A MOTHER whose baby son died from a horrific series of 94 injuries yesterday lost her fight to retain custody of her daughter.

And the High Court judge who originally ruled the mother had no involvement in the death was found to be "plainly wrong."

North Yorkshire County Council applied to take the girl - named only as J - into care late last year after her brother, named as K, died from "a catalogue of non-accidental injuries."

But in the High Court, Mr Justice Colman rejected their application after exonerating the mother from any involvement in her son's death.

He ruled the injuries were caused by the mother's "unusually well-built" partner who had "a reputation as a hard man".

But yesterday the Appeal Court overturned that decision - allowing the council to take the girl into care.

Sitting with Lord Justice Rix and Lady Justice Arden, Lord Justice Thorpe said: "It would be hard to describe a more serious catalogue of injuries to a very young child."

Counsel Lindy Armitage had argued that the mother's failure to take baby K to a doctor - despite fractures to his leg, ribs, and toe, and serious internal injuries - was due to the boy's "unusual pain threshold", which meant the injuries remained hidden until after his death.

But Lord Justice Thorpe said: "There is not a word of medical evidence to support that proposition. K was an ordinary little boy who screamed with pain and suffered ordinary childhood illnesses and experiences."

He said: "The judge dismissed the evidence of the partner, saying he was satisfied he was not telling the whole story. It seems to me that it's impossible to separate the mother from her partner in that regard.

"She never gave a trustworthy explanation as to the causation of the injuries.

"There was a fundamental flaw in her presentation and the judge's acceptance of her presentation. I am quite satisfied that the judge was plainly wrong and the appeal by the local authority must succeed."

The girl, who has been staying with a court-appointed guardian pending the outcome of the appeal, will now be taken into care.

A council spokesman said last night it had been surprised by the original decision. "We believe that our actions have now been vindicated," he said.