Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
State high court considers admissibility of 'abusive head trauma' testimony in Hsu appeal
Summary
At oral argument in Commonwealth v. Shu Feng Hsu, defense counsel urged the Supreme Judicial Court to bar or limit expert testimony framed as "abusive head trauma," arguing it usurped the jury and lacked scientific foundation; the Commonwealth defended the testimony as helpful and limited by instructions.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard arguments over whether expert testimony described as "abusive head trauma" (AHT) should have been admitted at trial in the involuntary manslaughter conviction of Shu Feng Hsu, who was convicted in the death of her 11‑month‑old niece, Chloe Chen.
Christopher DeMayo, counsel for Hsu, told the justices that AHT testimony in this case was not merely explanatory medical evidence but functionally a diagnosis of criminal conduct that risked usurping the jury. "She took everything the jury heard, she kind of regurgitated it," DeMayo argued, saying Dr. Schwartz’s opinion was derivative of treating physicians’ accounts and sometimes embellished those accounts in a way that prejudiced the jury. DeMayo urged the court either to exclude such testimony or find that Judge Wilkins abused his discretion in admitting it.
DeMayo pressed…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
