Yahoo News Mum accused of 'squeezing her baby to death' cleared of murder after expert evidence called into question
A mother who was accused of ‘squeezing her baby to death’ has been found not guilty of murder.
Laura Langley, 38, was accused of killing her seven-week-old daughter Edith after she stopped breathing at their home in Blackpool almost exactly four years ago - on November 20, 2020.
Edith was rushed to Blackpool Victoria Hospital after her mum dialled 999 shortly before 4am. However the baby could not be revived and was pronounced dead at 4:43am.
READ MORE: Sue and Noel Radford scream in delight as major baby news announced
READ MORE: Tragedy as mum who 'lived for her boys' dies suddenly on Egypt holiday
However two leading experts in pathology and bone health have now said that Edith’s injuries were consistent with resuscitation methods used at the hospital after her mother called for help.
As Ms Langley was set to stand trial accused of Edith’s murder, prosecutor Mr Cray KC offered no evidence on behalf of the Crown Prosecution Service and Ms Langley was formally found not guilty.
A post mortem found Edith had 33 fractures to her ribs. An expert in bone health, Prof David Manghan, was instructed by the CPS who said the injuries were non-accidental, with some of them up to four days old. He said the location of some of the fractures was inconsistent with having been caused during CPR.
Ms Langley was charged with murder - a charge she fiercely denied. In October 2023, a trial was opened, with Ms Langley accused of causing the injuries to Edith in the days before she died.
However during the trial, significant concerns were raised over expert evidence which formed the basis of the prosecution case.
Defence expert, Prof Edward McCarthy said Edith’s injuries were consistent with being caused during the CPR. He also raised issues around Edith’s bone density.
The jury was discharged with both experts being asked to give further consideration to the issue ahead of a new trial which was set for today, November 18, 2024.
But on the first day of the trial at Preston Crown Court Mr Cray KC formally offered no evidence against Ms Langley on behalf of the Crown Prosecution Service.
He said that in September 2024, the prosecution was made aware of a similar case in the family courts - also involving the ageing of fractures and questions over whether the injuries were deliberate. Mr Justice Keehan, the presiding judge, made "various criticisms" of the methodology used by Prof Manghan.
In light of this a third expert, Prof Anthony Freeman, was instructed to review the evidence and produce a report of his findings. He was tasked to consider the two competing expert opinions and form an opinion.
Mr Cray KC said: “He rejects the principles on which the prosecution case relies. Whilst he is critical of aspects of both professors’ evidence he does not agree that there is any evidence of the fractures being inflicted on any separate occasions.
“He gives the opinion that the method of resuscitation used at the hospital could explain the location and distribution of the fractures. It now follows that there are two experts with great experience in relevant fields who contradict the crown.”
Mr Justice Morris formally returned not guilty verdicts to all charges against Ms Langley. He said: “I understand the basis on which the prosecution has decided to offer no evidence. I therefore direct that not guilty verdicts are to be recorded. These verdicts have the same effect as if the defendant had been tried and acquitted by a jury.”
As she walked free from the dock, Ms Langley hugged family members and wiped tears from her eyes.
