The questionable convictions in Ontario
in the 1980's and 90's, some of which were were based upon Shaken
Baby Syndrome, and some of which were because of testimony by
now-disgraced pathologist Charles Smith, render Judge Crabtree's
conclusion to the Bayne questionable if not impugnable.
If the Baynes' children should not be
retained in the province of British Columbia foster care system
because the judge dismissed SBS as a cause for one child's injuries,
then there is no reason whatsoever for them to be in care. None
whatsoever.
 |
| In the middle of a circle of cows |
Don't tell me there is a risk. If the law cannot say that the risk is a definite 80%, or 50% or 30% then don't
speak about a probability of risk. Then for Judge Crabtree to
venture a 10% risk probability is fanciful nonsense, deplorable.
