Shaken Baby Case is on trial now

Vikingwoman wrote:Just got a response from the PNJ reporter. She said most of the testimony has been from Drs. so far saying the injury was non accidental. No testimony of what happened to the child earlier in the day. They don't have enough people to send one " from gavel to gavel".

Pathetic news outlet.

Pathetic news outlet.

It is the sad realty of internet advertising which is more effective than the classifieds on a newspaper. With no revenue, they simply have no money to pay reporters. I sent a message to one news organization and asked them why they were not covering the trial......they did not even bother to respond.

The woman gets beat up in public when the state releases one sided facts with conclusions without even pathology of tissue, and then they cannot report on what the medical people are saying. But for the Grace of God, this could happen to anyone here.

No pathology? A comment, unsubstantiated comment, made by the defense attorney. Sounds like she is desperately throwing a "zinger" up hoping it sticks.

No pathology? A comment, unsubstantiated comment, made by the defense attorney. Sounds like she is desperately throwing a "zinger" up hoping it sticks.


No, she is on cross setting up those so called treating medical folks to be savaged by the defense experts. There is no haphazard throwing a zinger by a trial attorney on cross. They are teeing the ball up for the defense experts. She made a big deal about the pathology on cross because the expert will say it was impossible to reach certain conclusions without that pathology. Hell, even I was shocked at the lack of pathology and I never suspected the rush to judgment would be done without tissue analysis........utter incompetence.

It might have taken weeks to get pathology back from experts. In this rush to judgment, it is clear that the State was going to run with some treating folks who were NOT experts to get a grand jury indictment. It took 14 days from my first bronch tissue sample off a lung tumor to get the results back from Mayo, and the local hospital said their pathology of my lung was NO CANCER, and when the pathology came back from MAYO, I was getting a phone call an hour to schedule my tumor and lobe removal. If we had relied on the abilities of those treating physicians, and had my doctor not been a teaching doc at the University of Illinois, they might not have sent the tissue to Mayo. My pulmonary doc had 35 years of experience and had only seen three of my type of tumors. My pulmonary doc at Northwestern does 150 surgeries a year on my type of tumor. My doc did not even know that immediately upon the pathology describing my cancer, I should have been put on sandostatin shots. It was another three years when it had spread to my liver that a doctor at Moffit got me on the Sandostatin. This woman has spent three years of her life which is now ruined in jail for something she did not do.

What would you expect the pathology to be....other than massive brain trauma. It is not going to show a metabolic disease.

What would you expect the pathology to be....other than massive brain trauma. It is not going to show a metabolic disease.


The tissue is able to provide a time line. Without the same how could they discover an injury which may have happened earlier than the treating physicians opinions? It makes it much more difficult. Let me ask you again, why was the tissue not given to a pathologist? Where is the tissue?

2seaoat wrote:What would you expect the pathology to be....other than massive brain trauma. It is not going to show a metabolic disease.


The tissue is able to provide a time line.  Without the same how could they discover an injury which may have happened earlier than the treating physicians opinions?   It makes it much more difficult.   Let me ask you again, why was the tissue not given to a pathologist?   Where is the tissue?

I like you, do not have access to the medical records. So, neither one of use know what pathology was done. You don't know and I don't know.

However, his autopsy, along with all trauma lab studies, would confirm any speculation you would have.

I do know that on cross examination, the doctor admitted that the tissue was not saved, nor was there pathology on the same. This was done intentionally to set the table for the experts. Now if the PNJ reported it incorrectly, then I stand corrected, but it is exactly what I would expect from the same people who treated Bob and T.

The defense attorney said it. Did you hear the doctor say that crucial telling pathology was discarded? Or non essential blood that pooled on the floor was mopped up. What patholology are you referencing?

When the skull was opened, blood and brain tissue under severe pressure shot out of the child's cranium. Did they cut out part of the brain and throw it away?

When you have a brain injury with swelling there are signs. Even if the injury evolves over 24 hours, those signs would be noticed.

My mother slipped in the bathtub and hit her head. Over a month later she was taken to the emergency room with bleeding on the brain and a swelling brain. Should they have indicted the Mailman, the last person who saw her? The attorney asked the question for a reason. Not some random question, but a question which is a tell for what is coming when real experts testify.

They are reporting that the court is filled with people with orange shirts on to show support for the infant. If anybody wanted to show support for the infant, they should have demanded that tissue and pathology was gathered and examined by real experts, not treating medical personnel. This color coordinated show of force should have been removed from the court before the jury was brought in........could it be one of those in orange works in the court system.....by golly who knows, but hopefully the jury will not be bullied or fooled.

Verdict in Guilty.... life in prison.



Her attorney claimed the brain bleed and swelling was caused by Brodie's surgeon at Sacred Heart Hospital accidentally severing boundary veins in his brain that would cause that type of injury.


Bull shit

Her attorney claimed the brain bleed and swelling was caused by Brodie's surgeon at Sacred Heart Hospital accidentally severing boundary veins in his brain that would cause that type of injury.



Gosh after T and Bob had horrible experiences with the same brain team, by golly, who would be surprised.

I thought you were joking. Five hours with the courtroom filled with color coordinated orange shirts......yep, I probably will not live long enough to see the appeal, but it will come, and an innocent woman has been convicted of a crime she did not do, but we live and die by the jury system, and in Santa Rosa County that is a rigged game. Thankfully we have appellate courts.

2seaoat wrote:Her attorney claimed the brain bleed and swelling was caused by Brodie's surgeon at Sacred Heart Hospital accidentally severing boundary veins in his brain that would cause that type of injury.



Gosh after T and Bob had horrible experiences with the same brain team, by golly, who would be surprised.

The same Brain Team? You are throwing out a red herring just like the defense. Brodie was attended by a pediatric neurosurgeon at a regional pediatric referral center.

Get the report. Once the skull was opened blood and brain tissue herniated out of the skull.

The family was bankrupted and now I am finding out they could not pay for the experts. What a travesty of justice. No admission. Consistent statements from the beginning. No witness to any crime. A courtroom which allowed color coordinated t shirts, and a rush for judgment. No wealthy person would ever have to face this kind of railroading. No delay for sentencing. Immediate life in prison. Our jury system is the best in the world, but for the working poor it does not always get a just result where the jury is not presented evidence which costs money. Five hours at least showed the Jury reviewed the evidence and it was not a slam dunk. On appeal, I would start with the courtroom. Of course if the defense did not make a motion to clear the court of color coordinated t shirts, the judge sure was not going out of his way to go against the mob who had prejudged this woman.

What about all the experts that dispute shaken baby syndrome exists....no one willing to present evidence without compensation?

Reading comments on news websites....there were other problems in her daycare. Children were removed after being injured, frightened to return and DCF complaints.

That evidence should have been introduced at trial. I am unaware of even one complaint. People after a conviction will spew poison, but where was the evidence introduced into evidence which would be relevant if there was any prior child abuse claim. NONE. However, I am all ears if you can show the same.

Wow! Her defense didn't last very long. It didn't say if she took the stand or anything? Tony Henderson? Remember him. He was the public defender who quit over allegations he was trading sex w/ probationers. He and that other lawyer Jimmy something were accused of sexual stuff and Jimmy wasn't reelected. What websites are making the comments?

Poor people do not get a fair shake in the American justice system. I was told that they had two experts and the husband was working in La to pay the cost. Travesty.

2seaoat wrote:That evidence should have been introduced at trial.  I am unaware of even one complaint.  People after a conviction will spew poison, but where was the evidence introduced into evidence which would be relevant if there was any prior child abuse claim.  NONE.  However, I am all ears if you can show the same.

There were complaints...one father said DCF stated his complaint could not be substantiated....when Bodie was injured he called the State Attorney and told them about his complaint. Another famiky removed their daughter after she fell on a block and required 4 sutures. Several stories like this on the news forum....I can't prove any of this....only the ones involved.

Did you ever entertain the thought she may have snapped and shook the child. It is not easy being the only one caring for a day care full of kids.

Vikingwoman wrote:Wow! Her defense didn't last very long. It didn't say if she took the stand or anything? Tony Henderson? Remember him. He was the public defender who quit over allegations he was trading sex w/ probationers. He and that other lawyer Jimmy something were accused of sexual stuff and Jimmy wasn't reelected.  What websites are making the comments?

WEAR

It was stated she took the stand.

Did you ever entertain the thought she may have snapped and shook the child. It is not easy being the only one caring for a day care full of kids.


Not once. I knew the lady's character and she never gave any inconsistent statements. A guilty person will try one story, and then try another, and try to outsmart investigators. She remained consistent. Just a working poor family which did not get a proper defense because they could not afford the same. I am still greatly bothered by a courtroom full of color coordinated t shirts.

I am appalled how these defense lawyers let her come into court. Her hair was never that greasy and unintended. She was always neatly dressed and professional. The photo in the PNJ is an immediate malpractice against any client who did not get a new outfit and a crisp and clean hair style for a jury trial where your very life depended on your appearance and empathy from the jury. She looked like a meth head frumpy with greasy hair. I cannot believe what has happened to this woman. You do not go to trial with that blouse and hair. It just screams trailer trash, and if the defense cannot do their job, why should the jury give any benefit of the doubt to this poor defendant. Travesty.

There's something just not right about what happened here? The brother supposedly hit him w/ a block? You have to wonder what else the brother did?