In a shaken baby syndrome case, do I have to prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” who shook the baby?

A: No. That standard is used only in criminal cases. We will help you prove who by a “preponderance of the evidence” who shook the baby in shaken baby syndrome cases. In more understandable terms, a preponderance of the evidence means that it is more likely than not that the defendant is the person who shook the baby and caused the baby’s injuries.

Although you may be unsuccessful in prosecuting a criminal case because the district attorney or prosecutor may decide they do not have enough proof to fulfill the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard, the law firm of Zimmet & Zimmet has more than 40 years of combined experience in civil actions involving cases with limited evidence.

Civil actions provide you with more flexibility and an opportunity to prove your case. We can operate in areas of the law that prosecutors and district attorneys can not. For example, they can not call any witnesses besides the medical examiner, doctor or coroner who saw the child in their attempt to prove the exact time the child’s injury occurred. On the other hand, we can hire nationally recognized doctors and other experts to prove the injury’s timing.