A Middlesex County superior court judge has denied a motion to dismiss Irish nanny Aisling Brady McCarthy’s murder case. A trial date has been set for May 6.
The County Cavan woman (36) is accused of the murder of Rehma Sabir, the infant who was in her care in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Baby Sabir was found unconscious in the family home. She died at the Boston Children’s Hospital on her first birthday.
On Wednesday Judge Maureen Hogan also denied a separate motion by the defense lawyers to exclude certain expert medical testimony in the nanny’s case. Some of those experts are expected to testify that Brady McCarthy cause Baby Sabir’s death by non-accidental shaking in January 2013.
Brady McCarthy’s defense team said the doctor rewrote his report on the baby’s death after another medical expert said they child did not die from a rare genetic disorder.
The nanny, who had been living and working in the US without a visa, was present during the 1.5-hour hearing. She left the court with her lips pursed and face contorted, according to Irish Times report. She has been in prison since January 2013.
Defense attorney Melinda Lee Thompson spoke to the press, having met with Brady McCarthy after the ruling.
“We’re still kind of reading…She’s doing the best she can,” Lee Thompson said.
She added that her red eyes were due to stress from the case. Laughing the defense lawyer said “This case is making me lose sleep…literally.
During the ruling Judge Hogan reprimanded both legal teams for not completing a joint pre-trial memorandum, required by law.
The judge said “What the rules require is communication.
“As we move to trial there must be communication.”
She that she expected professionalism from the attorneys.
Judge Hogan excluded one expert’s testimony. The expert had studied Baby Sabir’s backbone but the judge said “It was clear his opinions were influenced by the previous record.”
With relation to another expert, who had said the fractures in the baby’s vertebrae were consistent wth abuse, the just said “she will be allowed to testify.”
The judge said another expert will testify that the injuries were “not accidental.”
Another doctor who said “she could visualize the bilateral hemorrhages” would be allowed but the testimony of another expert who said the hemorrhaging was non-accidental trauma” and consistent with repetitive force from shaking would not be allowed.
Judge Hogan said “my reading of the grand justify (testimony was) that it was consistent heavy acceleration and deceleration injuries and when she was asked if it was one way or (a) second (way) she didn’t conclude one way.”
Comments