Man convicted of killing Worthing baby (From The Argus)

Word of the day is ATAVIST. If you are unsure what this noun means, just look at this lovely child killer.

Those present at this Trial will know this young man maintains that the baby was 'choking' (blue) and tried to revive her.
What would you do? Head injuries DID occur - but while Baby C was in the care of OTHERS. They know who they are.
A Police Statement was made of a fall from a bed to the hard floor one week before. NO MEDICAL ASSESSMENT was sought. The day before ANOTHER head injury took place.
EDWARDS was not aware when he took care of the Baby of these injuries.
Justice has NOT been served.

However, the Expert Medical Evidence

ifgoldshallrust wrote:
Those present at this Trial will know this young man maintains that the baby was 'choking' (blue) and tried to revive her.
What would you do? Head injuries DID occur - but while Baby C was in the care of OTHERS. They know who they are.
A Police Statement was made of a fall from a bed to the hard floor one week before. NO MEDICAL ASSESSMENT was sought. The day before ANOTHER head injury took place.
EDWARDS was not aware when he took care of the Baby of these injuries.
Justice has NOT been served.

However, the Expert Medical Evidence

do you mean he didn't do it? court and jury believe he did, so justice has been done. if his story was credible, then he would be a free man, but he isn't, so there must have been an element which just didn't ring true. he will, no doubt, be 'well looked after' in prison.

The Jury made a decision on the evidence PRESENTED. Edwards has always said he 'shook' trying to revive the baby from choking. The Prosecution case relied wholly on the Expert Medical evidence that there were SEVERE internal head injuries. NB there were NO external bruises which occur with violent "shaking". The internal injuries could only be discovered post mortem. Sussex Police therefore NEVER investigated those that were responsible for (1) feeding the baby with beer (2) not taking the baby to Hospital after it lay concussed from falling from the bed (3) telling the Mother of the fall. One person present was SO concerned she went to the Police and made a Statement. THAT statement was not produced at Trail. Sussex Police should now INTERVIEW these people who were probably responsible for the main Head injury to that baby.

i DONT get YOUR use OF capitals, WHY are YOu doing IT?

ifgoldshallrust wrote:
The Jury made a decision on the evidence PRESENTED. Edwards has always said he 'shook' trying to revive the baby from choking. The Prosecution case relied wholly on the Expert Medical evidence that there were SEVERE internal head injuries. NB there were NO external bruises which occur with violent "shaking". The internal injuries could only be discovered post mortem. Sussex Police therefore NEVER investigated those that were responsible for (1) feeding the baby with beer (2) not taking the baby to Hospital after it lay concussed from falling from the bed (3) telling the Mother of the fall. One person present was SO concerned she went to the Police and made a Statement. THAT statement was not produced at Trail. Sussex Police should now INTERVIEW these people who were probably responsible for the main Head injury to that baby.

Just a question here sunshine. If YOU know all these facts, why didn't YOU go to the police? I don't know whether this bloke is guilty or not, it's a strange one alright but YOU seem to be the one that holds the key to what YOU claim. If this bloke appeals, which if we are to listen to YOU he will, then that's YOUR chance to stand up and be counted.

Mr. Punch: Having sat through the Trial it became apparent that the Police having Edwards arrested two hours following the CPR machines being turned off did not look for anyone else in this tragic case.
When the post mortem results - showing "severe" internal head injuries became available in December 2011 Police protocols were followed and Edwards was arrested, charged with the 'Murder of Baby C' and he was detained in Lewes prison (248 days).

A 'scenario' had to be made by the Police and CPS to 'fit' the Head injuries to the only person present at the time. AND Edwards admitted shaking the baby (to revive her). Job done. EXCEPT a probable source for the massive internal injuries was the fall (reported to Police & 'The Argus') one less than 7 days earlier when others were present - failed to take the Baby to the Hospital - NOR told the mother of the incident. Alcohol was also administered to Baby C as was admitted in Court by one of those present at the event.
And so WHY haven't Sussex Police interviewed those people present - or have they done so? In other cases of SBS because the Medical Evidence is always post mortem the exact timing of an injury to a fatal event is contentious.
Was there an injury that Edwards 'shaking' created a re-bleed. The Medical Evidence perhaps should be tested again WITH the FALL and concussion within the framework.
This was a loving family before and after the tragic event. Neither said a bad word against the other through out: it was NOT in Edwards character to be violent. That Edwards MUST HAVE lost his temper momentarily was the basis for the head injuries caused and the scenario the Jury accepted.
Sussex Police should now review their Evidence to see WHAT was reported from the Fall where allegedly Baby C lay concussed on the floor without anyone noticing. An Independent Press can ask these questions to prevent an innocent man's life being spent in Prison unjustly. Edwards accepted he was responsible: Ignorant (of CPR), Negligent (for Prop Feeding bottle to swaddled baby) and Responsible. But he denies causing ANY head injury to a Baby he cared for. Many believe him