The Science and Law Underlying Post-Conviction Challenges to Shaken Baby Syndrome Convictions: A Response to Professor Imwinkelried

Abstract

We take the opportunity presented by a new article by Professor Edward Imwinkelried to respond to his use of shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma (SBS/AHT) cases as an example for his discussion of the appropriate standards for seeking new trials based on shifting scientific evidence. We explain how Professor Iwinkelried’s analysis overlooks the true nature of the medical-scientific debates in SBS/AHT cases; the import of the expert evidence in such cases; the various legal issues that can arise related to the expert testimony in such cases; and ultimately, therefore, the significance of newly recognized controversies in the medico-legal hypotheses underlying expert testimony in such cases.

Keywords: Postconviction review, SBS/AHT, shaken baby syndrome, abusive head trauma, newly discovered evidence, shifted science, flawed forensic science