A man facing 14 years behind bars after undergoing a trial by jury over the attempted murder of his former partner’s 15-month old son has filed an appeal claiming his guilty verdict had stemmed from a wrong appreciation of facts.
Former football player and Mellieħa resident Akande Rotimi Williams, 27, Nigerian-born with a Maltese residence permit, had faced criminal proceedings on three counts of attempted willful homicide, grievous bodily harm and ill treatment of the child relating to an incident dating back to April 2013.
At the time, the infant had been rushed to hospital and Mr Williams had claimed he had found the baby stiff and unresponsive in its cot. Doctors' suspicions were raised because some two weeks earlier the child had already been admitted to hospital with symptoms suggesting 'shaken baby syndrome’.
The medical condition, also known as abusive head trauma or whiplash trauma, is a preventable brain injury that destroys a child's brain cells and prevents his or her brain from getting enough oxygen.
The child required emergency head surgery to save its life
The child required emergency head surgery to save its life, with the injury causing it a permanent disability which meant that the boy will have to spend the rest of his life in a semi-vegetative state. In fact, baby Maleek is today cared for at the Dar tal-Providenza.
In the appeal application, Mr Williams’ lawyers argued against the prosecution’s thesis of foul play pointing out that the accused used to playfully toss the child it into the air and catch it, saying “the baby used to laugh a lot”.
There had also been instances when the baby had fallen off the bed while the mother, Mr William's former partner, was showering. The child had been taken to a doctor because he was bleeding from the nose and mouth.
It was also pointed out that the appellant never confessed to the alleged wrongdoing even when the inspector conducting investigations had suggested that the child's injuries were only compatible with shaken baby syndrome.
Even when asked directly by the judge presiding over the trial, the accused had categorically denied he ever shook the baby.
It was noted that even the child’s mother had declared under oath that the doctors, according to her, had immediately ruled out any other possibility than shaken baby syndrome.
She had considered it very strange that in the eight days that the child was hospitalised on the first occasion no one noticed that he had fractured ribs, compatible with a fall. Nor had the doctors allegedly taken into account the medical history of the child.
The lawyers also argued that the verdict was conflicting and illegal since the accused had been found guilty of both attempted willful homicide and grievous bodily harm, two alternative counts.
Finally, it was argued that the punishment of 14 years imprisonment was disproportionate to the facts of the case, pointing out that the appellant's conduct sheet was a clean one and if found guilty was to be treated as a first time offender.
Such a punishment did not provide the balance required between the retributive and reformative aspect so important in today’s criminal justice systems.
The appellant requested a retrial, a revocation of the guilty verdict or a variation in punishment.
Lawyers Franco Debono, Marion Camilleri and Amadeus Cachia filed the appeal on behalf of the accused who had been assisted by another lawyer during the trial.