After reviewing the motion for new trial, Judge Daniel O’Shea exercised his discretion under the law to grant an evidentiary hearing concerning the post-conviction medical analyses conducted by Brian’s experts.

The post-conviction evidentiary hearings commenced on August 25, 2025. In their opening statement, Brian’s attorneys suggested that the evidence would show the fundamental flaws with the Commonwealth’s theory at time of trial.

First to take the stand for the defense was Brian Legendre, (now) retired Westport Fire Chief and the first responder who initially assessed Christopher. Legendre testified that the Christopher presented with bruises that appeared to be old. As part of his assessment, he observed the diaper to be clean and dry. He also noted that the child’s veins were “collapsed,” indicating that he was dehydrated.

Pediatrician Dr. Jean Leimert testified on the contents of her affidavit where she stated that Christopher’s last “no show” was on January 22, 1996. That appointment was for a “recheck,” probably in connection with the fractured clavicle noted in the January 13, 1996 hospital record.

Dr. Leimert was made aware of Sneed’s trial testimony wherein she claimed that she called Dr. Leimert’s office on January 20, 1996 to report that Christopher was acting drunk or wobbly for five to ten minutes and was reportedly told by a nurse that it was likely due to him being off balance because of the fractured collarbone. Dr. Leimert stated in her affidavit and in her testimony that no one in her office would have given that advice in response to a mother’s call, nor would they have waited two days to have the child seen. Instead, they would have recommended emergency treatment.

Further, if Dr. Leimert knew that the hospital had given a “Head Injury” Sheet as part of Christopher’s discharge care after the fractured collarbone, based on Sneed’s trial testimony that on the day of Christopher’s death he had been acting “too quiet,” biting his lip and stumbling, she would have called an ambulance immediately. Sneed did not call an ambulance, nor did she bring Christopher to the doctor that day.

Biomechanical engineer, Dr. Chris Van Ee believes that Christopher’s six-inch linear skull fracture was consistent with a single impact, rather than the multiple impacts described by Dr. Weiner. He also disagreed with Dr. Weiner’s conclusion that the massive skull fracture could not have happened short of Christopher falling out of a ten-foot high tree limb landing on his head, and Dr. Newberger’s opinion that the skull fracture required a massive application of force, such as a fall from a two-story height onto concrete. Dr Van Ee opined that Christopher’s skull fracture did not require that type of force: rather, it could have resulted from “the impact force generated by a fall as low as 3-5 feet onto a hard residential floor surface as could occur in a domestic environment.” In support of his conclusion, Dr. Van Ee indicated that neither Dr. Weiner nor Dr. Newberger relied on any technical data, and their opinion “doesn’t fit with what we know about the tolerance of the skull to impact from a drop.”

The Commonwealth did not offer any expert testimony or evidence to rebut the biomechanical opinion of Dr. Van Ee.

When asked what caused Christopher’s death, pediatric neuropathologist Dr. Waney Squier stated that all the brain showed from [Dr. Weiner’s] account is mild swelling and a small amount of subdural hemorrhage,and neither of those would be sufficient to cause sudden death.

Dr. Squier also concluded that nothing in Dr. Schoene’s neuropathology report provided an anatomical explanation for Christopher’s death. Dr. Squier considered it unusual that Dr. Weiner requested a neuropathological evaluation in August 1996, some seven months after the autopsy, and that he had already concluded before the referral that Christopher was subjected to an assault by someone.

In 1997, Brian’s trial attorney, Raymond Veary retained Dr. Edward Sussman, a board certified anatomic and forensic pathologist, to assist him in the defense of this case. At the time of his initial consultation with Attorney Veary, he did not have Dr. Newberger’s report expressing an intent to testify about Christopher’s death being associated with a massive rise in intracranial pressure. Had he been aware of that anticipated testimony, he would have advised Attorney Veary that it was incorrect, because neither Dr. Schoene nor Dr. Weiner concluded that the normal furrows of the brain were crushed by a huge amount of pressure.

Dr. Janice Ophoven is a board certified anatomic and forensic pathologist with over 40 years of experience in the field of pediatric forensic pathology. Her medical practice focuses on evaluating childhood injuries for evidence of possible abuse and neglect.

With regard to the medical investigation of this case, Dr. Ophoven was highly critical of many of Dr. Weiner’s conclusions following his autopsy and considered much of Dr. Weiner’s medical investigation to be lacking. For instance, Dr. Weiner failed to obtain Christopher’s recent pediatric and day care information which would have highlighted his history of falls, wobbliness, multiple bruises (at least one of which affected his forehead and prompted the hospital to issue “Head Injury Discharge Instructions”) and a fractured clavicle. Dr. Weiner also admitted at trial that he did not obtain Dr. Arcuri’s narrative report. Dr. Ophoven noted that Dr. Weiner failed to preserve a section of the skull fracture site and the subdural clot to determine their age, and failed to describe the color, consistency and level of adherence of the subdural blood. These were critical factors in Dr. Ophoven’s estimation, because such testing could have ruled in or ruled out any healing that might have been taking place in the bone or subdural hematoma.

Given all the available medical and factual evidence, Dr. Ophoven ultimately opined that “Christopher did not die from acute blunt force trauma to the head on the day he presented to the hospital.

Her assessment of the evidence led her to conclude that Christopher suffered a severe head injury resulting in PTDI and complications, which then led to shock and cardiac arrest. In support of this conclusion, Dr. Ophoven testified that Christopher presented as a severely dehydrated, anemic three-year-old with a serum sodium level of 183 and a history of having multiple falls, being wobbly, acting drunk and being lethargic over the course of several days. Christopher’s advanced state of hypernatremic dehydration, as demonstrated by his severe abnormal fluid and electrolyte state (which was twice confirmed by the emergency room laboratory) provided convincing evidence that Christopher likely had PTDI following a traumatic head injury occurring at least days before he was found unconscious and vomiting at the bottom of the basement stairs.

Dr. Ophoven also criticized Dr. Newberger’s testimony, suggesting that it was “appallingly unscientific, grossly misleading, and in direct conflict with the medical data that was provided to him.”

She first took exception to his testifying to many areas which were outside his area of expertise. As pointed out in his trial testimony, Dr. Newberger admitted he was not trained in forensic pathology and had only witnessed a few autopsies in his career. Hе had never performed an autopsy, had never personally seen Christopher’s body, and drew all his conclusions from the 50 or so photos given to him. Dr. Ophoven testified that there was no scientific support for Dr. Newberger’s characterization of the age of Christopher’s bruising and pointed to a 1996 Department of Justice guideline for aging bruises, which was significantly changed in 2014.

The final witness for the defense was Dr. Jennifer Lipman, a physician board certified in anatomic and clinical pathology and forensic pathology and with direct experience with the MA Office of the Chief Medical Examiner.

Dr. Lipman’s report criticized nearly every aspect of the autopsy performed by Dr. Weiner. She concluded that the autopsy was inadequate both procedurally and in its documentation. She was equally critical of the opinion and testimony of Dr. Newberger, pointing to his mischaracterization of Dr. Weiner’s observations of Christopher’s injuries, and questioning his ability to render an opinion, outside of his specialty as a pediatrician, that the subdural hematoma and brain swelling were the causes of death.

The fundamental problem identified by Dr. Lipman is that Dr. Weiner never obtained, and therefore never addressed, Christopher’s highly abnormal lab results and his reported lethargy and episodic unsteadiness in the days leading up to his death. This problem was similarly identified by Peixoto’s other medical experts

The Commonwealth called Dr. Rene Stonebridge to testify as an expert pathologist. Dr. Stonebridge has worked at the Boston office of the Chief Medical Examiner since 2017. She is board certified in anatomic pathology, clinical pathology, forensic pathology, and neuropathology.

Dr. Stonebridge did not say anything contrary to what our experts testified to. As such, Brian’s attorneys did not need to cross-exam her.

The prosecution also presented Dr. David Cooke, a pediatric endocrinologist. On cross-examination, Dr. Cooke agreed that Christopher’s serum sodium level of 183 “absolutely” got his attention, and he acknowledged some physical markers showing that Christopher was severely dehydrated on his initial presentation to EMTs and the hospital. He further agreed that if 183 was an accurate serum sodium level, then it would be diagnostic of diabetes insipidus and that it would take more than a few hours for a person with even a high normal sodium level to reach the critically high level of 183.