So I still don’t really understand this case. Do they think the Nanny might have done something to harm the baby much earlier, and not the day of his ambulance trip? Why did they never investigate the cause of his skull fracture? Wouldn’t the defence have put forward an alternative cause? As in he fell, or he was harmed by another family member etc etc. The focus was on the injury but if it was so strongly refuted that it was not a new injury, then how was that not addressed at the time?
@mamamia-user-482898552 Uh yes these folks are not living in Melbourne or Tassie that’s for sure!