A north Co Antrim couple have gone on trial accused of inflicting multiple fractures to an infant, who was close to death.
The Newry Crown Court jury heard today that when the "very young child" was admitted to the Royal Belfast Hospital for Sick Children, doctors found that he had sustained a fractured skull, associated bleeding on his brain and retinas, a laceration to his liver, almost 30 fractures to his ribs and two fractures to each of his legs.
On trial jointly charged with four offences are 35-year-old Amanda Fulton and her husband 35-year-old Christopher Fulton.
The couple, from Rockfield Gardens in Mosside near Ballymoney, are accused of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, causing or allowing the young child to suffer significant physical harm and a charge of child cruelty in that they allegedly willfully neglected the young child in a manner likely to cause him suffering, which is alleged to have been committed on dates between 5 - 8 November 2019.
The couple face a further allegation of child cruelty but this final charge is alleged to have been committed between 17 October and 2 November and before Crown counsel opened their case.
Trial Judge Peter Irvine KC emphasised to the jury that despite the emotive nature of the charges and the evidence they will hear, they had to set aside any feelings of sympathy or prejudice.
"Such feelings or emotions will not assist you in deciding this case," the judge told them, adding that they should assess the evidence in a "cool and calm way".
Opening the trial, prosecuting KC Toby Hedworth told the jury the case is that the child was subjected to significant blunt force trauma whether by a punch or potentially being thrown or dropped onto a hard surface or shaking that was violent enough to cause fractures or compression with sufficient force that would fracture multiple ribs.
The senior barrister explained how the prosecution believes one or other of the defendants inflicted the injuries at a time and place when their co-accused was "in close proximity" and would have known the infant was being harmed yet did nothing to intervene.
Turning to the background of the case, Mr Hepworth told the jury and judge about Mr Fulton's phonecall to his GP surgery just after 1pm on 7 November to report how the infant "had a raw throat and was not drinking his bottles".
They saw the doctor at 4:10pm that afternoon and the GP noted the child was not responding to physical stimuli and his pupils were not reacting the way they should.
Mr Hepworth said "the doctor suspected a possibly serious head injury" and contacted 999 himself to arrange an ambulance.
The jury heard that initially, the child was taken to the Causeway Hospital, but when doctors there discovered that he had a fractured skull and bleeding on his brain, the child was transferred to the intensive care unit at the children’s hospital.
Mr Hepworth told the jury that "further medical investigations revealed that he had sustained a catalogue of injuries" which, he said, included a fractured skull with associated bleeding to the brain and retinal bleeding, 27 rib fractures, fractures to both thigh bones, fractures to both shin bones, a fractured wrist and laceration to his liver.
Surgeons removed part of his skull to relieve the pressure, and the jury heard that "he was deemed to be gravely unwell and there was a fear that he would not survive".
Mr Hedworth told the court that as the case develops over the next month, there will be evidence from a consultant paediatric radiologist and a neurosurgeon as to the timings of the injuries, how they could have been sustained and how the victim would have presented.
According to the radiologist, "her view is that the fractures to the ribcage were caused on at least two different occasions as some of them had evidence of healing," the barrister said.
He said that she also opined that the liver laceration was likely to have occurred in the few days before the victim was admitted to hospital but that the skull fracture and some of the rib fractures were the most recent injuries to have been inflicted.
The jury heard that while all of the injuries "could have been caused accidentally" or have an innocent explanation such as the child being dropped or an adult falling onto the child, "neither Mr nor Mrs Fulton have given any explanation for how any of these injuries could have been sustained".
"At no stage when questioned by nurses, doctors or police officers has either defendant referred to a single incident that could have accounted for these significant injuries," Mr Hedworth told the jury.
The pair told nurses and detectives that the young child took his normal bottle at midnight before he was put down to sleep and that he had slept normally until around 4am, when he was "fidgeting" and although he refused another feed, he went to back to sleep.
They claimed he slept until 7am when he began "fidgeting" again, that he was awake, his eyes were open and he was moving his arms and legs before he went back to sleep.
But they further claimed that by 10am when he next woke up, the infant "appeared sleepy" so they contacted the GP.
"There was no reference to any incident or accident that would have resulted in a skull fracture, a brain injury, a laceration to the liver or any other fractures," the Crown counsel told the jury.
Mr Hedworth outlined how an examination of Mr Fulton’s phone established that at around 1:30am to 1.45am, he was searching the internet for "what calms a raw throat in a baby".
But, he said, neither defendant told police about those internet searches and during "extensive police interviews … both denied causing the injuries".
They claimed that at 10am "he looked completely different" and they "knew there was something badly wrong", so it was at that stage they contacted the doctor.
But Mr Hedworth said it was another three hours before Mr Fulton phoned the GP surgery.
Claiming that it was clear the defendants were "telling lies" about how the victim was injured, how he was behaving and how he was sleeping, the barrister told the jury the prosecution believes the child was injured "at some stage" between his midnight feed and the morning time.
With the defendants each accepting they "were never far away," he submitted to the jury that one of them must have inflicted the injuries and that as the "non-assailant" was close by, they must have known the child was being hurt yet did nothing to intervene or help.
According to expert evidence, the brain injury was such that "he would have been in a coma, would not have been functioning normally and it would have been obvious that something was wrong," Mr Hedworth said.
He suggested the brain scans were supportive of the victim having suffered a shaking injury because he was unable to support his own head so the brain "impacts inside the wall of the skull causing injury".
Similarly, the fractures to his limbs could have been caused by shaking as his legs "would have been flailing" or they could have been caused "by pulling or pulling and twisting".
It is the prosecution case, he told the jury, that the child was deliberately struck or impacted on a hard surface and that "in the absences of any explanation put forward by the defendants, it is our case the injuries were caused either by direct blow or by significant compression".
The trial, set to last up to four weeks, continues.
