The appellant appealed a conviction for assault causing bodily harm arising from multiple fractures suffered by his two-month-old child.
He argued that the trial judge misapprehended the medical and timing evidence and that, at most, the facts supported criminal negligence causing bodily harm because parental implied consent to caregiving force had not been vitiated.
The court rejected both arguments, holding there was evidence supporting the finding that the appellant caused the injuries within the charged period and that the force used was not for legitimate caregiving purposes and was, in any event, clearly excessive.
The court held that implied parental consent is strictly limited to force used for the child's care and within ordinary parental norms.
The conviction was affirmed.
