The process used to diagnose Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS), a subgroup of Abusive Head Trauma (AHT) without signs of relevant trauma, is not reliable and remains uncertain. There is insufficient scientific evidence for any doctor or medical expert to conclude that if a child has three medical findings, the “triad”, then the infant must have been shaken or abused. All studies showing a ‘strong’ association between the triad and the diagnostic accuracy of the SBS diagnosis rely on circular reasoning., There is insufficient scientific evidence that the isolated triad can predict traumatic shaking, as there is a high risk of bias. There is an ongoing scientific controversy within the area. The aim of the present article is to facilitate a better understanding of this scientific controversy for those who are not themselves medical scientists -, such as lawyers, prosecutors, and judges. The legal and medical consequences of the current scientific controversy is that an incorrect diagnosis may delay the correct diagnosis, harm the infant and its family, and jeopardis e rule of law.