A North-East MP is hoping to close a legal loophole which is allowing parents to escape conviction for killing or abusing their children. Women's Editor Christen Pears reports.

A CHILD is killed and, although they both vehemently deny any involvement, it is obvious from the outset that either the father or mother is responsible.

The police go through the motions but they know there is little likelihood of bringing the killer to justice. As long as the parents maintain their silence, the chances of either one being convicted are very slim and both will probably walk free.

Between 1998 and 2000, there were 476 cases of children being killed or severely injured where the law had difficulty proving which parent was responsible. Sixty-one per cent of the cases did not go to court, six per cent were thrown out by the judge and, in a further six per cent, the accused were acquitted. The Crown Prosecution Service managed to secure a conviction in just 27 per cent of cases.

Vera Baird QC, MP for Redcar and a prominent barrister, is campaigning for a change in the law to close the loophole which allows parents to get away with murdering their children. Along with Brighton Kemptown MP Dr Des Turner, she has proposed an amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill, which had its third reading in Parliament on Tuesday.

She says: "There are far, far more cases of children being killed by their parents or carers than by strangers. Cases like Soham are horrendous and they quite rightly feature in all the headlines, but three children under ten are killed by carers per month and because they don't get the same sort of publicity, they don't generate the same sort of outrage.

"Very few people are prosecuted because, at the moment, if no one speaks out, no one can be convicted. The police don't even try. They just leave it because they know they won't get a conviction. Children are going unprotected in their own homes."

The clause will introduce a new offence which, Vera hopes, will bring those responsible to justice.

She explains: "If two people are present at the death or serious injury of a child and neither says anything, they will both be convicted of not having protected the child. But there is a defence if a person can prove they took reasonable steps to protect the child or if they say it was the other person. If you keep quiet, you will be convicted."

She hopes this will encourage the parent or carer who is not responsible to inform police about what actually happened, increasing the chances of the guilty party being convicted.

The law governing the issue was established by a test case in 1987. James and Linda Lane had their convictions for the manslaughter of their 22-month-old-daughter overturned on appeal because the prosecution could not prove which parent had fractured her skull. This established the legal principle that where there is not sufficient evidence to prove which of the two parents is responsible, neither can be convicted.

The NSPCC and other childcare agencies have been campaigning on the issue for several years. In 1993, they called for urgent action following the death of eight-week-old Kim Griffin from London. She was taken to hospital with a six-inch skull fracture, shattered rib cage, broken arm and broken collarbone. She died three days later. Her parents were arrested and charged with cruelty but they kept silent and the charges were dropped.

The case intensified pressure on then Home Secretary Ken Clarke to review the centuries-old right of defendants to remain silent to avoid incriminating themselves. But although the Home Office said this was one area being studied by a royal commission into the criminal justice system, the law has remained unchanged.

Several high profile cases over the last few years have brought the problem to public attention, most recently at the inquest in September last year into the death of six-month-old Angus Fell, of Barrow-in-Furness .

The pathologist who carried out a post mortem examination said there were signs Angus had been violently shaken but his parents, who were the only people in the house at the time he received his fatal injuries, denied harming him. Neither was charged.

Recording a verdict of unlawful killing, Furness Coroner Ian Smith expressed his frustration at the lack of justice. "Mr and Mrs Fell are covering up for the actions of the other. They know what happened to Angus. The medical evidence is overwhelming. I am sure it was done and I am fairly confident who did it - but that is not beyond all reasonable doubt."

Last year, the NSPCC set up a working group to look into the issue and explore how the law can be changed to ensure that adults who kill children are brought to justice. Following a high profile case in Brighton, in which three children died, Sussex Police carried out a survey of police forces in England and Wales.

It showed that over a three-year period up to December 2000, three children under ten were killed or seriously injured each week. Fifty per cent of the victims were under six months and 83 per cent were under two years. The working group presented its findings at a conference at Cambridge University last year, entitled Which of You Did It?. A number of recommendations were made, including a review of the rules of evidence in criminal proceedings and a new, nationally agreed protocol for carrying out investigations.

NSPCC lawyer Barbara Esam says: "We do not accept the view that this problem is just too difficult to solve or that these injustices should be tolerated because there are relatively few children each year who are killed or seriously injured in these circumstances.

"The victims often cannot speak for themselves. We have to speak for them. Even where the injuries are not fatal, the child may be an infant or a very young child unable to say what has happened to them.

"We have no desire to sacrifice the safeguards within our judicial system, which protect the innocent. Nor do we seek to convict an innocent party. We do, however believe that greater efforts have to be made to get at the evidence that would be available if both defendants were to tell the truth."

Following the publication of the report, the Government asked the Law Commission to look into it. The independent body carried out an initial consultation and made a series of proposals but these were later altered, and the Government is still looking for a solution.

Vera Baird became involved during the consultation stage and, working with Dr Turner, developed the amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill. The Government was both aware and supportive of their actions and at the third reading on Tuesday, Home Secretary David Blunkett, gave the clearest indication yet that action would be taken. He said: "...the matter is close to my heart, too. In the months ahead, if I still hold my current portfolio - as I sincerely hope - I am determined that we shall find a solution to that difficult problem."

Meanwhile, Vera is doing all she can to keep the issue in the public eye. She says: "It's amazing just how many parents kill their children. The more people are aware of that, the better and hopefully, something will be done about it soon."