Two decades after 21-month-old Rachelle Pelletier suffered a slow and painful death after being stomped and beaten in her Brockton home, it seemed that justice finally prevailed in 2005 when her mother and the woman's boyfriend were convicted in the slaying and sentenced to life in prison. But Thursday, the state's highest court overturned the second-degree murder conviction of Margaret Earle, ruling that prosecutors failed to prove that the child's mother acted with malice and knew there was a strong likelihood that the toddler would die when she failed to seek medical attention for her injuries. The child died March 7, 1985, from a blow to her abdomen that severed her small bowel, causing an infection that slowly killed her. Investigators were unable to prove who attacked the girl until years later, when Earle's former boyfriend, Michael Burnham, confessed that during a fit of rage while baby-sitting, he stomped on the baby's abdomen the night before she died. In its eight-page opinion, the Supreme Judicial Court found there was no evidence Earle, who told friends she believed her daughter had the flu, knew her boyfriend had attacked her daughter, even though the child had bruises on her face and body, two broken ribs, and swelling of her abdomen. The court found it was not enough to show that Earle failed to seek medical care when a reasonable person would have known it would cause serious harm to her daughter and possibly death. 'The testimony must support the inference of a plain and strong likelihood of death, and on that point the medical testimony was insufficient,' Justice Judith A. Cowin wrote. The court found that Earle's failure to take her daughter to the hospital may support her conviction for involuntary manslaughter, but not for murder. However, the court pointed out that it is too late to retry Earle on the lesser charge because of the six-year statute of limitations period for manslaughter in Massachusetts. There is no statute of limitations for murder. The ruling means that Earle, who has spent five years in prison, is likely to be released soon. Boston attorney Michael Schneider, , Earle's lawyer, praised the decision as 'resounding vindication' for his client. But the ruling drew swift condemnation from Plymouth District Attorney Timothy J. Cruz, whose office spent years investigating the Pelletier case before winning convictions against Earle and Burnham. The SJC upheld Burnham's 2005 conviction for first-degree murder two years ago. Schneider said that for Earle, now 46, 'this whole tragedy has been devastating to her for the past 25 years, but she has known in her heart of hearts that she had nothing to do with her daughter's death.' He said that he met with Earle, her 21-year-old son, and her mother Thursday afternoon at the Framingham prison where she is being held and that she was thrilled to learn that she will soon be free. He said he will file a motion with the court within the week seeking her release. 'There was absolutely no evidence presented at trial that she had any idea what had happened to her daughter the night before when her daughter was left alone with her boyfriend,' Schneider said. 'She didn't learn until 20 years later.' He said Earle, who was out celebrating her 21st birthday the night her daughter was attacked, was 'a young, immature mom,' who did not recognize the severity of her daughter's symptoms. Pelletier's father, who sat through Earle's 2005 trial, could not be reached for comment. But Cruz said he was 'gravely disturbed' by the court's decision, which took away a verdict that was given by a jury that heard weeks of live testimony and concluded Earle was guilty of murder for intentionally ignoring her daughter's suffering and leaving her to die. 'I think it's fair to say that Friday there was no justice for Rachelle Pelletier based on this decision,' said Cruz, adding that Earle had a duty to protect and care for her daughter, who weighed only 22 pounds when she was beaten by Burnham. 'If what they are saying is Margaret Earle can walk away from what she did to Rachelle, then maybe it's time the Legislature reopened whether manslaughter should not have a statute of limitations,' Cruz said. 