A medical expert has told a court the baby at the centre of a high-profile child-abuse case did not have bone fragility.
A prominent sportsman, who has interim name suppression, is accused of causing the infant’s 13 rib fractures and broken collarbone during a brief window while the child’s mother was at the gym in July 2023.
He has pleaded not guilty to injuring with reckless disregard, and an alternative charge of assault, and the mother of the infant told the Dunedin District Court earlier this week she was certain the man was incapable of such abuse.
Counsel Anne Stevens, KC, told the jury there were other viable explanations for the baby’s injuries, including a severe vitamin-D deficiency.
But yesterday Prof Stephen Robertson, a genetics expert, said that did not explain the fractures.
He conducted genetic testing which, to a "very high level of likelihood", ruled out a bone-fragility disorder as the cause of the breaks.
In cross-examination, Mrs Stevens asked whether there remained a possibility, even slight.
Prof Robertson, though, had never seen such a case during his practice or in the medical literature which was attributable to bone fragility.
"The amount of doubt that remains is trivial," he said.
He told the court a full skeletal scan of the child showed no issue with the size or shape of his bones which could lead to a particular diagnosis.
A paediatrician, whose name was suppressed, accepted the baby had significant vitamin-D deficiency but said that was common for infants born in Dunedin.
She agreed the low levels could affect bone strength, but stood by the conclusion she and her colleagues formed, that the injuries had been caused by "significant trauma".
The clinician was reluctant to speculate on how the breaks could have been caused, but only said the force required would have exceeded that involved in day-to-day handling.
"Ribs don’t spontaneously fracture, there has to be something that causes them to fracture," she said.
Mrs Stevens asked the witness whether the boy’s injuries could have been caused by the mother rolling on to him while co-sleeping.
While "theoretically possible", she said it would be unlikely to occur on a soft surface and it would be more likely the child would suffocate.
The crushing-during-sleep theory was first suggested to the infant’s mother by a fracture specialist during their conversations in the weeks following the discovery of the bone breaks.
The pair knew each other from previous medical dealings and the surgeon — who also has name suppression — told the court he felt sorry for the distressed woman when she approached him looking for answers.
They shared emails discussing the case and an intercepted phone call between the duo was played in court in which he raised the possibility of her crushing the baby in her sleep.
The surgeon later wrote a reference for the mother.
In court yesterday, he admitted he had no clinical experience of rib fractures being caused in such a scenario, nor had he read medical literature addressing the point.
Crown prosecutor Robin Bates asked the witness how he now felt about giving his input on the matter.
"That’s a difficult question because clearly that suggestion created a lot of trouble for me.
"I’d have to say I regret that now, but at the time I thought it was a reasonable thing to do," he said.
The clinician said in a police statement: "I had good intentions and was not trying to undermine any investigation."
The trial continues next week.
