. Ashley Saucier (pediatric emergency room specialist), Dr. Jeff Kukucka (cognitive bias), and Kysa Douglas (nurse legal consultant).
The doctors who testified for the defense agreed that C.B. suffered from a serious viral infection that began as a respiratory infection, led to encephalitis, and ultimately developed into sepsis. On March 11, 2026, the jury acquitted Gonzalez of all charges."
The entire post can be read at:
https://exonerationregistry.org/cases/19545
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. 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.
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;
