Mistrial declared in Gallishaw child abuse case

[Guest guest]

SYRACUSE (AP) --

Monday, March 23, 2009 at 4:47 p.m.

A judge declared a mistrial

after a state Supreme Court jury said it was deadlocked in the trial of

a Syracuse mother who claims her infant daughter's injuries nine years

ago were from mold exposure, not child abuse.

The

jury of eight men and four women convicted 25-year-old Everson

Gallishaw on Friday of a misdemeanor charge of endangering the welfare

of a child but couldn't reach a unanimous decision on a more serious

felony charge of first-degree assault.

The jury continued deliberations Monday but reported to Justice Brunetti

about 2:00 p.m. that it was deadlocked.

Prosecutors could not immediately say if they would seek to try Gallishaw on the

assault charge again.

http://www.cnycentral.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=277206

[Guest guest]

Sharon, I agree with you.  There is something very wrong with this whole case. 

I really wish they would have done some research on Dr. Baden. 

According to the information on the Internet, he is another one of those

high-paid defense experts who will say whatever his clients tell him to say, and

the Internet information about his divorce is really creepy.

________________________________

From: " SNK1955@... " <SNK1955@...>

brianc8452@...; ; tigerpaw2c@...

Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 5:24:37 PM

Subject: Re: Mistrial declared in Gallishaw child abuse case

I hate to sound so cynical about this case. But, isn't that

convenient. Misdmeaner conviction.  Hung on the criminal.  Let's see.  They put

her in prison for a month while claiming felony child abuse and claiming no

pictures available that would support her claim of mold in her mother's laundry

room causing the baby's clothes to be moldie, causing the pediatric pulmonary

hemmoraging.   Then, pictures of the baby's clothes in the moldie laundry

basement, miraculously show up in the police records a few years later.  So a

judge throws out the guilty verdict against her...after she has already spent

her time in jail.

So they prosecute her again with nothing to be gained because she has already

served the prison time.  They bring in a hot shot defense attorney from

Hollywood. I guy who is on record in another case being paid $250,000 to serve

as an expert for the defense.  They pay him beaucoup bucks to say Dr. Dearborn's

multimillion dollar, Federally funded, scientific research into infant pulmonary

hemmoraging from mold is just  Junk Science.  (BTW, " junk science " is a term the

tobacco industry made up to discount research that cigarettes cause lung

cancer.)

The original examiner comes in and says she is more convinced than ever that she

was right to begin with.  The infant's lung problems could not be from the

mold. 

Why? Why would they spend all this time, energy and money on a case that the

person has already served her time several years back - and " newly discovered "

evidence showed that a plausible alternative reason for the baby's illness has

been established? 

Answer:  I think it is most likely because the pictures that the police had all

this time would have proven her innocent to begin with.  I think they now know

the imprisoned an innocent woman. I think they know an innocent woman spent time

in jail and had her reputation destroyed and her life turned upside down from

them concealing evidence (whether intentional or not).

Now, we have a misdemeanor verdict and a hung jury on the original criminal

charge.   Guess she can't go after them for concealing evidence, huh?  But,

there also will not be a big stink that the woman is being criminally convicted

again for something she did not do.

Now...she will be a registered child abuser, who served time in prison who also

cannot go after them for what they did to her.  Could be wrong.  Don't have all

the documents of the case, but from what I am reading, I think something is not

right about this whole case.

 

In a message dated 3/23/2009 4:25:50 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

brianc8452@... writes:

SYRACUSE (AP) --

Monday, March 23, 2009 at 4:47 p.m.

A judge declared a mistrial after a state Supreme Court jury said it was

deadlocked in the trial of a Syracuse mother who claims her infant daughter's

injuries nine years ago were from mold exposure, not child abuse.

The jury of eight men and four women convicted 25-year-old Everson

Gallishaw on Friday of a misdemeanor charge of endangering the welfare of a

child but couldn't reach a unanimous decision on a more serious felony charge of

first-degree assault.

The jury continued deliberations Monday but reported to Justice Brunetti

about 2:00 p.m. that it was deadlocked.

Prosecutors could not immediately say if they would seek to try Gallishaw on the

assault charge again.

http://www.cnycentral.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=277206

Sharon Noonan Kramer

________________________________

Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make meals for under $10.

[Guest guest]

Here's another case with Dr. Baden. The judge blasted Dr. Baden and the defense

team for misconduct.

http://www.courttv.com/trials/spector/081407_ctv.html

________________________________

From: " snk1955@... " <snk1955@...>

Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 6:54:25 PM

Subject: Re: [] Mistrial declared in Gallishaw child abuse case

Look at this! Dr. Baden, the expert they brought in to refute Dr. Dearborn

has participated in some VERY high profile cases and taken some very

controversial positions. Why on earth would he be brought into a child abuse

case

that was 9 years old and the mother had already served time, then was found

innocent of criminal...if there wasn't a ton of money involved somewhere?

Could Terri Schiavo's husband Schiavo be chraged with murder if she

died

" Dr. Baden, chief pathologist for the City of New York and director

of the New York State Police Forensic Sciences Unit, questioned the claim of a

potassium deficiency in an interview by Greta van Susteren. He said such a

situation would be “very unusualâ€. He suggested a _physical trauma_

(http://www.cnsnews. com/Culture/ Archive/200310/ CUL20031028a. html) such as a

beating

provided a more likely explanation. He cited a bone scan indicating a head

injury and other bone injuries. "

The Stacey case.

" Drew ’s attorney questioned the legitimacy of Baden’s work.

“The results of Dr. Baden’s autopsy on Ms. Savio do not surprise us, not

because we believe they are accurate, but only because Dr. Baden had indicated

over a week before he had performed the autopsy that he believed Kathleen’s

death was not an accident,†lawyer Brodsky said in a statement Sunday. "

Look at this one. Feb 2009. He can determine murder in a 16 year old case,

based on NO new evidence.

_http://www.northjersey.com/breakingnews/scharf021309.html_

(http://www.northjersey.com/breakingnews/scharf021309.html)

Mello also said the case was reviewed by Baden, the celebrity

forensic expert, who concluded that Jody Scharf's death was a murder.

Bilinkas, however, said Baden's conclusion is based on the same evidence that

prosecutors have, which until a few months ago has been deemed insufficient

to even arrest Scharf.

Below is Baden as an expert witness for O.J.

Simpson._http://www.nytimes. com/1996/ 12/18/us/ alternate- simpson-juror-

is-dismissed- for-boasting- about-case. html

_

(http://www.nytimes. com/1996/ 12/18/us/ alternate- simpson-juror- is-dismissed-

for-boasting- about-case. html)

" Before the dismissal, a plaintiff's lawyer, Medvene, accused a

defense pathologist, Dr. Baden, of shading his testimony to favor Mr.

Simpson and pulled out a tape of a television talk show to illustrate his

point.

The lawyer and witness clashed repeatedly as Mr. Medvene sought to undermine

Dr. Baden's testimony that he believed two attackers killed Brown

Simpson and L. Goldman on the night of June 12, 1994, and that it took a

relatively long time for the victims to die.

Dr. Baden testified earlier that a long struggle and the lack of screams

during the slayings supported his theory that two attackers restrained Mrs.

Simpson and Mr. Goldman.

Mr. Medvene focused on Dr. Baden's testimony that Mr. Goldman could have been

on his feet struggling with a killer for two to three minutes after he was

stabbed in the jugular vein.

The lawyer asked Dr. Baden whether he had told a national television audience

that Mr. Goldman was standing for 5 or 10 minutes.

''I don't think I said it that way,'' Dr. Baden said.

Mr. Medvene, trying to show jurors that Dr. Baden was changing his testimony

to help Mr.. Simpson, played a part of Dr. Baden's interview on a Nov. 11

'' Live'' television show in which Dr. Baden said: ''It would have taken 5

or 10 minutes for the blood to go down to the left shoe. He was standing for

that period.''

''Does that refresh you, sir?'' Mr. Medvene asked. ''Yes or no?''

''Yes,'' Dr. Baden said.

The pathologist later said the difference between 2, 3 and 5 minutes did not

matter significantly because the gap between the first stab wound and death

was still 5 to 10 minutes. He said Mr. Goldman continued to bleed after he

collapsed.

Dr. Baden's time line differs dramatically from that of the plaintiffs'

pathologist, who said both victims could have died in about a minute. "

Sharon

************ **Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make meals for Under

$10. (http://food. aol.com/frugal- feasts?ncid= emlcntusfood0000 0002)

[Guest guest]

Where did you find creepy divorce stuff on Baden? Clue us in.

Barth

www.presenting.net/sbs/sbs.html

SUBMIT YOUR DOCTOR: www.presenting.net/sbs/molddoctors.html

---

BC> Sharon, I agree with you.  There is something very wrong with this whole

case.  I really wish they would have done some research on Dr. Baden. 

According to the information on the

BC> Internet, he is another one of those high-paid defense experts who will say

whatever his clients tell him to say, and the Internet information about his

divorce is really creepy.