How did Joshua Marbury’s baby son come to be abused without guarantee of his son’s abuser being prosecuted?
An Oregon babysitter accused of bruising a one year old Joshua Marbury’s one year old son has avoided facing charges because the infant is unable to speak up.
The decision comes after the child’s parents alleged that the toddler was subjected to a beating from the baby-sitter but because of a 2012 Oregon Court of Appeals ruling have been unable to pursue charges, despite photos that show the child covered in bruises and scars.
Photos that the parents took showed baby Jacob incurring a severe smack that left him with a black eye along with a bruises and a stinging palm print on the child’s face.
Told Jacob’s mother, Alicia Quinney via the nydailynews: ‘I’m so extremely upset, it’s disturbing, on this little innocent baby,’
‘To think someone could do this to him.’
The incident comes despite the babysitter even conceding violently smacking the baby, along with medical professionals and law enforcement later confirmed that the child had been abused.
At the time, the couple, from Sherwood, told of returning home from a date night in March only to find their son screaming and the babysitter fast asleep.
According to the couple, baby Jacob was covered in bruises the next morning with the parents reporting the incident to police. However, two months later with no criminal charges being filed, they claim the authorities have let them down.
Responding to Oregon authorities against pursuing a case against the babysitter, the child’s father, Joshua Marbury took to Facebook where he posted: ‘After TWO months of waiting we only find out that charges are dropped BECAUSE my one year old cannot tell you verbally he was abused and my son did not show he was in pain OR that this person ‘intentionally’ did this.’
The alleged bruising babysitter dodged a criminal case since the 2012 ruling specifies that the victim must be able to describe the pain suffered, Oregon Live reported.
The incident comes after a January 2015 article via the Oregonian titled, ‘Even pets are better protected than young kids under Oregon abuse laws, prosecutors say.’
The article explained that in order to convict a suspected child abuser of felony assault or criminal mistreatment, prosecutors must prove that the victim experienced ‘substantial pain.‘
Confounding Jacob’s parents is the view that the new law offers the possibility that children and adults who are not able to or do not want to articulate the extent of their suffering may never see justice.
Offered Joshua Marbury via Oregon Live: ‘It doesn’t make sense that someone can go strike a dog and witnesses see it, that’s enough proof, but if you strike a baby…”
‘I don’t understand why this law is in effect.’
Offered Jacob’s mother who remains intent on seeing a prosecution against the babysitter: ‘It’s so disturbing that they can let somebody walk around and live their life while my whole family is traumatized from this.’
The incident has led to the parents having trouble trusting babysitters to watch over their 1-year-old son, as the child’s father is forced to tend to a demanding job.
According to Joshua Marbury the child’s beating comes despite the babysitter once being his best friend, who the father claims made up several lies and excuses to cover up the beating — first suggesting the child fell, then claiming he accidentally dropped the boy.
Emotionally, the father told his son is still scarred from the attack.
After the attack, Jacob has a breakdown every time his mother is away.
Told Jacob’s mother: ‘He definitely recovered from the bruises, but inside, this is gonna follow him.’
Alicia Quinney hopes to now become the advocate to change the loophole that protects child abusers.
After Marbury’s Facebook post went viral with more than 180,000 shares, Quinney said she received an outpour of support from relatives of victims with the same frustrations.