A police officer charged with assaulting his young stepson walked free yesterday after a magistrate ruled he had no case to answer.His wife, however, remains on trial for the same offence.Both defendants denied charges of assaulting the boy on an unknown date between May 1 and May 31 this year.The boy’s mother has admitted using a belt to discipline the child, but said the punishment was lawful chastisement. The boy’s stepfather denied ever striking the child with a belt.Neither the defendants nor the complainant can be identified for legal reasons.The court had earlier heard testimony from the young victim, who said that his mother and stepfather had given him “licks” with different belts in separate incidents in May.On May 31, a police forensic officer photographed bruises and cuts to the child’s right thigh, which the boy said was caused by the beating.In a subsequent police interview, the child’s mother admitted striking the child with his school belt three times after hearing repeated reports of his bad behaviour in school.The woman denied that the punishment left marks on the boy’s skin. She insisted that her husband was allowed to physically chastise the boy but she had never seen him do so.In Magistrates’ Court yesterday prosecutors read in evidence from physician David Barber. He said that in looking at the child’s leg he identified two crescent-shaped legions where the skin had been broken. He also noticed one vertical mark around four inches wide and four horizontal marks, along areas of faded bruising.After the Crown closed its case, the stepfather submitted he had no case to answer. He argued that the only evidence against him was the testimony of the complainant.According to the law, the court can only accept the unsworn testimony of a child if it is corroborated.Crown counsel Susan Mulligan argued that the bruising on the child’s leg was corroborating evidence in itself, but Senior Magistrate Archibald Warner ruled there was no corroborating evidence that the bruise was caused by the defendant.“I have carefully considered the extensive and forceful evidence supported by the authorities led by Ms Mulligan for the Crown,” Mr Warner said. “I have carefully considered the meaning of corroboration in its application in these types of cases.“It’s the duty of the trial judge in this case to carefully identify what pieces of evidence if any that are capable of corroborating the unsworn evidence of a child, such as [the one in this case].“In all the circumstances, I find that there is no evidence in this case that is capable of corroborating his evidence; that it was the defendant who struck him with a belt causing the injuries as shown by the exhibits in this case.”As a result, Mr Warner ruled that the child’s testimony was inadmissible in the case against the stepfather and dismissed the charge against him.However, Mr Warner said that the child’s mother had admitted using a belt to strike the complainant, and as a result did have a case to answer.The mother subsequently declined the opportunity to testify, or bring forward any witnesses.Summarising the Crown’s case against the remaining defendant, Ms Mulligan said that while it is legal for a parent to physically chastise a child, the punishment must be reasonable. In this case, she told the court the punishment was “clearly and manifestly excessive and not reasonable” based on the injuries sustained.“This, combined with other evidence in her statement, suggests that this was not a calm, reasoned correction with the use of corporal punishment but rather a mother who went too far out of frustration and anger,” Ms Mulligan said.Mr Warner adjourned the matter until next week, when he said he will deliver his judgement after considering the details of the case.The victim’s father later expressed outrage over Mr Warner’s ruling that his son’s evidence was inadmissible.“You don’t march a child before the court and then not listen,” the father said. “Why did he drag him before the court? Why did the magistrate ask him questions if the answers were inadmissible?“People talk about how we all need to step up and speak out. My son was brave enough to come to the court. Here we have a child who stood up to say what happened to him, and his voice went unheard. A little boy’s voice went unheard in court.”