Court fears 'starving mother' poses danger to her kids
Justice Moshe Ravid says State's case against haredi woman accused of starving three-year-old son strong enough to secure conviction
Jerusalem District Court Judge Moshe Ravid ruled Wednesday that the evidence gathered in the case against the haredi woman accused of starving her toddler son, suggests she poses a threat to her other children as well.
The court heard the State's motion to limit the woman's house arrest further and Justice Ravid noted that the evidentiary basis of the case was solid enough to secure a conviction.
Related stories:
- 'Starving mother' may have abused other children
- Court: 'Starving mother' to remain under house arrest
- 'Starving mother' charged with abuse
- 'Starving mother' charged with abuse
The Parole Service is schedule to file its evaluation as to whether or not the woman poses a danger to her other children at the beginning of the week.
The court will debate the review next Monday, with the aim of ruling on the prosecution's motion to bar her from seeing her other children.
Reviewing the evidence in the case, Ravid noted that "the photographs (of the three-year-old boy abused) bear witness to the dire situation he was in before he was taken from her and the immense improvement he has experienced since."
Ravid also reviewed the testimonies of the physicians who treated the toddler, saying that they, along with other evidence, suggested the mother not only tampered with the variety of feeding treatments given to the child by the hospital, "But also treated him in a harsh and cruel manner, which goes against the nature of a caring mother."
The woman's lawyers, Attorneys David Halevy and Reuven Bar-Haim, said in response to the judge's ruling, "We reiterate that our client claims innocence and that the entire evidence material matches the innocence claim very well. The court's decision only relates to an alleged examination of the evidence submitted only by the prosecution.
"As for the rest of the children, we would like to stress that no indictment referring to any damage caused to them has been submitted, and there is no implication of such damage, and all these claims are based on assumptions and are completely baseless."
