The accused was charged with assaulting her 8-year-old son with a metal rod between May 8 and May 14, 2016.
The Crown's case relied primarily on the child's testimony, expert medical evidence regarding the nature of the injuries, and the father's account of the child's disclosure.
The child's evidence was fraught with inconsistencies, exaggerations, and fabrications regarding various incidents and allegations.
The medical expert testified that the linear bruising pattern was highly suspicious for inflicted injury and inconsistent with a bicycle accident.
The accused testified that the injuries resulted from the child falling off a bicycle with a loose helmet.
The court found that while someone had clearly beaten the child with a linear object, the child's testimony was so unreliable and inconsistent that the Crown had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was the perpetrator.
The accused was acquitted.
