Is it required to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" who shook the baby in a shaken baby syndrome case?

No. In civil cases, it is not required to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" who shook the child, as long as there is a "preponderance of the evidence" that the person being sued shook the child, meaning that the person in question "more likely than not" caused the baby's injury. Although a district attorney or prosecutor may decide not to proceed with prosecuting someone if there is no proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the person shook a baby, the Keane Law Firm has experience handling civil cases of shaken baby syndrome in which there is limited proof.

Often, prosecutors and district attorneys will not proceed due to an inability to prove when exactly the child's injury occurred, and they are limited to calling only the physician, coroner or medical examiner who saw the child to the witness stand when attempting to prove the timing of the injury. The Keane Law Firm, however, does not face the same limitations: we are able to hire top physicians from all over the country to prove the time at which a baby was injured.

If you believe that your baby or a baby you know may be suffering from shaken baby syndrome, you can contact our firm for compassionate and professional answers to your questions, helpful resources and information, and an evaluation of your unique situation.

Contact shaken baby syndrome attorney Chris Keane via the web or call 1-888-592-KIDS.

Relevant Links:
Shaken Baby Syndrome Blog

Child Injury and Child Abuse Cases

Is it required to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" who shook the baby in a shaken baby syndrome case?

Does Your Child Have a Case?