|
Citation
|
Narang SK, Sachdev KK, Bertocci KL, Pierre-Wright MJ, Kaczor K, Bertocci G, Pierce MC. Child Abuse Negl. 2022; 127: e105578. |
|
Abstract
|
We thank you for the opportunity to reply to Professor Findley's critique of our study on overturned Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma (SBS/AHT) convictions in the U.S. appellate system, and we thank Professor Findley for his comments.
Professor Findley takes issue with the methodology of our study. In response, we agree with Professor Findley that our study is not representative of "the world" of overturned SBS/AHT convictions. It was never intended to be. The objective of our study was to evaluate prevalence and characteristics of overturned AHT/SBS convictions in the US appeals system. We were express that our analysis was limited to those in the U.S. appellate court system based on the query strategy set forth in our manuscript. And, our primary stated limitation was that the Westlaw database, while appropriate for legal research, is "not exhaustive". We made no claim to catalogue the outcome of every SBS/AHT case based on appellate decisions. Rather, because of exaggerated claims of "hundreds" of false convictions, we sought to provide a more empiric estimate of that prevalence based upon a transparent and repeatable methodology using a sample obtained from Westlaw.
Professor Findley is, of course, correct that some SBS/AHT convictions have been conclusively dispositioned at the trial court level without appellate recordings. Professor Findley cites a handful of these trial court decisions. However, based upon these few citations, Professor Findley generalizes that "many such [SBS/AHT] cases are resolved at the trial court level". Aside from our concerns that this is a hasty generalization, we disagree with Professor Findley that such cases are routinely or more commonly conclusively dispositioned at the trial court level...
Language: en |