Defense expert doubts shaken baby abuse claims

PALMER — Whatever else it is, the trial of Michael Ponte and Shannon Silook is, in at least some ways, a battle of diagnoses.

Over the past week the jury has heard from doctors convinced there was no way Silook’s 3-year-old daughter could have shown up to the emergency room in November 2009 with those injuries if someone hadn’t been abusing her.

She had all the classic signs of abuse.

And those brain injuries? There’s no way she could have gotten those by accident unless it was some kind of dramatic, 70-mph crash into an unyielding object. Which was not the case.

Abuse was the conclusion of Dr. Roderick Smith, the only Pediatric Neurologist in Alaska who testified two weeks ago.

But Monday, the jury heard from Dr. Janice Ophoven, an expert in child forensic pathology that defense attorneys hired to review the girl’s case and give her opinions.

Ophoven said that a lot of what the jury had already heard was simply incorrect.

“Short falls” including falling from no higher than a standing position can cause traumatic brain injuries in young children.

“If you look at what causes traumatic brain injuries in children this age it’s falls 10 times more often than anything else,” she said.

In her opinion, Ophoven said, doctors who did the initial diagnosis were relying on what’s known in the child abuse field as the classic trinity of symptoms for shaken baby injuries.

Yes, she said, Silook’s 3-year-old daughter did have hemorrhaging in her eyes, a subdural hematoma and a swollen brain.

But, she said, while for years those three symptoms had been accepted to be telltale signs of abuse, more recent medical research seemed to indicate otherwise.

It might very well be that this child’s injuries came from a fall. And since she had no other signs of abuse — no bruising, no abrasions — Ophoven concluded that a fall was the most likely explanation.

She pointed out that earlier that year the child had been to the emergency room with a swollen brain. The literature on brain injuries indicates that after one traumatic brain injury a child is at a much higher risk for a second such injury.

And, she pointed out, prior to the November hospitalization the child had been out sledding, an activity she said that could easily have caused the symptoms observed at the hospital, especially in a vulnerable child.

But, defense attorney Greg Parvin asked, what about that broken clavicle? Isn’t that a sign of abuse?

No, Ophoven said. That’s a pretty common injury for kids and usually comes from a fall onto an outstretched hand. The injuries often go unnoticed in children.

“My 2-year-old nephew had a fractured clavicle that was discovered at his 2-year check-up,” she testified.

But, defense attorney Jon-Marc Petersen asked, what about the child’s interview with investigators where she testified to being held underwater?

No, Ophoven said. That kind of oxygen deprivation and drowning would cause a whole different constellation of symptoms.

“Multiple doctors testified that they thought this was suggestive of this type of event,” Petersen said. “Why would they say that?”

“If they don’t believe a short fall can cause this kind of injury then they would never see one,” Ophoven testified. “What they’re saying doesn’t make sense scientifically.”

Contact reporter Andrew Wellner at andrew.wellner@frontiersman.com or 352-2270.