Post by Dean Robinson on May 6, 2008 8:32:50 GMT -5
heres a good reason as to why I have always said that there is a need for child protection. But and its a big one! why is it that this main stream media firm has been able to print the names that will ID the child if hes in CAS care, I mean this is a real case of a child being abused by his parents. This story has the boys first and last name his parents full names and the area of residence is this not a major violation of the act?
Now there are 1000's of cases where the child is removed for bogus reasons e.g dirty dishes in the sink, as a parent tries to defend their family they are told by the courts that they will be jailed for printing the names of the children e.g Cathy Norris.. is the act not there to protect the child? or is it there to protect the CAS
Crown seeks 10 years for Edwards' abuse; Cites lengthy record of local man who 'horribly injured' son, Baby Kevin
Posted By Linda Richardson
www.saultstar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1015494
Kevin Edwards should be sentenced to a 10-year prison term for the pain and cruelty he inflicted upon his infant son, the Crown argued Monday.
"A severe sentence is the only way to protect defenceless children, especially if we have to protect them from their parents,'' prosecutor Nancy Komsa said.
Acknowledging the "child is horribly injured,'' the defence suggested a five-to-eight year sentence would be appropriate.
"I can't be more precise than that. Thankfully, that's your job,'' Michael Bennett told Superior Court Justice Gladys Pardu.
After hearing testimony from seven defence witnesses, including Edwards, and the lawyers' arguments, Pardu reserved her decision until May 15.
Just before reserving her decision, she asked Edwards if he had anything to say.
Edwards responded that he regrets what happened, that he loves his son and never hit him.
"I pray to God one day my son will be all right,'' the 49-year-old man said, telling the judge that every time he sees or hears a baby on TV, he goes into his cell and cries.
"I regret what Treena (his wife) and I did,'' Edwards said. "Nobody should be blamed but Treena and I.''
In November, a jury convicted Edwards of aggravated assault, criminal negligence causing bodily harm and failing to provide the necessities of life.
During the six-day trial, jurors heard 10-week-old "Baby Kevin'' Edwards was brought to hospital on Oct. 26, 2005, suffering from severe head injuries, including extensive bruising and swelling.
They also viewed a lengthy videotape of an Oct. 26 police interview of the self-described "proud father,'' who offered various explanations for the injuries, including blaming his wife Treena Edwards.
At the end of the interview, he admitted to shaking the crying baby in frustration and slamming him to the floor earlier that morning.
A pediatrician from the Children's Hospital of Western Ontario outlined to jurors the litany of abuse inflicted upon the baby, who had severe neurological injury.
Baby Kevin had been abused for most of his short life, said Dr. David Warren, the medical director of child protection at the London hospital.
"The injuries that endangered his life occurred Oct. 26 at the hands of Kevin Edwards and he should be sentenced for that," Komsa said Monday.
Pardu was told the now nearly-three-year-old child still faces a grim future and prognosis.
The baby's "brain development came to a screeching halt'' on Oct. 26, Komsa said.
While his body is growing, his brain and head circumference will always remain the same, the assistant Crown attorney said.
Baby Kevin's daily life consists of seizures, vomiting, blindness, pain and paralysis.
An updated report from the baby's Sault Ste. Marie pediatrician described him as the "most-severely damaged child in my practice.''
"His brain injury was devastating and affected virtually every aspect of his being,'' Komsa said.
In calling for the 10-year sentence, Komsa cited a list of reasons why such a term was warranted.
The baby suffered multiple injuries of a life-threatening nature, Edwards was the principal participant in the assault, there were other injuries over time and all of the injuries would have been extremely painful, she said.
She pointed to Edward's lengthy criminal record, which includes convictions for threatening to blow up the Children's Aid Society, sexual assault causing bodily harm, indecent acts and sexual interference (involving a child) and criminal harassment.
As well, she noted the man's lack of remorse and reports that described him as manipulative and vindictive with a tendency toward violence and a high risk to re-offend. When he testified Monday, Edwards again pointed the finger at his wife.
He described two incidents in which he witnessed an angry Treena hitting the baby.
Edwards said he didn't go to the police or CAS because he was afraid of his wife and afraid of losing his family, Bennett questioned whether it was an aggravating factor at sentencing that one is a principal participant or merely a party,
"Maybe, in this case it doesn't make a difference,'' he said.
"Was he cruelly negligent, horribly, horribly negligent or did he deliberately harm this child?''
Bennett painted his client as a man blinded to what was happening and trying to hold his family together.
"There is a difference between deliberate acts and this awful, gross criminal negligence,'' he suggested.
Treena Edwards was to have been sentenced April 22 for her role in the assaults.
She pleaded guilty Nov. 14 to aggravated assault and failing to provide the necessities of life.
But the hearing came to a halt because of a breakdown between the 38-year-old woman and her lawyer.
Treena Edwards asked to have her guilty pleas struck and told Pardu: "I want to go on record that I lied during the police interrogation. I did not strike or hit my son.''
She will bring an application May 12 to have the pleas struck and to take the matter to trial.
Now there are 1000's of cases where the child is removed for bogus reasons e.g dirty dishes in the sink, as a parent tries to defend their family they are told by the courts that they will be jailed for printing the names of the children e.g Cathy Norris.. is the act not there to protect the child? or is it there to protect the CAS
Crown seeks 10 years for Edwards' abuse; Cites lengthy record of local man who 'horribly injured' son, Baby Kevin
Posted By Linda Richardson
www.saultstar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1015494
Kevin Edwards should be sentenced to a 10-year prison term for the pain and cruelty he inflicted upon his infant son, the Crown argued Monday.
"A severe sentence is the only way to protect defenceless children, especially if we have to protect them from their parents,'' prosecutor Nancy Komsa said.
Acknowledging the "child is horribly injured,'' the defence suggested a five-to-eight year sentence would be appropriate.
"I can't be more precise than that. Thankfully, that's your job,'' Michael Bennett told Superior Court Justice Gladys Pardu.
After hearing testimony from seven defence witnesses, including Edwards, and the lawyers' arguments, Pardu reserved her decision until May 15.
Just before reserving her decision, she asked Edwards if he had anything to say.
Edwards responded that he regrets what happened, that he loves his son and never hit him.
"I pray to God one day my son will be all right,'' the 49-year-old man said, telling the judge that every time he sees or hears a baby on TV, he goes into his cell and cries.
"I regret what Treena (his wife) and I did,'' Edwards said. "Nobody should be blamed but Treena and I.''
In November, a jury convicted Edwards of aggravated assault, criminal negligence causing bodily harm and failing to provide the necessities of life.
During the six-day trial, jurors heard 10-week-old "Baby Kevin'' Edwards was brought to hospital on Oct. 26, 2005, suffering from severe head injuries, including extensive bruising and swelling.
They also viewed a lengthy videotape of an Oct. 26 police interview of the self-described "proud father,'' who offered various explanations for the injuries, including blaming his wife Treena Edwards.
At the end of the interview, he admitted to shaking the crying baby in frustration and slamming him to the floor earlier that morning.
A pediatrician from the Children's Hospital of Western Ontario outlined to jurors the litany of abuse inflicted upon the baby, who had severe neurological injury.
Baby Kevin had been abused for most of his short life, said Dr. David Warren, the medical director of child protection at the London hospital.
"The injuries that endangered his life occurred Oct. 26 at the hands of Kevin Edwards and he should be sentenced for that," Komsa said Monday.
Pardu was told the now nearly-three-year-old child still faces a grim future and prognosis.
The baby's "brain development came to a screeching halt'' on Oct. 26, Komsa said.
While his body is growing, his brain and head circumference will always remain the same, the assistant Crown attorney said.
Baby Kevin's daily life consists of seizures, vomiting, blindness, pain and paralysis.
An updated report from the baby's Sault Ste. Marie pediatrician described him as the "most-severely damaged child in my practice.''
"His brain injury was devastating and affected virtually every aspect of his being,'' Komsa said.
In calling for the 10-year sentence, Komsa cited a list of reasons why such a term was warranted.
The baby suffered multiple injuries of a life-threatening nature, Edwards was the principal participant in the assault, there were other injuries over time and all of the injuries would have been extremely painful, she said.
She pointed to Edward's lengthy criminal record, which includes convictions for threatening to blow up the Children's Aid Society, sexual assault causing bodily harm, indecent acts and sexual interference (involving a child) and criminal harassment.
As well, she noted the man's lack of remorse and reports that described him as manipulative and vindictive with a tendency toward violence and a high risk to re-offend. When he testified Monday, Edwards again pointed the finger at his wife.
He described two incidents in which he witnessed an angry Treena hitting the baby.
Edwards said he didn't go to the police or CAS because he was afraid of his wife and afraid of losing his family, Bennett questioned whether it was an aggravating factor at sentencing that one is a principal participant or merely a party,
"Maybe, in this case it doesn't make a difference,'' he said.
"Was he cruelly negligent, horribly, horribly negligent or did he deliberately harm this child?''
Bennett painted his client as a man blinded to what was happening and trying to hold his family together.
"There is a difference between deliberate acts and this awful, gross criminal negligence,'' he suggested.
Treena Edwards was to have been sentenced April 22 for her role in the assaults.
She pleaded guilty Nov. 14 to aggravated assault and failing to provide the necessities of life.
But the hearing came to a halt because of a breakdown between the 38-year-old woman and her lawyer.
Treena Edwards asked to have her guilty pleas struck and told Pardu: "I want to go on record that I lied during the police interrogation. I did not strike or hit my son.''
She will bring an application May 12 to have the pleas struck and to take the matter to trial.