A CO Antrim woman has gone on trial accused of sexually assaulting her 2½-year-old daughter.
The 28-year-old woman is accused of causing a tear to the child's genital area, which the prosecution claim was "consistent with blunt trauma".
A jury at Belfast Crown Court was told yesterday that several doctors who examined the child's injuries concluded they were consistent with sexual assault.
The accused has been charged with wounding her daughter with intent and indecently assaulting her on October 5th, 2006. She has also been charged with child cruelty but denies all three charges.
Crown prosecutor Philip Mateer told the jury that on the afternoon of the alleged offences, the woman brought her daughter to her GP after she found blood in her nappy. The doctor told the accused the child would have to be taken to hospital where she was examined by another medic.
When the doctor questioned the defendant, the woman said she had put her daughter to bed about tea-time the evening before. She said that when her daughter woke the next morning, she was changed into a pair of pants which were replaced later that day with a nappy as the child was going for a nap.
The accused told doctors that prior to her taking a nap, her daughter was not showing any signs of pain or distress. She claimed that when the girl awoke from her nap, she noticed blood in her nappy.
Mr Mateer said the child was kept in hospital and was examined by another two doctors, who both concluded "considerable force or pressure" was used to cause a tear in the child's genitalia.
The prosecutor said medics agreed the injuries were "indicative of sexual assault which occurred within the previous 24 hours" and were consistent with a "smooth and round object" being used.
A PSNI investigation was launched and the child's father and grandfather were arrested. After forensic samples from both men were analysed, nothing was found to connect either to the alleged assault and both were released without charge.
Police officers were told by the girl's mother that no other adult had been in contact with the child during the time doctors believed the incident occurred.
Mr Mateer said it was the Crown's case the defendant was "the only adult alone" with the girl, adding that due to "her account, given the nature of the injuries and what she said about her daughter, she caused these injuries".