Why feature this case? It’s one of the earliest known acquittals. The judge himself advised the defendant to file for damages. She did, but doctors fought back, saying they needed immunity from civil suits in order to protect children. An appellate court set precedent by granting doctors absolute immunity.
The baby’s 26-year-old mother, Carol Phinney said she put her 30-month-old son, Travis, in the bathtub and returned a few minutes later to find him face down in 3” of water. After a month unconscious on a respirator, he died. The original manner of death was accidental but it was changed to homicide four months later without explanation. Doctors said swelling on the right side of the head had been caused by a non-accidental blow to the head, violent shaking or a substantial fall. Murder and felony child endangerment charges were filed. The mother passed a polygraph.
At a multi-day preliminary hearing, the defense attorney grilled the forensic pathologist about how heavily his independent assessments were influenced by Drs. David Chadwick and Bradley Peterson. Four months after the autopsy, the coroner wrote that the swelling would have required a fall of more than five feet or a head-on car collision at up to 35 miles per. He denied that he had been influenced by other doctors.
The mother took the stand at the preliminary hearing and testified that she did nothing to hurt the baby. A forensic pathologist who had recently quit his job at the coroner’s office testified that the coroner used only certain pathologists for child autopsies and the death should have been ruled “accidental.” The child could have had a seizure or fallen and hit his head on the tub.
The judge dropped the murder charge but found probable cause for felony child abuse because the child had been left unattended. The defense attorney complained that the investigators demanded that “the mother explain something she was unable to explain.” When she said she didn’t know what happened, “she became the victim of an inquisition mentality.”
At trial, the mother was acquitted of child abuse. The judge told her he found it “disgraceful” that she had even been charged. “You were the victim of too many people who wanted to cover their own hides,” he said. “I think this is a case that cries out for civil action.” The mother commented, “I’ve always believed in child-protection agencies. In cases like this, who protects the parents? This tore my family apart.”
According to the defense attorney, the entire investigation was “based on assumption, inference and speculation.” It started after an “overzealous” child protection worker filed a suspected child abuse report with police. “When you file a report like that…it’s like dropping blood in a handful of sharks,” the defense attorney said.
The defendant’s father said, “The child abuse laws are being abused. It’s like putting a gun in the hands of a kid.”
After the murder charge was dismissed, the defendant’s attorney filed a civil suit for $1.1 million dollars against the county, the coroner’s office and the doctors who determined the cause of death, claiming that their inadequate investigation caused her to be wrongly charged with murder. Slander and libel were alleged. The practice of the coroner allowing hospital doctors to conduct autopsies of their own patients represented a conflict of interest.
There was concern that a civil award might frighten physicians into silence. “Unless the physicians have absolute immunity, there would be a chilling effect on reporting,” argued Dr. David Chadwick’s attorney.
The Fourth District Court of Appeals ruled that the State’s interest in uncovering child abuse outweighs any harm done by improper reports, ending the civil suit. This case set precedent. Doctors have absolute immunity when they accuse people of abusing children.