Nathan Rawling case: Defendant denies injuring one-month-old baby
PUBLISHED: 12:33 31 January 2013 | UPDATED: 12:33 31 January 2013
A man accused of causing life-threatening injuries to a one-month-old baby claims the child's mother is responsible.
Nathan Rawling says he did not carry out the ‘frenzied, brutal and repeated assault’ during which the baby suffered 26 rib fractures and a ‘particularly shocking injury’ to the penis.
The 31-day-old baby, who cannot be identified, had a heart attack and had to be resuscitated when he was taken to Darent Valley Hospital on December 1, 2011.
Initially Rawling said the fractures were a result of him performing CPR on the baby when the baby’s lips turned blue.
But medical experts told the court the baby’s condition could not have been caused in this way and was a result of a severe compressive force.
The 36-year-old defendant, formerly of St Gregory’s Crescent, Gravesend, now accuses the mother of the baby of causing the injuries.
Rawling told Maidstone Crown Court on Wednesday: “All I know is that I haven’t injured the baby at all. I didn’t do it.”
In a cross-examination of the defendant, John O’Higgins said: “You decided the mother had to be guilty when you discovered that you couldn’t run the trial on the basis of saying you had caused the injuries innocently.”
Rawling said he first came to the “logical explanation” that the mother of the baby must be responsible at the end of last year.
Mr O’Higgins responded: “There is no evidence that the mother injured the baby. The only reason that you pointed the finger is because you say you didn’t do it.”
The prosecution also said Rawling had not enquired after the baby’s condition in the hospital or in the police station.
Referring to the police interview following Rawling’s arrest, Mr O’Higgins said: “You [were] cool, calm, collected, you go into lengthy detailed explanations and you [were] at times extremely jovial.”
The case continues.