Senior Magistrate Archibald Warner refused to accept the guilt of a woman who admitted hitting and injuring her son ? saying the case should never have come to court.

The mother admitted assault causing bodily harm to the seven-year-old, but claimed she gave him a black eye and scratches by accident.

After hearing a summary of the case, Mr. Warner said: "I don't know why this matter is being prosecuted." Refusing to accept the guilty plea, he ordered the case to go to trial before him next year.

Yesterday Crown Counsel Graveney Bannister said the Director of Child and Family Services made a complaint against the mother, a Devonshire woman, on behalf of Child A. Neither can be named for legal reasons.

In April this year, Police and a social worker went to the Botanical Gardens in Paget as a result of information received and spoke to a woman who identified herself as Child A's grandmother and directed them to a boy playing on the grass. The Police saw he had a black eye and scratches to his neck.

"He was spoken to and said that he was smacked by his mother in his eye," said Mr. Bannister. "He was left in the care of his grandmother. The Police commenced investigations."

This included interviews with the seven-year-old, his brother and their mother who told Police she was trying to break up a fight between the children while waiting for her mother to collect them and struck both boys with her arm.

Mr. Bannister said the mother was reported to the Domestic Crime Unit, although he did not state by whom. He showed Mr. Warner pictures of the injury to Child A.

Mr. Warner asked Mr. Bannister in apparent surprise: "Have you got a grandmother (who) used to hit you?" Mr. Bannister replied "I used to take licks" but added that in Bermuda it was a matter of degree.''

The mother told the magistrate: "I didn't mean to do what I done. I was stressed out...and was having an anxiety attack."

She went on to say she tried to break up a fight between her sons, and smacked both, but Child A "kept crying and crying." By now overcome with sobs, the mother told Mr. Warner: "I truly love my children."

Mr. Warner said: "First of all, I don't know why this is being prosecuted.''

And he said of the Crown's position: "Clearly in the statement of facts that's put forward, there's the defence that it was an accident. There is nothing to say that there was intentional brutality or abuse and it must be accepted by the Crown that she was attempting to chastise the children because they were fighting. The one youngster flinched and got hit in the eye with fingernails."

He agreed parents were not allowed to abuse their children, but said in law if the injury was an accident, this was a defence. He also said the law allowed parents to chastise their children without this being assault.

Mr. Bannister said injuries had been caused in this case, and urged the magistrate: "Even if it was an accident, instead of rushing to judgement or sentence, look at the circumstances. A Social Inquiry Report can determine what conditions the child faced, the scenario, et cetera."

He said it was right to prosecute, telling Mr. Warner: "It's in the public interest. It's in the purview of the court.''

Mr. Warner said he was not going to accept the mother's guilty plea and set the matter for trial in front of himself in March next year.

"If this matter was properly examined and investigated, we would not have to go to all this trouble," he admonished Mr. Bannister.

Mr. Warner granted her $500 bail until her trial.