By NEAL WAGNER / Managing Editor

An Alabaster woman who has denied allegations of abusing her infant child is set to appear in court on Aug. 13 after her June 11 court date was continued.

Caitlin Gregory Lunceford, 25, originally was scheduled to appear in court for a preliminary hearing on June 11, Shelby County Circuit Court Judge Dan Reeves continued her case until Aug. 13 at 8:30 a.m.

The Alabaster Police Department arrested Lunceford, whose address was listed in the 500 block of Windsor Court in Alabaster, on Jan. 23 and charged her with one count of aggravated child abuse, a Class B felony.

According to her arrest warrant, Lunceford allegedly did “strike and/or shake” her child, who was about 2 months old and in her care at the time of the incident. The warrant claimed Lunceford caused “brain damage” to the infant.

In a motion filed in court on Feb. 25, Lunceford requested a previous court order denying her contact with her child be lifted, and requested she be allowed supervised visitation for one hour three nights per week.

Along with the order requesting supervised visitation, Lunceford’s attorneys, Barry and Lara McCauley Alvis, also filed the results of a polygraph test Lunceford took on Feb. 19 with Sprayberry Polygraph Investigations.

During the test, the polygraphist, Jesse Sprayberry, asked Lunceford if she caused any of the infant’s injuries, if she deliberately injured the child in any way or if she ever lost her temper and injured the child. Lunceford answered “no” to all three questions, according to the Sprayberry.

“In the present case … evaluation of the test charts determined that deception was not attempted to the relevant questions,” Sprayberry wrote. “In my opinion, Ms. Lunceford answered the questions truthfully.”

In the motion seeking supervised visitation, Lunceford’s attorneys wrote, “If this mother is innocent of said crime, it would be an injustice to inflict lasting emotional harm on this 3-month-old child that could never be repaired.”

As of June 16, Circuit Court Judge Dan Reeves had not ruled on the request for supervised visitation.