May 26 2013 Latest news:
By Colin Adwent, crime correspondent
Thursday, November 8, 2012
A VILE thug who caused horrific injuries to a baby girl got his head stuck between the bars of the dock after making a bid for freedom from a London court.
After Braybrook’s sentencing in August last year, Suffolk Constabulary’s Detective Inspector Tonya Antonis, responsible for the victim care centre in Ipswich, said: “This was a very traumatic case for everyone involved.
“The doctors and paediatrician were really quite horrified by the injuries this girl had sustained.
“Braybrook didn’t appear remorseful in any way. He just completely denied it and maintained the injuries had happened as a result of her going to the toilet.
“I would say these are the most serious injuries that I have known a child sustain in the 15 years I have worked in this field. I have never come across anything as serious and shocking as this before. It was just horrific.
“You have to ask the question – how can anybody inflict such an injury or do something like this to a small child? It is beyond belief.”
In scenes that threw a usually-sombre courtroom into chaos, evil thug Byron Braybrook tried to escape after losing his appeal against his conviction – only to find himself wedged between the bars of the dock.
The 22-year-old, who is serving an indefinite jail term for his sickening attack on a toddler, refused to leave the dock at the Royal Courts of Justice after judges condemned his attempt to overturn a jury’s guilty verdict as simply incredible.
The drama unfolded in the Criminal Appeal Court, housed within the historic building on The Strand, London.
Braybrook tried to wriggle free before forcing his head through the wrought-iron bars of the dock. Astonished onlookers gasped as Braybrook, of Maidenhall Approach, Ipswich, thrust his left arm and leg through a gap in the bars and appeared to almost get through.
He then ran to the end of the dock and wedged himself in – with his head sticking through a gap in the bars at the top and his feet on the wooden railing below.
As the judges left the court and security guards flooded into the dock, he shouted: “I’m not going. You’ll break my neck if you try to get me down. I’ll hang myself.”
Braybrook’s lawyers and members of his family tried to persuade him to go quietly, but he refused and it took around 15 minutes to forcibly remove him from the dock.
He was at the Criminal Appeal Court, housed within the historic building on The Strand, for an appeal against his convictions for unlawful wounding and assault by penetration – committed against a baby girl.
Braybrook was handed imprisonment for public protection – almost identical to a life sentence – at Ipswich Crown Court in August last year after being found guilty of the crimes. He also admitted a count of child cruelty.
His lawyers argued his convictions were ‘unsafe’ and urged appeal judges to consider ‘fresh evidence’, which they said supported his claim he was nowhere near the child when the attack happened.
But his appeal was dismissed by three of the country’s most senior judges, who said the new evidence was ‘not credible’ – particularly as it was put forward in support of Braybrook’s fifth version of events since his arrest.
The court heard he was charged after the baby girl was found to have sustained serious injuries to her genitals. She was rushed to hospital after being examined by a GP and medics concluded ‘significant force’ had been used to inflict her severe injuries.
A paediatric expert, who had to put the extremely distressed child under general anaesthetic to examine her injuries, said they were the worst he had seen on a baby of this age in his 20 years as a practitioner.
Braybrook initially denied any wrongdoing but, following his convictions, told a probation officer he had caused the injuries. However, he later said he wanted to retract his admissions, claiming he only made them because he thought it was what he was expected to say.
After getting new legal representation, he launched the appeal against his convictions – claiming he was not near the child at the relevant time and submitting evidence from witnesses which he said backed up his alibi.
But, dismissing his appeal, Lord Justice Toulson said: “The alibi defence shows every sign of late fabrication.”
Sitting with Mr Justice Langstaff and Judge Anthony Morris QC, the judge added: “In this case, the evidence falls so far short of even the minimum threshold of credibility, that we do not consider it necessary to hear any cross-examination.”