Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the n/a site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Baby daughter injured by father has permanent brain damage



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 05 January 2009
An IT consultant from Northamptonshire who seriously injured his month-old baby daughter by shaking her has been spared a prison sentence.
Stephen Craine, 46, was given a 12-month suspended sentence at Northampton Crown Court yesterday after pleading guilty to inflicting grievous bodily harm against four-week old Isabelle Craine in May last year. She is now disabled, with brain damage,
and will never recover.

Craine previously denied the charge, as well as two other counts of grievous bodily harm with intent, and cruelty to a person under 16.

But at a hearing in November, he admitted shaking her and causing injuries which mean she is now disabled and will be totally dependant for the rest of her life.

Sonia Woolley QC, prosecuting, said: "The prognosis for Isabelle is not clear but extremely poor. She will never see, speak nor walk, she has severe difficulty understanding, problems with posture and language, epilepsy and is severely disabled which means she will never lead an independent life and will always be dependant on other people."

Craine had called an ambulance to the home he shared with partner Angelica De Bruin in Chatsworth Drive, Wellingborough, at 4.46am on May 20, saying his daughter was having trouble breathing and was bleeding from the nose.

Tests later revealed she had suffered brain haemmorhage consistent with her being shaken.

The court heard that Craine was now estranged from his partner who has since returned to Holland with Isabelle and their son Robert.

Judge Peter Morrell, who expressed sympathy for Isabelle and her mother, said: "The defendant recognised there was a risk injury would result from his actions but not necessarily injury which did result and in acknowledging that risk, he acted anyway."

He sentenced him to 12 months' imprisonment, suspended for two years, with up to £5,000 costs.

Passing sentence, the judge added: "I have to ask myself whether the degree of culpability should outweigh the degree of harm you caused.

"In my judgement, what you did that night was as a result of panic.

"Any fair-minded member of the public sitting where I am sitting now would think it unjust to send you to prison."



The full article contains 373 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 06 January 2009 8:54 AM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Northampton
 
Prev
1
2
1

Cotton,

Npton 05/01/2009 17:09:12
shocking to say the least!
20 years inside would have fitted better!
2

The Big D,

Northampton 05/01/2009 17:51:34
Hang your head in shame Judge Peter Morrell. You are a disgrace, this piece of sh*t should have got life, you could have at least given him the maximum four years.
3

Michael S.,

05/01/2009 17:52:56
He better give her the world for the rest of her life nd hope he doesn't have any more kids cause if he does the same thing again the court will probably take him out to eat for doing it again,that's how much they care.
Unless he is the courts own personal IT Consultant.?
4

johng36,

northampton 05/01/2009 18:39:04
this judge should be taken to court for bringing the judiciary into disrepute. this poor baby is disabled for life and all he (judge morrell) gives the offender is a suspended sentance of 12 months and a fine. this sentance should be reveiwed and increased substantialy
5

S M,

05/01/2009 19:04:33
Hang the scum bag
6

,

05/01/2009 19:07:51
Comment Reported Unsuitable By User
7

Disheartened teacher,

05/01/2009 20:18:19
So someone can be banned from keeping animals for 25 years and given a supervision order for 12 months for mistreating a dog, yet this 'animal' is free to enjoy his life and continue to spread his gene pool without a second thought.
We live in a strange society.................
8

Michael S.,

05/01/2009 20:53:30
Red.John the blame falls on the one who gave the sentence(hahaha),if it came across your desk do you work for the courts and trying to defend the lamrbrain divs who are bringing this country down?.
Those violent action films may not be just films but a glimpse into the future.
You seem to know alot about what went on about this case but you didn't take it someone else did and look what happened,so yes w will blame whoever actually had something to do with it for we care about our society and the people no matter how old they are,the father technically killed this girls life.
9

farmerbill,

london 06/01/2009 15:59:04
For the information of ladymuck the comment by redjohn was reported due to the suggestion that a senior police officer would be willing to lead a lynch mob against mr craine due to the sentencing passed by the court. It will be the decision of the editor from the chron if the whole comment is removed or just the offending section. It is interesting that redjohn has such intimate knowledge of the case as the name of the senior officer has never been published, and yet redjohn appears to know who it is!
10

redJohn,

06/01/2009 16:08:38
Wow so it`s ok to slant the system, promote vigilante`s ("Hang the scumbag") But when someone who has firsthand knowledge of the case gives you an insight you remove the comment??? Wow? why?? Do you feel the need to "censor the truth" a newspaper??? For shame, Editor I close this post with “Speechless"
Prev
1
2

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.