Ron:

Once again, let me say that my own mother, whom I love, smacked me and my brother around a bit, and we are both useful and productive members of society far better off than people who are taken away by Child Protective Services and go through the foster care system. Though we may have some issues, I don't think the psychological effects of being smacked were serious. So it would be counter productive to over-react to this, IMHO.

If physical damage is the issue, marks ARE important. It's true that "certain blows will not leave visible marks," but physical marks are one prime indicator of injury. Try to tell a doctor that the absence of marks is irrelevant and she'll laugh at you. It's very relevant, though it may not be the whole story. In any case, as you say, the examination showed that the child had NOT sustained any serious injury.

If psychological damage is the issue, it would probably be far more damaging to take her away, unless we can show a pattern of abuse that goes beyond this one incident.

Intent to harm was caught on tape? I must have missed that part--you must have one of those high definition TVs. In fact, I didn't think you could catch an intent on videotape. What was caught was a mom smacking around her child. Anything else, including supposed motives, intentions and, yes, even ethnic discrimination, is being read into it by outside interpreters.