https://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/dec/11/childrensservices.uknewsExpert hired by couple to clear name finds they probably did harm the child
· Parents threatened with losing a six-month-old son
· 'No evidence' of brittle bone disease in fractures
Clare Dyer, legal editor
Mon 11 Dec 2006 00.11 GMT
First published on Mon 11 Dec 2006 00.11 GMT
A couple who claim they were victims of a miscarriage of justice when their three children were taken into care probably inflicted the injuries that prompted social workers to act, according to an expert they briefed in the hope of clearing their names. Mark and Nicola Webster were given permission last August to instruct a consultant paediatric radiologist to take a new look at the x-rays of their son, who suffered fractures to both arms, both legs, and a rib. He and his younger brother and older sister were taken into care after a court found that one or both parents had caused the broken bones. The couple, who are now threatened with losing their fourth child, six-month-old Brandon, are fighting to prove their innocence, although they know their other three children, named only as A, B and C, will not be returned to them. The Websters made legal history last month when their application, supported by the media, to have their case heard in open court was granted by a high court judge, Mr. Justice Munby. Previous high court care cases have been heard anonymously behind closed doors. But now, in a further judgment, the judge has revealed that the couple's own expert, the consultant paediatric radiologist, named only as Dr L, has produced a report with "clear and unequivocal" conclusions which are damning for them. The couple, from Cromer, Norfolk, had suggested alternative explanations for the fractures such as brittle bone disease, of which the mother has a family history, though she is not herself a carrier. Another suggestion was that the boy's four-year-old sister might have injured her brother, then nearly two. But the report says: "The fractures in this child are of the 'classic metaphyseal lesion' type and are highly specific injuries for inflicted injury. The number and distribution of fractures suggest all the child's limbs were forcibly twisted on one or more occasions with enough force to cause the fractures. The degree of force is inconsistent with normal handling. The degree of force identified to cause these injuries is described as such that an observer would be clear that an assault had occurred. It is my opinion that a four-year-old would have insufficient strength to inflict these injuries. These fractures suggest that he had been injured by one or more episodes of forcible twisting of the limbs and compression of the chest. There is no evidence to suggest that
suffered from an underlying bone condition that would predispose him to fractures of the kind found. It is my opinion on the balance of probabilities that one or other of the parents inflicted these injuries."
The couple is now pinning their hopes on the report of a California-based paediatrician specialising in child protection whom Mr Justice Munby gave permission for them to consult last month. His brief is to look at B's injuries and any link with brittle bone disease. The Websters fled to Ireland before Brandon was born when Norfolk county council threatened to take him into care, then returned to England under pressure from social workers. Their claims of a miscarriage of justice received huge media coverage under Mrs Webster's maiden name of Hardingham. They were allowed to take Brandon home under supervision last month after spending five months caring for him in an assessment centre, where they were closely watched. The high court will decide next June whether they will be allowed to keep him or whether he too will be adopted.
