2 total
Accused acquitted of aggravated assault on infant son due to reasonable doubt from competing medical evidence.
The accused was charged with aggravated assault following the hospitalization of his two-month-old son with severe injuries, including multiple bone fractures and brain trauma.
The Crown relied on expert medical evidence to argue the injuries were inflicted by intentional force.
The defence presented competing expert testimony suggesting the injuries could have resulted from a stroke, infection, and metabolic bone disease.
The court found the defence experts raised a reasonable doubt regarding the cause of the injuries and acquitted the accused.
Manslaughter conviction in shaken baby case upheld; fresh expert evidence rejected and jury instructions deemed adequate.
The appellant was convicted of manslaughter in the death of his infant daughter, who died from extensive intracranial bleeding.
The Crown alleged the death was caused by severe shaking, supported by extensive expert medical testimony.
The appellant appealed, seeking to introduce fresh expert evidence from a forensic neuropathologist and arguing the trial judge erred in refusing an adjournment, admitting certain expert evidence, and instructing the jury on reasonable doubt and conflicting medical evidence.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in refusing the adjournment, the fresh evidence did not meet the Palmer criteria, and the jury instructions adequately conveyed the necessary legal principles.