A father who has severely injured his toddler to 8 weeks and to then try to put the blame on his cat, will have to serve two years less a day in jail, ruled the Court of appeal this week.
“What strikes and offends the spirit is the very young age of the victim. Any person knows or ought to know, the extreme vulnerability of a young baby, ” had commented the judge, André Vincent, when he had condemned the father now, at the age of 35 years.
The accused, a resident of Acton Vale, that we cannot name to protect the identity of his toddler, had committed his crime in July 2014. At the time, it was he who had the responsibility of taking care of the baby, who woke up in the night.
“By impatience, frustration or anger, it took strongly the child to stop his crying, told the judge.
Shortly after, seeing that the child was wrong, the father and the mother were brought to the hospital.
Fault in the cat
During the examination, the doctors quickly noticed that the small could suffer from shaken baby syndrome. The police has been called, and the parents of the child have been met.
“[The father] will submit a few ideas to investigators [ … ] said the Court of appeal. It suggests that the sister of the victim, aged 20 months could have hurt the child in playing with him, or even that the cat is present in the apartment would have been the cause of the injury. “
Seeing that investigators were far from convinced, he then mentioned, ” may have shaken the child while sleeping “. Then, during the trial, he wanted to raise the reasonable doubt by arguing that the mother could have been responsible for the crime.
The apology of the father have not been heard so that a jury has found him guilty of aggravated assault.
“Abuse of strength with respect to a child is an act against nature, and this, surely, is not the frustration or the tiredness that can justify it “, said the judge.
Dissatisfied, the father appealed, on the grounds that his statements to the police had to be discarded, or that the judge had committed errors.
Except that it was not, ruled the Court of appeal this week in rejecting the application. Because no offense to the father, he has freely consented to talk to the police, recalled the judges.
“[The investigators] reported [the father] that he was free to leave or respond to their questions, is it stated in the judgment. During breaks, he was otherwise free to go where he wished. In addition, it appears from the evidence that investigators have by no means created an atmosphere intimidating, or oppressive. “
The judges ordered that the accused person is a prisoner. He had until Thursday to comply.