 |
 |
 |
 |
Third trial decision for shaken baby case delayed
Prosecution wants more time to review evidence, jury comments
Veronica Martinez Salcedo
|
The decision as to whether a nanny accused of fatally injuring a 15-month-old girl will go to a third trial has been postponed until late July.
Thursday morning criminal defense attorney Mary Beth Acton filed a motion to dismiss the case against Veronica Martinez Salcedo.
Salcedo is charged with assault causing the death of a child in the May 2006 death of toddler Hannah Rose Juceam. The prosecution contends that Hannah died as a result of brain injuries caused when Salcedo shook the toddler. The defense argued that a virus, and ultimately a stroke, caused Hannah’s death.
Deputy District Attorney Jeff Wood said the prosecution would like additional time to question witnesses the defense used in the second trial. Wood said there is not necessarily new evidence to present to the court but rather a different interpretation of the evidence.
Acton argued on Thursday to Judge Robert McElhany that the case should be dismissed because she believes there is no new evidence that the people can bring to the court. Additionally, she said, medical experts do not agree on symptoms surrounding shaken baby syndrome. She said in the second trial the defense proved that Hannah’s death was a result of blood clots, among other medical issues not relating to injuries resulting from being shook too hard.
She said an additional trial would cause harassment to her client and the court has already incurred “incredible” expense and time on the matter.
Wood countered that Acton’s motion dismissal was “premature.” He argued that given the length of time spent on the case — two trials in two years — allowing an additional three weeks to review evidence was not a large request.
He said the prosecution would like to review the evidence before deciding whether or not to retry Salcedo.
He said they are considering testimony jurors gave after the second trial ended with a jury deadlocked at 9-3 in favor of acquittal. Wood said jury members informed the district attorney that the actual vote was 7-5 in favor of acquittal.
“I do not believe the evidence in this case is indicative of Ms. Salcedo’s innocence,” Wood told the judge.
He countered Acton’s argument that medical experts disagree about symptoms relating to shaken baby syndrome. He said those who believe there is debate are in the minority of the medical community.
He added that any trial poses a burden to all those involved and said cost should not be an issue.
“To even suggest that we have to decide based on cost is totally a slap to the face of justice,” Wood said.
He argued the additional weeks to allow the defense review time was not harassment to Salcedo.
At the conclusion of arguments, McElhany decided to grant the additional weeks of review.
Outside of the courtroom Thursday afternoon, Wood said he would not comment further as it was a pending case.
Acton said some of the prosecution’s comments “surprised” her. She asserted that Hannah’s injuries were the result of several other medical issues, not shaken baby syndrome injuries.
She said the cost of the trial is mostly based on paying experts — who she contended couldn’t agree.
“If the medical community can’t agree, how can 12 people?” Acton asked.
McElhany set a ruling for 8:30 a.m. July 28 in Dept. 13.
The Journal’s Jenifer Gee can be reached at jeniferg@goldcountrymedia.com or post a comment.
Veronica Martinez Salcedo, shaken baby syndrome, Hannah Rose Juceam, Mary Beth Acton, Jeff Wood
Not registered? Click here
|
Share this
|
For years parents of SIDS babies where accused of wrongdoing when they found their babies lifeless. There are so many unknowns.
Not meaning to refer to this specific case. How long does death occur after the alleged shaking episode. I have wondered if it is possible that the mommy or daddy can shake a baby and then leave for work only to have the child experience symptoms while in the care of a sitter.
THREE TRIALS. How many times is a person allowed to be tried? I wonder what the record is?
A third trial would be a total waste of taxpayer's money. Twice now the Placer County District Attorney's office has failed to win a conviction. They either have a weak case or they lack the staff to successfully prosecute this case.
I did not follow the second trial but attended most of the first trial and there is no way I would have voted to convict this lady.
Another thing, the more I see, hear or read about the family the more I believe that they are trying to prosecute the wrong person.
Let her go, she's had enough pain due to the D.A.'s incompetence. If the decision is made to prosecute a third time I would suggest that just like they did with the Garcia trial that they seek the assistance of the County of Sacramento's D.A. Office, maybe then they may win a conviction and if they still can't maybe it's time to let the lady go free and for the District Attorney not to seek another term.
loomisresident: I agree, except I doubt any incompetence on the part of the DA. Combine murky facts, bizarre behavior by the victim, excellent defense counsel, and a conscientious judge and jury and the result is reasonable doubt. As for the DA seeking another term, he won't. Bet on Scotty Owens to run unopposed when Fennochio's term is up.
Bizarre behavior by the victim? The victim can not behave in any way bizarre or otherwise because she was an innocent little baby is dead. Retry her? Of course retry her she's a baby killer. Maybe they can get some smart people on the jury this time... Not because it's what I believe but because the nanny confessed and showed them how she shook that beautiful little baby. Try and convict her. Let prison justice then take over.
Mimmi_1125, each successive trial has leaned more towards innocent. If there is a 3rd trial, hopefully, the circle will be complete & they'll aquit & have it over with. I doubt if Jeff Woods will be up for Prosecuter of the Year Award this year.
"INCOMPETENT ARROGANCE !!!!! The Placer County DA has had 2 years to prepare this case for trial. The first trial they used the local inexperienced doctors to testify.(the ER doctor stated he had never seen a shaken baby case) The second trial they tried to get around the local doctors because they didn't say what the DA wanted so several of the local doctors were not called to testify. The DA then brought in "experts" some quack from Arizona. Another hung jury with the DA saying that he had a "stronger" case.(check channel 10 video blog) Surely the DA is smarter than that. I belevie the DA is trying to appease the parents and save face. Now the DA contradicts the Jury 9-3(AGAIN CHECK CHANNEL 10 VIDEO BLOG) verdict that is in the court record. What planet are Brad Fennochio, Jeff Wood and Scott Owens living on??? My answer, is the planet "incompetant arrogance"
Resonse to bluebird, you are right about SIDS, many researchers are now connecting SIDs to all kinds of pre-existing medical conditions. With each new step in technology medicine advances, and thank goodness, otherwise we would still be using leaches. In this case, doctors for both the prosecution(neuro surgeon from UCD and neuroradiologist Sutter Memorial and for the defense a pediatric neuroradiologistsfrom Stanford, a pediatric stroke specialist from UCSF, and a nuero pathologists stated that Hannah's brain swelling and old blood clots (microfasia) occuired 3-5 days before she presented to Sutter Roseville. Testimony from the mother states that Hannah had awoke 3 nights before "screaming hysterically, which shhe has never done before". It all fits,End of story, Placer DA, Brad Fennochio, Scott Owens and Jeff Woods, let it go and move on. I saw two jurors on Channel 10 blog this morning say the DA "has no case and no chance of a conviction" move on. This is beggining to stink.
Placer county DA's office is full of coruption, They don't have enuff real crime in auburn, and there are way too many prosecutors, So if they get anything they make it into a crime. I understand already a million dollars spent, I hope we get another DA and it won't be soon enuff. If this had been a citizen, she would have been found guilty at first trial. WHITE GUILT