The Paris Assize Court on Thursday sentenced to six years in prison a 63-year-old nanny found guilty of shaking eight-month-old Augustin, who died the next day following numerous internal injuries. Legbro Wahi, 63, had been on trial since Monday for willful violence leading to the death without intention of inflicting it on a minor under 15 years old by an ascendant or a person having authority over the victim.
The court underlined “the extreme seriousness of the facts” alleged against Legbro Wahi, specifying “not having believed” the statements of the latter, who remained prostrate “in constant denial” throughout the procedure. This sentence is accompanied by a ten-year ineligibility as well as a definitive ban on the accused from carrying out voluntary or professional activity with minors. Legbro Wahi was placed under arrest warrant.
Infant injuries “compatible” with shaken baby syndrome
During his indictment, Attorney General Philippe Courroye requested eight years in prison for the nanny. “We know, because Augustine’s body spoke, that it was shaken. We know she took the child and shook him,” he said.
The sixty-year-old was recruited in January 2019 by the baby’s family and a couple of neighbors. On May 22, 2019, she contacted emergency services after noticing that Augustin had vomited and was in a coma. Rushed to hospital, the child died the next morning of numerous cranial hematomas and retinal hemorrhages. Medical assessments carried out after the victim’s death concluded that the infant’s injuries were “consistent” with shaken baby syndrome.
The accused, however, always denied it. During several hearings, she had described a child with unusual behavior, crying, and particularly agitated on the day of the incident. The accused had also mentioned suspicious behavior on the part of the victim’s father, and placed the blame on the couple. “I am not sure of the shaken baby theory, just as I am not sure of the opposite,” argued Thursday her lawyer, Me Bernard Benaiem, who pleaded for the acquittal of his client with the “benefit of the doubt” .