Fifteen year old girl who killed her newborn baby

The judge had expert reports before him and all the evidence. He explained how the sentence was reached. What is harsh or heavy handed about it? Did you note that the judge actually criticised the comments of the defence’s psychiatric expert? The starting point is that the jury, having heard all the evidence, had convicted her of murder.

You can’t remand to a secure psychiatric hospital someone who is not mentally ill.

I did read the judgement GSM

Thanks. I hope you found it useful.

Paris Mayo could have asked for help at any point

I think we need to seriously consider where and how she might have asked for help. Not all children live in cosy families where they can chat to Mum and Dad about their situation. Not all children feel confident to talk to adults at school. It is very sad that she did not feel able to reach out for help, but she should not be condemned for that. I wonder what any of us would have done at 15 if we had found ourselves pregnant? .... and in her family circumstances.

I agree Luckygirl13 whilst it was a terrible thing she did I think there were some extenuating circumstances.

I completely agree "Luckygirl".
What a terribly sad situation and 12 years is unbelievable.

Read the judgement to understand how 12 years was calculated. It wasn’t an arbitrary figure.

She killed the baby. Of course the jury found her guilty of murder.

It is the degree of premeditation versus panic reaction that is in dispute. Together with the degree of compassion for her age and needs shown in the sentencing. As I see it, that was 0.

The definition of infanticide given by Foxygloves seems to cover the circumstances. Not sure why it doesn't apply.

The jury were invited to consider infanticide. They decided the crime was not infanticide but murder.
If you read the judgement (my impression that you haven’t) you will see that in sentencing full consideration was given to her age when she committed the crime. She was shown compassion and nothing is ‘in dispute’.

I meant in dispute among posters on this thread, sorry that wasn’t clear.

I feel strongly about the sad outlook for this poor girl but will withdraw from this discussion now. Can’t go on repeating myself.

Bodach

" You've got to be mentally very unstable to actually kill any living thing, even an animal." Rather a sweeping statement, BlueBelle?

BlueBelle: you say a couple of pages back that you don't understand my post. I was attempting to suggest gently that your comment above (saying that anyone who kills any living thing, even an animal, has got to be mentally unstable) is a wild exaggeration. Are all anglers mentally unstable? Are all vets who euthanise sick animals mentally unstable? Are all soldiers who kill enemy soldiers on the battlefield mentally unstable? I think you are conflating killing with murder.

GSM - yes I did find the judgement useful to read. I meant to say thank you to you, but I was off to yoga.
It does help to understand the thinking behind sentencing and I'm aware of the fact that this will have been arrived at after careful thought. No judge wants to have his/ her rulings overturned on appeal, surely?

Thanks. Indeed, no judge wants to be overruled. As you have seen, there are sentencing guidelines they have to clearly show they have followed.

Casdon

This thread is going down exactly the same route as the one about the disabled lady and the elderly female cyclist.
We weren’t there, we didn’t have the evidence presented to us, including the psychiatric reports. We don’t know about the duration of her father’s illness, we don’t know that she was neglected, it’s all assumptions - but the report of her mother talking to her at the time she rang 999 is revealing. One thing I do know though Glorianny is what a crush injury is, if you can face it, look it up.

You may Casdon but the doctors in A&E didn't. When this person was admitted they described the injuries as being equivalent to being hit by a car. Eventually that was shown to be impossible and it was agreed they were the result of a fall.

I wonder what any of us would have done at 15 if we had found ourselves pregnant? .... and in her family circumstances.

I can say with absolute certainty I would not have murdered my baby and certainly not in such a cold blooded way.

I believe the legal age of criminal responsibility is 10 - might be wrong. Do some of you wish to raise it? I also find it odd that some are referring to this girl as a child.I don’t class 15 year olds as children - they’re young teens.

Glorianny

Casdon

This thread is going down exactly the same route as the one about the disabled lady and the elderly female cyclist.
We weren’t there, we didn’t have the evidence presented to us, including the psychiatric reports. We don’t know about the duration of her father’s illness, we don’t know that she was neglected, it’s all assumptions - but the report of her mother talking to her at the time she rang 999 is revealing. One thing I do know though Glorianny is what a crush injury is, if you can face it, look it up.

You may Casdon but the doctors in A&E didn't. When this person was admitted they described the injuries as being equivalent to being hit by a car. Eventually that was shown to be impossible and it was agreed they were the result of a fall.

Not quite, they said akin to being involved in a road accident I believe, if you read the transcript Germanshepherdsmum posted you will see exactly what type of injury it was. I don’t want to put the detail in my post about this or argue with you about it when the facts are there,

This article sums up the situation perfectly. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/30/women-kill-newborns-murder-infanticide-paris-mayo-courts
There seems to be an increasingly aggressive attitude towards women throughout society. There is also reference to the lack of proper funding for defence. The prosecution successfully convinced the jury that this was not infanticide.
The state of mind of any woman who has just given birth is neither as logical nor as capable as seems to be suggested. Giving birth with proper medical help can be traumatic, doing it alone at the age of 15 must have been devastating. How many can say that after giving birth they were able to plot, and execute any plan, never mind murder.

Casdon

Glorianny

Casdon

This thread is going down exactly the same route as the one about the disabled lady and the elderly female cyclist.
We weren’t there, we didn’t have the evidence presented to us, including the psychiatric reports. We don’t know about the duration of her father’s illness, we don’t know that she was neglected, it’s all assumptions - but the report of her mother talking to her at the time she rang 999 is revealing. One thing I do know though Glorianny is what a crush injury is, if you can face it, look it up.

You may Casdon but the doctors in A&E didn't. When this person was admitted they described the injuries as being equivalent to being hit by a car. Eventually that was shown to be impossible and it was agreed they were the result of a fall.

Not quite, they said akin to being involved in a road accident I believe, if you read the transcript Germanshepherdsmum posted you will see exactly what type of injury it was. I don’t want to put the detail in my post about this or argue with you about it when the facts are there,

Casdon I have no doubt there was a crush injury and she may well have stood on the baby. But it is entirely possible that the baby also fell to the floor and, if she gave birth standing, that she then stepped on the baby accidentally. It didn't have to be either deliberate or premeditated.

Did the cottonwool end up in his tiny body accidentally ?

Read the judgement Glorianny. There was very good defence representation - King’s Counsel. I for one am not interested in newspaper articles when the actual judgement is available, and I am not so arrogant as to argue with it. She had a fair trial after extensive background investigations and reports by experts and she was dealt with fairly and sensitively by the judge. You weren’t there to hear all the evidence and are not in a position to express a valid opinion on the outcome of the trial, much as you think you are.

Germanshepherdsmum

Read the judgement Glorianny. There was very good defence representation - King’s Counsel. I for one am not interested in newspaper articles when the actual judgement is available, and I am not so arrogant as to argue with it. She had a fair trial after extensive background investigations and reports by experts and she was dealt with fairly and sensitively by the judge. You weren’t there to hear all the evidence and are not in a position to express a valid opinion on the outcome of the trial, much as you think you are.

Anyone is able to offer a view of any event GSM It's called free speech.
Kings Counsels vary as I think you well know. The most expensive and the best are not available to those dependent on legal aid. You must also know that solicitors are seriously worried about the underpayment they feel is involved in legal aid, and the effects this is having on the criminal justice system www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/criminal-justice/criminal-legal-aid
She had a defence there is no evidence to show how good it was.

I don’t intend to argue with you but do you think any old barrister becomes a KC? No. And free speech is no excuse for uninformed opinion.

I don't know any details of this case because TBH I don't want to know but I've been wondering about the sentence.

The killers of little James Bulger were released on licence before they could be moved onto an adult prison, so I was wondering if the same could apply here.

"You weren’t there to hear all the evidence and are not in a position to express a valid opinion on the outcome of the trial, much as you think you are"

Neither were you, GSM.

Germanshepherdsmum

I don’t intend to argue with you but do you think any old barrister becomes a KC? No. And free speech is no excuse for uninformed opinion.

Of course not. But not all KCs are experienced and the most experienced cost the most. Junior barristers are usually the people involved in legal aid cases. They can earn as little as £20000 a year. Whereas experienced and successful barristers can be paid millions for a case.
It isn't uninformed to recognise the disparities in the system.
www.chambersstudent.co.uk/where-to-start/newsletter/how-much-do-barristers-earn#:~:text=Successful%20junior%20barristers%20doing%20work,free%20loans%20to%20cover%20costs.