From the article you quoted:

“District Judge Daniel Hebert told prosecutor Christina Trocheck that the case would require more work before he could find probable cause to support the serious allegations against Tiffany L. Axelson, 24, 107 Hays Court. The judge dismissed charges in a way that would allow them to be re-filed.”

That means that there is a hurt baby and no concrete proof that Axelson herself did it. The judge thinks she did it, but knows the prosecution can’t prove it. There also appears to be suspicion on the child’s mother.

You said:

They didnt have enough evidence against Tiffany which I know doesnt mean she didnt do it, but I was Tiffany’s neighbor when this happened and although I didnt really know Tiffany I know she didnt do this. If Tiffany is guilty of anything it could be that she didnt turn the mother in, but at the same time if she felt that the baby was in any real danger, she would have done the right thing for that baby and turned the mother in.

Pfft. She’s not guilty because you’re her neighbor, and you didn’t really know her, but since she lives by you you’re sure she could not have done this, but maybe she didn’t get help for an injured child when she should have, but you still don’t think she did anything wrong? Come on, now, that is the weakest argument ever posited on this site.

Fact is, the charges against Axelson were dropped and my article is edited to reflect that. The other fact is that the charges were dropped over a month ago and you just now showed up to champion the neighbor you hardly know, but know well enough to be sure she’d never shake a baby in a stressful moment. Riiight.

I hope Tiffany Axelson is actually innocent and didn’t just get away with shaking an infant. But someone hurt that baby, and the mother has not even been charged. Unfortunately, it looks to me like one of those cases where a baby gets hurt and nobody saw anything and the evidence leads to a range of hours rather than minutes and they just can’t prove it. Someone hurt that baby. If not Tiffany and not the mother, then who?

By ERIN MATHEWS

Salina Journal

Although he didn’t doubt the baby’s injuries were real, a Saline County judge ruled Tuesday that the evidence presented during a preliminary hearing against a child care provider accused of violently shaking the infant was not sufficient and dismissed charges against her.

District Judge Daniel Hebert told prosecutor Christina Trocheck that the case would require more work before he could find probable cause to support the serious allegations against Tiffany L. Axelson, 24, 107 Hays Court. The judge dismissed charges in a way that would allow them to be refiled.

Trocheck, an assistant Saline County attorney, could not be reached for comment following the hearing.

Hebert said the state’s case against Axelson relied on information given by medical doctors that was not within the knowledge base of the ordinary juror. Much of the medical evidence presented did not sufficiently pinpoint the time frame during which the injuries occurred, Hebert said. He also was not satisfied that evidence was sufficient that Axelson was the only person who could have caused the baby’s injuries.

“We may be jumping to real conclusions that haven’t been fully investigated before bringing very serious charges against this defendant,” Hebert said.

Before the judge’s ruling, Trocheck said she believed the state had met its burden of proof.

Symptoms the child suffered, from a moderate to severe concussion, including vomiting, seizures and breathing irregularities, led a child abuse evaluation team at Wesley Medical Center, Wichita, to conclude the child could be safely sent home with his mother, according to testimony offered during the first day of the hearing on Aug. 22.

Those symptoms, which are known to be caused when a baby is violently shaken, usually occur within two hours of the traumatic injury that caused them, a Wichita pediatrician testified. Axelson was the only person who had cared for the baby for seven and a half hours before the onset of his symptoms on April 28, according to testimony.

Salina police investigator Melissa Short was the only witness to testify Tuesday. Short said she interviewed both Axelson and Ofelia Rodriguez, the baby’s mother. Short testified that Rodriguez said she thought the baby was in normal health. However, he had been fussy that morning and was teething, so she gave him some Tylenol before taking him to Axelson’s house.

Axelson told Short that she had put the baby down for a nap after feeding him a bottle at 11:30 a.m. Axelson said she woke the baby up at 3 p.m. and fed him another bottle, which he vomited on her, Short testified. Axelson called the baby’s mother and called for an ambulance when the child seemed unresponsive, Short testified. Axelson said she had not shaken the baby, Short said.

Axelson was caring for six children that day, with Rodriguez’ 8-month-old baby being the youngest, and the oldest being age 3, Short said. Short said Rodriguez told her she had never observed Axelson getting angry or acting inappropriately with the children in her care.

Short said the initial investigation looked at other possible suspects but eventually focused on Axelson based on the medical opinions of staff at Wesley who had examined the child.

IMPQUEEN (and everyeone else) I think you ALL owe Tiffany and her family an apology! They didnt have enough evidence against Tiffany which I know doesnt mean she didnt do it, but I was Tiffany’s neighbor when this happened and although I didnt really know Tiffany I know she didnt do this. If Tiffany is guilty of anything it could be that she didnt turn the mother in, but at the same time if she felt that the baby was in any real danger, she would have done the right thing for that baby and turned the mother in. And saying that she is guilty because of the picture of her! Come on, she was like 8 months pregnant and was probably a little stressed out about everything going on. Im sure the last thing on her mind was how she looked. Also they didnt arrest her until very late at night. Living next door to Tiffany I never even heard her raise her voice to her dogs let alone do something so horrible to a baby! I know there are very bad daycare providers out there but Tiffany is/was not one of them!

I hate peaple that abuse and mistreat children just as much as every one else.

Wow, found some truth in this post after all….

I know Tiffany really well, in fact she is my cousin and is sitting in my living room right now.

Oh, you poor thing, I sure hope she doesn’t bash your head in like she did this innocent child.

Now to the tard. I love tards. They’re fun. Like this:

Nothing makes me laugh like a tards butchering of the English language while on a quest to appear intelligent.

Fowl Language ….BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Peaple – Is that some new food like a cross between a pea and an apple?

You have to love a baby abuser defender that’s a tard don’t you? BWHAHAHAHAHAH

R

Whatever happen to innocent until proven guilty. In the world today it is guilty until proven innocent and that is exactly what we are going to do.

http://www.dreamindemon.com/2008/03/16/true-crime-why-we-do-what-we-do

I love when we get a perfect textbook family-member defense. This one is beautiful. I wish I could score you for originality, but your usual mistaking of the internet for a court of law is, sadly, overused. By a long shot. I’m gonna give JGosselin a 6/50. Five points for using the same whine everyone else does, and one point for taking me up on my offer.

Now to the tard. I love tards. They’re fun. Like this:

By the use of such fowl language and rude comments that make absolutly no sense or most of them do not even have any thing to do with the situation at hand.

BWAAAAHAHAHAAA!! Here, I’ll answer Caregiver in the appropriate fowl language:

Quack quack wuack, chirp, twitter, tweet. Remember, Caregiver, Imp’s First Rule Of Don’t Be A Dumbass: if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and babies in its care get head injuries, it’s a child abusing duck.

Struck out by a fowl ball, huh?

That’s all I got, have a nice day.

R

These are the people we pay to care for our children? A baby shaker and an illiterate retard?

Kinda scary, considering how children learn from their caregivers… huh? That is if they survive and aren’t murdered by them, or in this case nearly murdered by them.