tapnewswire,com
More and more innocent men and women are being falsely accused
of committing shaken baby syndrome and later jailed for murder after a
vaccine injury has occurred.
Unfortunately, an alarming number of
medical and law enforcement professionals are quick to accuse
caregivers of shaking their infants so hard that they have caused them
to suffer from shaken baby syndrome
(SBS), defined by a triad of serious
brain injuries that can also be attributed to vaccine adverse
reactions.
Medical professionals are quick to dismiss adverse
reactions to recently administered vaccinations, or never consider them
to begin with, while parents and caregivers are automatically assumed to
be guilty of horrendous abuse, including the murder of young children.
However, if these children have been shaken so violently that it has
caused them to suffer extensive brain injuries, then why have so many
suffered no external injuries as a result of their assault?
We
need to ask ourselves whether just shaking alone can cause these
injuries or if there are alternative explanations as to why these
injuries occur.
Darryl Elliott is one of many caregivers serving a life sentence for a crime that he did not commit.
A Brief Synopsis of Darryl’s Story
Amelia
Bowmar was a healthy, happy, mischievous toddler, until she received
her MMR vaccination in May 2012. Within days, her caregiver, Mr.
Elliott, noticed a lump on the back of Amelia’s head. The lump was
obviously causing the little girl some discomfort, so when her mother
(who wishes to remain anonymous) returned home from work, they took her
to the local hospital.
When asked how she was injured, Mr.
Elliott was unable to account for the lump, but thought that the
family’s puppy may have knocked over Amelia. Later, it appeared that the
injury might have occurred when she had banged her head on a coffee
table while having her diaper changed at her grandma’s house.
“Blame the Parent” Theory
While
Amelia was in the hospital, the doctor noticed that she had a small
bruise on the back of her calf and the doctor contacted social services
because he believed that the bruise was a human bite mark.
Social services decided to place the couple’s two children in the care of their grandparents, pending further investigation.
After
a full investigation, the allegation that she had been bitten was
unproven and social services returned both of the children.
However, everything suddenly changed two months later, when, after being “off color” all day, Amelia began vomiting.
Mr.
Elliott informed us that to make Amelia more comfortable, he had
decided to bathe her, and as he lifted her out of the bath, she slipped
and banged her head, swallowing some water before bringing it back up.
After drying and comforting Amelia, he checked her over and noticed no
signs of head trauma.
However, around twenty minutes later, everything changed, he said:
“Around
20 minutes later I left her on a sofa (40cm) left the room briefly to
fetch her a drink and returned to find her on the floor facing the
ceiling. I picked her up and she curled into a c shape position. I
turned her round to face me, tipped her head forward where I saw her
eyes rolling to the back of her head and she looked like she gasping for
air. I panicked and shook her about 6 times then called 999.”
Sadly,
Amelia never regained consciousness and later died in the hospital of
what medical professionals diagnosed as severe head trauma and
pneumonia. Amelia was said to have suffered no back or neck injuries and
reports do not identify that she suffered from any external injury
whatsoever. Despite this fact, however, Mr. Elliott was accused of
shaking the little girl so hard that he caused her brain to bleed and
swell and was later charged with her murder.
Falsely Imprisoned for Murder
Try
to imagine what it is like sitting in a jail cell for up to 23 hours a
day, for a crime you did not commit. Sadly, this is the reality for more
and more innocent parents and carers like Mr. Elliott.
In a bid
to have this case reopened and the facts studied in detail, something
which was not done at the original trial, retired hematologist Dr.
Michael D. Innis asked VacTruth to publish a paper that he wrote titled Shaken Baby Syndrome – Shaken.
Shaken Baby Syndrome – Shaken, by Dr. Michael D. Innis
A
pediatric consultant has testified in the trial of a child minder
charged with assaulting a baby that some of the baby’s injuries
represented a “classic text book case” of baby shaking. Obviously, this
pediatrician, and others with similar views, need to be educated and
abandon their habit of covering up the mistakes of their colleagues.
They are menacing innocent parents and caregivers and are a danger to
the whole community until they abandon the myth of the “shaken baby
syndrome.” No apology has been made for the strident tone of this
response, and some action must be taken to restore faith in the
integrity of the medical profession which is under scrutiny.
Abstract
Parents
and carers are often falsely accused of injuring a child, asserting
that unexplained bruises, fractures, retinal and subdural hemorrhages
with ischemic encephalopathy, the so-called “triad” are signs of
physical abuse. However, these features can be the result of tissue scurvy,
defined here as a disorder of vitamin C metabolism in which vitamin C,
although abundant in the plasma, is unable to enter the cell and ensure
cell function because of a lack of insulin, which is necessary to
transfer the vitamin C into the cell. The cause is an autoimmune
reaction which destroys the insulin-producing beta cells of the
pancreas, as evidenced by the invariable associated hyperglycaemia in
these children. Here it is shown that the evidence of the
prosecution experts, alleging death from the shaken baby syndrome, was
demonstrably flawed. The shaken baby syndrome diagnosis is false and an
innocent man was incarcerated. This irrational diagnosis should be abandoned. It is destroying the lives of hundreds of innocent people.
Introduction
Mr.
Darryl Elliot was convicted for the murder of Amelia Bowmar based on
the evidence of doctors who alleged Amelia was shaken to death. The
basis of this allegation was the presence of a subdural hematoma,
swelling of the brain with ischemic changes and haemorrhagic contusions
in the cortex of the right and left superior frontal gyri of the brain.
The brain and spinal cord showed evidence of old and recent injury,
which was attributed to “non-accidental injury.”
The
condition of which the carers of the child could offer no explanation
for fractures, bruises, retinal and cerebral hemorrhages with ischemic
encephalopathy was given the name “shaken baby syndrome” in 1971 by
neurosurgeon Dr. Guthkelch, who, unsurprisingly, could offer no other
explanation for the lesions in the brains of these children, and as
incredible as it may seem, nor could the doctors in the UK who reported
on Amelia Bowmar a year ago.
Amelia had a disorder of
the coagulation system as shown by a raised INR of 1.3,(NR <1.2) and
an APTT of 39.6.(NR <39.0), which would explain the brain hemorrhages
and others, but the evidence was ignored by the doctors who alleged
murder, obviously uninformed in the interpretation of these and other
laboratory results.
Their preoccupation with the shaken
baby syndrome hypothesis also caused them to ignore the elevation of the
level of glucose in the blood and the presence of glucose in the urine
of Amelia. Both of these features are manifestations of an autoimmune
response to antigenic stimulation, as I have explained.
Until
the medical profession realizes that the shaken baby syndrome is a
fabricated diagnosis without a shred of scientific evidence, they are
going to continue to falsely accuse innocent people, deceive the
judiciary system and send innocent people to prison.
Mr. Justice MacDuff said, when he sentenced Darryl Elliott for the murder of his partner’s baby, Amelia Bowmar:
‘You
have been convicted, on overwhelming evidence, of the murder of Amelia
Bowmar, a little girl of 14 months whose care had been entrusted to you
by your partner, her mother. Your job was to look after and protect her
but, instead, she died at your hands.
It is clear to me
that because you perceived her to be misbehaving, or perhaps because you
had to deal with her when she was sick, or just because you lost your
temper at something wholly unconnected with her behaviour, you so
violently and deliberately shook her as to the catastrophic injuries
from which she died. Only you know exactly what went on inside that
house on July 28 last year.
I accept that this was a
spur of the moment loss of temper and also that you did not intend to
kill. I also accept that you were immediately full of remorse – although
that remorse has to be seen alongside an attempt to distance yourself
from what you did and a failure to acknowledge your responsibility. Your
failure to tell the truth in those early hours meant that the medical
teams spent time investigating other possible causes. I am satisfied
that Amelia was so seriously compromised that she would have died
anyway. Buy you were not to know that.’
The judge
believed the evidence of the doctors and the “overwhelming evidence” he
refers to is analyzed here and is demonstrably “overwhelmingly
non-sense.” (emphasis added)
The Testimony of Dr. P.H.T. Cartlidge, Specialist Field Pediatrics
Dr. P.H.T. Cartlidge, in his evidence, said:
“In
my opinion the head injury was not caused by a fall from the seat of
the settee and I struggle to conceive how Amelia could have climbed
higher.”
He went on to say that:
“The mechanism
of non-accidental head injury causing an acute encephalopathic illness,
acute subdural bleeding and retinal haemorrhages is thought to be
shaking, an impact or a combination of both. In shaking a child is often
grasped around the chest and shaken.
Squeezing the
chest impairs the return of blood to the heart and thereby causes an
increase in venous blood pressure. This in turn causes engorgement of
the veins that traverse the subdural space on the surface of the brain.
Shaking the child and/or hitting the child’s head on a firm object leads
to marked accellaration-decellaration forces that rupture these
engorged veins, resulting on subdural haemorrhage The same shearing
forces generated by shaking-impact can damage the parenchyma of the
brain and also the spinal cord and cord roots.”
Comment from Dr. Innis
“Dr.
Cartlidge gave an account of the fanciful speculative mainstream
opinion of shaken baby syndrome, which ignores crucial biochemical
evidence such as increased glucose in the blood (hyperglycemia),
abnormal liver function test, abnormal coagulation tests and glycosuria
(sugar in the urine), which proves that this condition is actually an
autoimmune disease known as TISSUE SCURVY.
The shaken
baby syndrome theory is actually unscientific speculation, as
demonstrated in the peer-reviewed manuscript, Autoimmunity and
Non-Accidental Injury in Children, in which it was shown that the shaken
baby syndrome conceived by Guthkeltch to explain bruises, fractures,
retinal and cerebral hemorrhage and encephalopathy in children, (called
the “triad”), can instead be explained by an autoimmune reaction to
antigens in a genetically susceptible child.
Children
diagnosed as suffering from non-accidental injuries were investigated
for evidence of immune response reactions following mandated vaccination
and childhood illnesses. In the results, it was found in all the
reported cases that the response to antigenic stimulation damaged the
beta cells in the pancreas caused hyperinsulinemia, which inhibited the
cellular uptake of vitamin C. This resulted in liver dysfunction. The
failure of carboxylation of the vitamin K-dependent proteins resulted in
hemorrhages and fractures associated with the triad.
Fractures,
retinal and subdural haemorrhages and encephalopathy in children are
autoimmune responses to antigenic stimulation in a genetically
susceptible individual. Common antigens are mandated vaccines, viral
bacterial and parasitic infections.”
Testimony from Dr. S.J. Hamilton, Forensic Pathology, Unit Leeds
Dr.
S.J. Hamilton, Forensic Pathology Unit Leeds, who, with his colleague
Dr. Malcomson, performed the post-mortem examination on Amelia, also
gave evidence for the prosecution, in which he stated:
“Having
considered all the findings with respect to the death of Amelia, it is
my opinion that she as died of a head and spinal injuries.
Neuropathology has revealed recent injuries including subdural bleeding,
axonal injury in the medulla and spinal nerve roots, and fresh bleeding
within older contusions within the brain itself. There is also evidence
of older injury including older subdural bleeding and cerebral
contusions. These are indicative of at least one, but possibly more than
one, episode of significant head trauma. These neuropathological
appearances are entirely consistent with non-accidental injury also
referred to as paediatric head injury or sometimes “Adult Induced
Injury.” Although some authors have proposed theoretical models that
would indicate a natural single underlying cause leading to the finding
of subdural haematoma brain swelling and retinal haemorrhage to my
knowledge these theoretical models have not been accepted by the Courts.
The presence of this combination of findings is entirely consistent
with a traumatic aetiology. The lack of external injury means that it is
not possible to state that there has been an impact to the head,
although the possibility of an impact that has not left an external
injury must exist.” (sic)
Comment from Dr. Innis
“I
am one of the authors that ‘have proposed theoretical models that would
indicate a natural single underlying cause leading to the finding of
subdural hematoma brain swelling and retinal hemorrhage.’ Amelia had
elevated blood glucose levels and glucose in her urine, features which
confirm a diagnosis of tissue scurvy, as reported in the manuscript
below.
(Research from Dr. Jayamohan Jayaratnam, Consulting Pediatric
Neurosurgeon)
Dr. Jayamohan Jayaratnam discussed all the
available evidence, including the fact that initial blood-clotting
tests show some raised clotting times with an INR of 1.3, an APTT of
39.6 and an APTT ratio of 1.3. With support from the evidence of Dr.
Al-Sarraj, he concluded:
‘In my view this sufficient
support for my already formed view that there is likely to have been a
traumatic explanation for Amelia’s collapse. In view the globalized
findings of ischemia, it was hard to place exactly what may have
occurred. However with the focal injuries described by Dr. AL SARRAJ, in
view of the absence of external signs of injury and in view of the
bilateral severe ophthalmology findings, I believe it is highly
indicative that a non-impact traumatic injury otherwise known as a shaking type injury has occurred to Amelia.’
Dr.
Jayamohan clearly identified an abnormality of the clotting mechanism
and then, for no apparent reason, chose to ignore it as a cause of the
bleeding in the skull and elsewhere. His illogical conclusion needs to
be further investigated for the safety of others with similar
coagulation profiles.
Other caregivers may suffer the same fate as Darryl Elliot did if medical personnel continue to hold this view.” (emphasis added)
Testimony from Dr. Neil Gordon Stoodley, Consulting Neuroradiologist
Dr. Neil Gordon Stoodley, a consultant neuroradiologist, concluded his assessment of the situation with the remarks:
“I
cannot think of a biologically plausible mechanism that would
potentially directly link any event occurring toward the end of May 2012
and Amelia’s presentation with a severe (indeed fatal) encephalopathic
illness at the end of July.
The scan abnormalities are all explicable on the basis of being due to an episode of non-accidental head injury. The mechanism of the injury is likely to have involved shaking.
Majority medical opinion is of the view that what is likely to be
required to produce such injuries is the backwards and forward movement
of the unsupported infant head pivoting on the neck. It is believed that
this leads to a degree of acceleration/deceleration and rotational
forces and that the consequent differential rotation of the brain and
skull leads to stretching of the subdural veins which cross the subdural
space and it is this which leads to bleeding in the subdural space.” (emphasis added)
Comment from Dr. Innis
“Dr.
Stoodley could not ‘think of a biologically plausible mechanism that
would potentially directly link any event occurring toward the end of
May 2012 and Amelia’s presentation with a severe (indeed fatal)
encephalopathic illness at the end of July.’
The MMR vaccine, administered on May 25, 2012, was the biologically plausible mechanism
Dr. Stoodley had difficulty in thinking that would potentially directly
link an event occurring toward the end of May 2012 and Amelia’s later
presentation with severe (indeed fatal) encepalopathic illness at the
end of July.
An account of the condition, tissue scurvy,
of which doctors, including Dr. Stoodley, are obviously unaware, is
featured below. When doctors understand tissue scurvy can be induced by vaccines and also causes the signs and symptoms found in Amelia, they will stop misdiagnosing shaken baby syndrome.” (emphasis added)
Research from Dr. Al-Sarraj, Consulting Neuropathologist
Dr. Al-Sarraj provided a detailed account of the findings and concluded:
“The
clinical history indicates presence of extensive bilateral retinal
haemorrhages. These injuries, in addition to the presence of subdural
haematoma and generalized ischemia (ischaemic encephalopathy) form the
triad frequently seen in patients with non-accidental head injury. This
is further supported by presence of subdural haematoma in the spinal
cord, axonal injury in the pyramids of the medulla and axonal injury in
the spinal nerve roots.
The presence of axonal injury in
the pyramids and spinal nerve roots suggest head and spinal cord injury
resulting from violent hyper-extension and hyper-flexion of the head
and neck similar to those seen in shaking. The presence of extensive
retinal haemorrhages supports this suggestion.
The
pathological findings in the brain have to be considered closely with
other findings of autopsy examination, radiological examination, eye
examination and other investigations, before final conclusion. I will
review the pathological findings in the brain and my interpretation if
further information becomes available.
Conclusion
Head and spinal cord injury consistent with non-accidental injury.” (emphasis added)
Comment from Dr. Innis
“There
is no conflict with Dr. Al-Sarraj’s findings, but it is the
interpretation of those findings which I dispute. He is evidently
prepared to review his interpretation if further information becomes
available and I would like to draw his attention to the fact that Amelia had biochemical as well as anatomical abnormalities. The biochemical diagnoses of hyperglycaemia,
glycosuria, coagulation abnormality (INR 1,3, APTT 39.6) all suggest
she was suffering from an autoimmune disorder tissue scurvy, [1] which I am sure Dr. Al-Sarraj is willing to consider.” (emphasis added)
Dr. R.E. Bonshak, Consultant Ophthalmic Pathologist
Dr.
Bonshak gave a detailed account of the pathological changes seen in the
eye when exposed to infection and injury and concluded:
“Non-traumatic
injuries which might possibly cause this form and extent of pathology
include severe coagulopathy (bleeding disorder) leukaemia (with
coagulopathy) septicaemia (with coagulopathy) meningitis (with
coagulopathy) and catastrophic intracranial bleeding. I am not aware
that these conditions have been identified.” (sic) (emphasis added)
Comment from Dr. Innis
“The
hospital records and pathology report of Amelia clearly did show a
severe coagulopathy, which Dr. Bonshak did not recognize.
1. INR (International Normalized Ratio) 1.3 (Normal Range 2 – 4.5) 2. APTT (Accelerated Partial Thromboplastin Time) 39.6 sec (Normal 27-35 sec)
Having
been a haematologist in a teaching hospital, I HAVE REPORTED ON MANY
THOUSANDS OF HEMATOLOGICAL RESULTS. These results indicate that a
coagulopathy is present due to the reduction in the clotting factors
XII, XI, IX, and VIII and spontaneous bleeding is inevitable. It also
indicates that the liver is damaged because these factors are formed in
the liver.
Dr. Bonshak has the evidence of a
coagulopathy he requires to conclude ‘non-traumatic injuries which might
possibly cause this form and extent of pathology.’”
Conclusion: Words from Dr. Innis
“Darryl
Elliot has been found guilty of murder based on the evidence of doctors
who are not competent in interpreting the hematological evidence which
clearly indicated a coagulopathy caused the death of Amelia Bowmar.
Prior to migrating to Australia, I was one of the pathologists working for the coroner in The West Riding of Yorkshire.
I declare that I have not made any statement that I know to be untrue.
Michael D. Innis, MBBS; DTM&H; FRCPA; FRC Path”
A Letter From Darryl Sent to Dr. Innis From Prison
“Amelia
had her MMR vaccine on May 23rd 2012, part from the nausea she
experienced for a few days, how subtle would the vaccines have been in
regards to any further illness? If Amelia collapsing was due to the
reaction from the MMR vaccine, would my accident of dropping her
heighten the risk to her? If Amelia had any blood disorder that caused
her to bruise easily, would (in the words of the crown prosecution) my
vigorous and violent shaking have brought on any external bruising to
her upper torso? Did my panic and subsequent shaking cause Amelia more
harm? I didn’t mention to the hospital that I had shaken Amelia in
panic, if I had told them sooner, could it have save her life?
Medical
experts did not believe my version of events, they don’t believe Amelia
could have entered into the condition I found her in, unless she was
involved in some kind of severe head trauma or NAI, I believe you have
my version of the events, could you offer any explanation as to why
Amelia’s condition turned so rapidly?
Amelia’s scan at
Grimsby showed no abnormalities to a trainee radiologist, however, at
Sheffield the next day a trained radiologist saw severe abnormalities,
from 18.30 on the 29th July to 10.30 on the 30th, doctors didn’t know
about anything going on in Amelia’s brain until a 2nd scan was done at
13.30 due to Amelia’s pupils being a different size, how much could have
gone on in her condition between 18.30 and 13.30, that the doctors
didn’t see?
Would more seizures in this period of time
have caused more damage to her brain, why was a trained radiologist not
available in such a life threatening situation, we was told they was
checking for meningitis, diabetes, metabolic conditions, what else
should have been explored? And if it wasn’t explored, why wasn’t it?
The
coagulation condition you found, how long did Amelia have it? How would
it or should it have been spotted, and how did it affect Amelia’s
condition, before and after she collapsed?
What could
have caused her levels of glucose to elevate and why wasn’t it spotted?
What did glucose in her urine represent? What effect would it have had
on Amelia? Plunkett’s report is now 14yrs old, has there been any other
short fall fatalities since then? Finally, was Amelia’s death my fault?
Thank
you for taking so much time out to try and answer my questions, thank
you also for helping me in my struggle to clear my name, I loved my
daughter and never unlawfully harmed her in any way, nor would I ever.
Myself
and my family are truly grateful for the work you are doing for myself
and Amelia’s mum and family, they need the truth just as much as me,
many thanks Dr. Innis I am truly grateful.
Darryl Elliott 12/03/2014”
Dr.
Innis hopes that by publishing this paper, Darryl Elliott’s case will
be reopened and the truth of what really happened to Amelia Bowmar will
be discovered.
References
- Buttram, Harold, MD, and England, Christina. Shaken Baby Syndrome or Vaccine Induced Encephalitis – Are Parents Being Falsely Accused? 2011.
- Innis, Michael, MD. Shaken Baby Syndrome – Shaken.
- http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/thirteen-men-in-one-prison-jailed-for-shaken-baby-syndrome-after-possible-vaccine-injuries-had-occurred/
- http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/thirteen-men-in-one-prison…
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario