**Mother Denies Causing Fatal Head Injury to Toddler as Harrowing Trial Continues**
A mother has denied inflicting a fatal head injury on her two-year-old son, whose death has become the focus of an emotive murder trial underway at Mold Crown Court in North Wales. On 14 August 2021, Ethan Ives-Griffiths was found collapsed at his grandparents’ home in Flintshire. Tragically, he died in hospital two days later, with extensive medical examinations revealing he was severely underweight, dehydrated, and that his body bore as many as 40 external injuries.
Ethan’s maternal grandparents, Michael and Kerry Ives, aged 47 and 46, both stand accused of the child’s murder. They have pleaded not guilty to those charges, along with denying causing or allowing the child’s death, and additionally face counts of cruelty to a person under 16. Ethan’s mother, 28-year-old Shannon Ives, faces accusations of causing or allowing his death and cruelty; she too has denied all allegations against her.
The court proceedings have delved into complex questions about what really happened in the hours and days leading up to Ethan’s critical injury. Medical experts previously told the court that the boy’s fatal wounds were likely caused by significant applied force, such as shaking, and that this occurred only minutes before Ethan ultimately collapsed.
On Monday, Shannon Ives took to the witness box, visibly distressed as she faced cross-examination from David Elias KC, who is representing her father, Michael Ives. Under questioning, Ms Ives was asked directly whether she had ever struck her son. She responded emotionally, indicating that her only physical discipline amounted to light taps, either on his hand or bottom, and insisted this did not constitute real harm.
Further scrutiny came over the timing of her statements to police. Ms Ives did not mention in her original interviews that she had witnessed her father shaking Ethan on the day of the incident—a detail she only brought to police attention nearly a year after her son’s death. When pressed about this delay, she offered a candid explanation: “I was told about what the doctors had said in their reports,” she said, stating that her emotional state in the wake of her son’s death had left her confused and traumatised.
Under more direct questions, Mr Elias suggested she might simply be shifting blame to others. “Were you just trying to blame whoever you could and not you?” he asked. Ms Ives was firm in her response: “No, cause I’d never shaken him.” The defence pressed further, accusing her of fabricating the details about shaking to redirect fault, but Ms Ives maintained the truthfulness of her account, saying, “No, I’m not [making it up].”
Her persistent denial came despite challenging lines of questioning about whether she herself had harmed Ethan. Mr Elias concluded his cross-examination by asking, “You were the one who hit Ethan, weren’t you?” Ms Ives responded firmly, “No, I didn’t.”
The trial has brought to light devastating details about Ethan’s final days. The jury has heard about the severe state of neglect surrounding the toddler at the time of his collapse. A key aspect of the case remains who, if anyone, bears direct responsibility for the fatal injuries, and whether others in the household allowed the circumstances leading to the child’s deterioration.
Both Michael and Kerry Ives, of Kingsley Road, Garden City, and Shannon Ives, of Rhes-y-Cae near Holywell, deny all charges levelled against them. The trial is ongoing, as jurors continue to piece together testimony and forensic evidence in search of the truth behind Ethan’s untimely death.
Observers note that the legal process is challenging not only for the bereaved family members but also for the wider community, which has followed developments with concern and distress. As proceedings continue, the court will hear further evidence in what has become an emotionally charged case highlighting the tragic consequences of alleged child neglect and abuse.
The case is expected to resume this week, with further testimony anticipated from medical professionals, family members, and experts in child welfare. The outcome of the trial could hold lasting implications for how such cases are prosecuted and understood in the future.