Fifteen year old girl who killed her newborn baby

Or if that was the defence a judge (and jury, as well, I presume) discounted it.

The jury which was not unanimous.

I wonder if those jurors are still happy with their decision and can live with it.

She was represented by King’s Counsel. And expert reports were obtained as regards her mental state at the time. Lawyers don’t fabricate defences as you are suggesting should have been done. I posted the judgment at the time, why not read it?

Germanshepherdsmum

For good reasons,

I can't agree, Germanshepherdsmum.

Poor children, by which I mean both mother and child.

I hope her school teachers are feeling as guilty as hell - one or other of them should have realised what kind of family liFe this poor girl had and done something to help her long before she became pregnant, I know I would have felt guilty if this had escaped my notice!

And a teacher or some other grown up should have realised that her figure had changed, however hard the poor girl tried to conceal her pregnancy. We have been hearing of teenage mothers since I was 12 (many years ago now)

Desperate women all through history have killed new born babies and suffered for it.

Horrible to think that this girl's solicitor hadn't the sense to build up a defence along the lines that the girl concealed her pregnancy so as not to worry her parents, intending to put the baby up for adoption, then killed the infant while the balance of her mind was disturbed due to giving birth alone.

Or if that was the defence a judge (and jury, as well, I presume) discounted it.

For good reasons,

There is something very wrong here.

Two dead babies, two scared mothers, one a 15 year old child with a troubled family life, one 34 with a partner, both killed their babies and apparently wanted them out of sight, out of mind, denying the pregnancy and the reality of the birth.

Each treated completely differently.

That was to Glory.

The jury would have been instructed very clearly to deal with Mayo as a 15 year old. They would have been left in no doubt that they were required to do that.

I won’t argue either case further with you because you have a fixed mindset which is unable or unwilling to distinguish between the two. You were not in court to hear the evidence but nevertheless believe you know better than the experts and the jury. You do not.

The CPS said:

Her actions were deliberate, she chose to hide her pregnancy, give birth alone and kill her baby, then hide his body despite accepting that she had a family who would have supported her

The police said:
“It’s important the investigation and resulting proceedings were dealt with sensitively and proportionately by the police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) taking into account all the evidence gathered, including the expert medical reports, to achieve the most appropriate outcome in these very sad circumstances.”

🤔

So which case is which?
These statements could apply to each case.

Germanshepherdsmum

You know why the Mayo case took so long to come to trial Glory. Perhaps you should revisit the judgement as well as reading the judgement in the Barron case which I posted above. Barron has a very low IQ and a reading age of 10-12. She is a very different person to Mayo, who despite what you say was treated as a 15 year old in the case. Lawyers have to be able to approach cases such as this without emotion clouding the facts, and to contrast one case with another.
I wish you would stop using that hackneyed old phrase. It does you no credit and underlines your lack of understanding of the very basic differences between the two defendants.

Are you telling me that the jurors didn't look at Paris Mayo and see an adult? Because as you have said the judgement in this case rested with the jury, no matter what the legal reasons, the final decision is the jurors and they saw a 19 year old, not a 15 year old.
The condemnation and accusations made about that young girl are not balanced or reasonable. It is unreasonable to think that a 15 year old deliberately conceals a pregnancy from her family, with nefarious intentions, but the partner of a 34 year old doesn't notice and the woman of 34 who doesn't tell her GP was just upset.
The baby was also said to have injuries which were possibly not from the fall but inflicted previously.

As for the reading age. The average reading age for the UK population isn't much higher. 10-12 is the reading age necessary to read the Sun newspaper.

You know why the Mayo case took so long to come to trial Glory. Perhaps you should revisit the judgement as well as reading the judgement in the Barron case which I posted above. Barron has a very low IQ and a reading age of 10-12. She is a very different person to Mayo, who despite what you say was treated as a 15 year old in the case. Lawyers have to be able to approach cases such as this without emotion clouding the facts, and to contrast one case with another.
I wish you would stop using that hackneyed old phrase. It does you no credit and underlines your lack of understanding of the very basic differences between the two defendants.

We knew the parents of a young girl of about 17 very many years ago. She and her boyfriend disposed of their newborn baby with the rubbish.
I know that she got probation, but can't remember what happened to him. I don't think he was sent to prison.

And 12 years for killing 39 people? - the sentence for a people-trafficker. How do these sentences add up?

I have worked with 15 year old pregnant girls - many of them, one of whom also killed her baby. She was entirely sane but luckily the judge saw fit to take her age and circumstances into account.

Psychiatrist don't always get it right.

As is evidenced by the two differing opinions in the Paris Mayo case.

Germanshepherdsmum

Barron was found by experts to have had a recognised psychiatric disorder. There was no such finding in the Mayo case.
www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/R-v-Barron-sentencing-140723.pdf
Whatever people on GN might imagine defendants’ mental conditions to be, I prefer to trust the opinions of highly qualified experts.
The law is not an ass Glorianny. It is highly sophisticated. Different situations produce different outcomes.

Any legal system which takes 4 years to bring a 15 year old girl to court and which tries her as an adult is an ass.
Are you telling me that if the jury had seen a vulnerable 15 year old in the dock she would have been treated in the same way? Because I don't believe that.

Barron was found by experts to have had a recognised psychiatric disorder. There was no such finding in the Mayo case.
www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/R-v-Barron-sentencing-140723.pdf
Whatever people on GN might imagine defendants’ mental conditions to be, I prefer to trust the opinions of highly qualified experts.
The law is not an ass Glorianny. It is highly sophisticated. Different situations produce different outcomes.

In the second case the woman was charged with infanticide despite living with her partner and being a mature woman.
Two consultant psychiatrists who assessed Barron found she was suffering from pervasive pregnancy denial, calling it a “classic case” of the disorder.
Noah was found to have died from blunt impact head injuries consistent with a fall from height and is said to have lived up to half an hour after the trauma was inflicted.
He lay in a neighbour's garden for a week before his body was discovered.

The teenage mother was charged with murder.
The judge also used his sentencing remarks to criticise a prosecution expert witness, describing forensic psychiatrist Dr Duncan Harding's "inflexibility of thinking" while giving evidence as "unhelpful".

"He had told the police that you ought to be prosecuted, a surprising opinion for an expert called to give evidence on a defendant's mental state to express," Mr justice Garnham said.

Germanshepherdsmum

It seems clear that the difference between the two cases lies in the medical evidence. In the earlier case the balance of the teenager’s mind was found not to have been disturbed, hence the jury found her guilty of murder rather than infanticide.

That is the opinion of one forensic psychiatrist.
The other one's opinion was different.

Luckygirl3

The differences in law are clear.

But this child was 15 when the incident happened - assessing her mental state 4 years later as an adult is not helpful or valid. How to get inside the mind of a frightened vulnerable child? You can be entirely sane, whilst also being frightened, lost and unsupported.

The interviews used as evidence of her mental state would have been done immediately after the event Luckygirl, not four years later.

Glorianny

So a woman of 34 is able to conceal a pregnancy, even though she is in a relationship, then kills her newborn and is treated with compassion
While a girl of 15 is considered to have deliberately hidden her pregnancy and planned a murder and must be punished.
The law is an ass

I agree wholeheartedly, Glorianny.

If it was influenced by the opinion of the forensic psychiatrist then I would point out again that the two medical expert witnesses differed in their opinions.

The differences in law are clear.

But this child was 15 when the incident happened - assessing her mental state 4 years later as an adult is not helpful or valid. How to get inside the mind of a frightened vulnerable child? You can be entirely sane, whilst also being frightened, lost and unsupported.

So a woman of 34 is able to conceal a pregnancy, even though she is in a relationship, then kills her newborn and is treated with compassion
While a girl of 15 is considered to have deliberately hidden her pregnancy and planned a murder and must be punished.
The law is an ass

It seems clear that the difference between the two cases lies in the medical evidence. In the earlier case the balance of the teenager’s mind was found not to have been disturbed, hence the jury found her guilty of murder rather than infanticide.

Callistemon21

Different judge, obviously.

She was charged with infanticide as a result of medical evidence.

Following the investigation, a file of evidence was passed to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and in October 2022, they authorised the defendant be charged with one count of murder.

As a result of detailed medical evidence compiled in preparation for a trial, the CPS accepted a plea to a charge of infanticide. In UK law, an offence of infanticide is one where a woman, by a wilful act or omission, causes the death of her child (under the age of 12 months), while the balance of her mind is disturbed due to the effect of giving birth.

I feel that Paris Mayo, a frightened teenager, has been dealt with very harshly in comparison.

Different judge, obviously.