Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma: Wrongful Conviction Risks, Mis-information Effects, and Psychological Consultation

ABSTRACT

Psychologists as experts may be engaged in criminal or family court cases involving Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma (SBS/AHT). There are unsettled questions within medical specialties regarding the diagnosis of SBS/AHT, as well as the mechanisms and timing of injuries. Psychologists need to be cautious about providing testimony based on findings from disciplines other than psychology. Forensic psychological consultation in SBS/AHT can be informed by the record of exoneration in these cases. Also, psychological research on processes in wrongful conviction such as the “mis-information effect” and forensic “confirmation bias” can inform such consultation and testimony.

KEYWORDS:

• Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma
• wrongful conviction
• psychological testimony
• mis-information effects
• forensic confirmation bias

Acknowledgments

Portions of this manuscript were presented (8/15/18) as “Confession Evidence: Shaken Baby Syndrome, Abusive Head Trauma, & Unexplained Injuries to Children”, at the New Jersey Office of the Public Defender, Continuing Legal Education Program - New Jersey Forensic Science Center in Hamilton, New Jersey. The authors thank attorneys, Theresa Owens and Robyn Veasey, for inviting the presentation. The authors also thank Dr. Monique Swift for inviting the presentation titled, “False Confession in Child Abuse” at the (4/20/19) New Jersey, Association of Black Psychologists Meeting at The College of St. Elizabeth in Morris Township, New Jersey where portions of the manuscript were also presented. In addition, the authors appreciate the commentary on a draft of the manuscript provided by Mark S. Johnson, MD, MPH as well as Patricia Morgan, MD.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

¹ Documents from the 2013 case consultation are on file with the first author. It is not known whether the psychologist requested to see defense medical reports.

² Much earlier Caffey (1946) had described abused infants with subdural hematomas and intraocular (retinal) bleeding.

³ There may be a dispute regarding whether a defendant’s statement actually amounted to a “confession” or was merely interpreted to be an incriminating admission by the prosecution.

⁴ See the RaShawn Greer SBS prosecution where the gruesome nature of trial evidence was an element in the conviction reversal and Greer was acquitted on re-trial (“RaShawn Greer” – National Registry of Exonerations, n.d.).

⁵ Often exacerbated by plea negotiations in the context of severe penalties.

⁶ Though certainly with adequate training a psychologist could be an expert in medical aspects of SBS/AHT (American Psychological Association, n.d.).