Tauranga mother charged with injuring her child during Covid test acquitted

A Tauranga mother who was accused of injuring her child when attempting to get her to comply with a rapid antigen test says she "never hurt" her daughter. Photo / Bevan Conley

“I’ve always sworn black and blue that I wouldn’t turn into that person.”

A Tauranga mum accused of injuring her child while performing a Covid test told Crown Solicitor Anna Pollett, during cross-examination, that she has done “work on herself” to ensure she never uses violence in the way her biological mother did towards her.

Now a jury has acquitted the 34-year-old on a charge of injuring with reckless disregard, over injuries alleged to have happened during an attempted rapid antigen test (RAT).

The woman had picked up her 4-year-old daughter from preschool, in line with the arrangement she had with the girl’s biological mother, with whom she’d had a six-year relationship.

The mother was told another child had tested positive for Covid-19 so the next morning when the young girl awoke “sniffly”, she decided to do a test.

When the child wouldn’t comply and began “screaming and kicking” in a tantrum, the Crown alleged the mother had hit her bottom, squeezed her face to administer the test, and hit her lip.

The mother chose to give evidence in the trial, breaking into tears at one point, and asking for a break from the witness box, after she’d repeatedly insisted the children were mistaken, and she’d never hurt them.

She told Pollett the older of the two girls had been known to make incorrect statements, but stopped short of agreeing with Pollett’s proposition that she was calling her a “liar”.

She said her daughter, who’s in primary school, had some developmental delays and communication issues, and she wasn’t sure the child understood what she was saying, or what she was being asked about.

But Pollett said it was clear the child had been correct about some things – agreeing with aspects of the defendant’s account – and the girl’s description of what happened was consistent with the medical evidence about the bruising.

The woman said she didn’t cause the injuries. She said she’d been “as gentle as possible” and patient with her child as she tried to coax her to take the Covid test.

The girl had thrown a large tantrum – kicking, screaming, and rolling around on the floor.

When the mother attempted to calm her down and comfort her with a cuddle, the child thought she still had the nasal swab for the test in her hand and launched herself out of her arms, and into the couch.

This had caused the bruising to her face.

But Pollett said the degree of force needed to cause the bruising made that explanation “implausible”.

The mother said the doctor who examined her hadn’t been there when it happened and couldn’t know whether a face-knock to the couch could have caused the bruising.

“She hit the front of her face into the sofa,” the woman said.

“I’ve told everybody exactly the same thing, which is the honest truth.”

The Crown pointed to medical evidence from the paediatrician who had examined the girl and offered the view the injuries were likely to be non-accidental.

The pattern of the bruising, particularly the bilateral bruising under her eyes, was consistent with a hard squeeze across her face, and bruising to the eyes was rarely accidental, in the doctor’s opinion.

Pollett said in closing that this was not a case where there had been “any moment of calm”, as the mother suggested.

Instead, the mother had lost her cool and hit the child when she wouldn’t comply, despite knowing it could cause bruising.

“She knew the risk, she was very angry, and she took that risk knowing that [her daughter] may be injured.

“What we know from all of the evidence and what we can be sure of is that these injuries were not caused by a couch or the floor.”

In a police video interview, the girl’s older sister said their mum had become “angry” and had hit her younger sister all over her body when doing the “nose test”.

The court also heard from the other mother who said the children told her about the anger and hitting when they got home.

She said the older of the two told her, as they were driving, that, “Mum made me scared”.

She said both children had described the younger child being smacked on the bottom and the younger daughter, when asked about the injury to her face, demonstrated a hand across her mouth.

In closing, the mother’s lawyer Martin Hine said the injured girl had described falling off the couch, and into the couch, at one point, so there were aspects of the girl’s evidence that did support the mother’s account of how the bruising was caused.

He pointed to inconsistencies in the older girl’s video interview and suggested the jury treat her evidence with caution.

The jury deliberated for nearly four hours before delivering the not guilty verdict. The case concluded with Judge Louis Bidois, who presided over the trial, telling the woman she had been acquitted and was free to go.

Hannah Bartlett is a Tauranga-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She previously covered court and local government for the Nelson Mail, and before that was a radio reporter at Newstalk ZB.