Lawyers offered closing arguments yesterday in the trial of a former day care owner accused of causing grievous bodily harm to an ten-month-old boy.

The trial of 28-year-old Jacquelyn Fubler, of Pearman?s Hill, West Warwick concluded after lawyers debated whether or not there was no case to answer.

In March, the former Noah?s Ark Day Care owner admitted to causing grievous bodily harm to Stephen Ebbin, who was in her care on July 6, 2001.

At that time, Magistrate Tyrone Chin ordered the case be sent to the Supreme Court and Fubler was remanded in custody pending her sentence.

In May, when the case was presented to Chief Justice Richard Ground, Fubler admitted to causing grievous bodily harm to Stephen but stated she did not shake him so violently as to cause symptoms consistent with shaken baby syndrome.

The case was then ordered back to Magistrates? Court for retrial under the same magistrate to determined how the injuries occurred.

Responding to defence questions on the validity of paediatrician Dr. Alexander Barron?s testimony, prosecutor Kulandra Ratneser said that Dr. Barron was not qualified to speak about the cause of death and in that circumstance a forensic pathologist would have been called in. However, because the child did not die, a forensic pathologist was not called.

He added the best person to testify to Stephen?s injuries would have been Dr. Barron, not a forensic pathologist.

In March, Dr. Barron told the court that Stephen had an internal brain injury consistent with being shaken back and forth, at a high velocity. He told the court blood vessels in the child?s brain had burst, a classic indication of shaken baby syndrome.

Scans of the brain taken after the alleged assault showed there was permanent fluid on his brain, and had caused a dramatic increase in Stephen?s head circumference. Experts have predicted that Stephen will never reach his full potential as a result of the injuries.

The court was also shown photographs in March of dark crimson bruises on Stephen?s arm and legs and a cut on his lip said to be inflicted by Fubler, a mother of two.

Stephen had to be flown to Boston?s Children?s Hospital, and was found by doctors to have a left-sided chronic facial seizure associated with head trauma.

Mr. Ratneser added there was no evidence to suggest that Stephen?s injuries were caused by anyone other than Fubler.

He said that Stephen?s injuries were caused while in the care, custody, and control of Fubler on the same day the defendant admitted to the mother that Stephen fell off a chair.

Mr. Ratneser added that the day before Stephen was rushed to the hospital there was no evidence that he was shaken and that Fubler was in ?total control? on the day he did go to the hospital.

In arguing against the no-case submission Mr. Ratneser said: ?The question of reliability is a non-issue in this case.?

He added that every witness in the case was 100 percent reliable because their evidence was not challenged by the defence, therefore, the evidence must be accepted.

Defence lawyer Mark Pettingill said there was a ?big window? in regard to when the injuries were inflicted and there was no evidence that the child was assaulted when he was in the care of the defendant.

Mr. Pettingill added the prosecution?s suggestion that Fubler had sole care custody and control of Stephen during the time the injuries occurred was simply not true because the child was with family members as well.

There is no medical evidence in this case that the injuries were sustained while in the care of the defendant, he said.

He pointed out that if there was evidence that the shaking had occurred one hour before the child went to the hospital, the case would be totally different because the child would have been in Fubler?s care at that time.

Regarding Dr. Barron?s testimony, Mr. Pettingill said that there was no evidence Dr. Barron had the qualifications to say how the injuries occurred. Mr. Pettingill argued a forensic pathologist would be needed to testify to that .

He added that a paediatrician can not give forensic evidence and that doctors have specialised areas.

?You do not get your heart surgery done by a foot doctor,? said Mr. Pettingill.

Mr. Chin advised the court he would need some time to go over his notes before making a decision.

Fubler was remanded in custody and Mr. Chin will deliver his judgement on Monday morning.