Fifteen year old girl who killed her newborn baby

Beetle juice, thanks for setting it our clearly, again. GSM and others have posted similarly accurate summaries.
Deedaa, the evidence led the jury to conclude that legally she is responsible. We may all want to believe she wasn’t in her right mind but we didn’t hear the evidence

Obviously there may be circumstances that we know nothing about but I can't imagine anything worse than being a 15 year old girl giving birth on her own. I would find it hard to be certain that she was in her right mind at the end of it.

Therefore I remain questioning the decision re murder v infanticide, and the appropriateness of the sentence.

This has been covered several times already on this thread but, for clarity, I'll explain it again. The judge had to give the jury 3 options to consider: a not guilty verdict, guilty of infanticide (which would mean that he could hand down a lighter sentence) or guilty of murder. The jury deliberated for over 8 hours and, having taken into consideration all of the evidence given to them, they decided that Mayo was guilty of murder. The verdict was theirs and theirs alone and unless you want to dispense with our judicial system of trial by jury, you'll have to come to terms with the fact that they were the ones with full visibility of all the facts and it was on those facts that they based their verdict.
The judge is given parameters of sentencing for each crime, based on the verdict given to him. He cannot just give an arbitrary sentence; every crime has a recommended sentence and he is legally obliged to follow those sentencing guidelines. The judge followed the law and if you read the sentencing notes provided by GSM earlier, you will see that he explains all of this in quite simple terms. Please read them.

I realise that.

The child did indeed, Iam64.

Dreadful.

Nevertheless decisions were made on the basis of choices as regards very seriously psychiatric views

by medical lay-people faced with horrifying evidence as regards the injuries.

My "reading" is of a choice between "ill" and evil" and feelings naturally run very high on matters such as this.

This sort evidence is not a matter of "Fact", it can only ever be of "opinion" particularly because of a lack of information as to her long term state of mind before the event and the lack of in depth information of family circumstances.

I suspect the appeal will be made on the re-arguing of these issues.

The helpless infant died a truly awful death

Poor little soul, he did.
I don't know what drove her to do this.

I just know that Jamie Bulger's killers, who tortured and very deliberately made sure he had a truly awful death seem to have got away lightly in comparison.

Wyllow3, the link you give was part way through the trial. The judge mentioned the expert evidence in his comments.
I find it impossible not to feel compassion for this desperate 15 year old but, the jury rejected infanticide and convicted on murder.
The helpless infant died a truly awful death.

There were 7 women on the jury and 5 men though.

It's the psyche evaluation I have ? about not in anyway about due process followed.
In such a complex evaluation there will be substantial disagreements between different psychiatrists. The prosecution is in a position on whom they get to testify.

Therefore I remain questioning the decision re murder v infanticide, and the appropriateness of the sentence.

Defence psychiatrist offered a different opinion
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-65922302

Equally valid IMO as I do not think overall they had anything like adequate evidence of the teen's state of mind and social circumstances prior to the event.

I do also have some reservations about how attitudes to how women can act under the most extreme of circumstances may have of recent times hardened from "ill", to "Evil",

tickingbird

^young teens is not a legal definition^

Murder is.

The murderers of Jamie Bulger were released age 18.

And?
Did I dispute that?

Sentences vary.

young teens is not a legal definition

Murder is.

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.

young teens is not a legal definition.

www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/youth-crime#:~:text=Children%20between%2010%20and%2017,if%20they%20commit%20a%20crime.

Wyllow3

"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.

The difference is though that Germanshepherdsmum isn’t offering a personal opinion about the outcome, she has stated what the process is, and has shown the detail of the verdict. That has a lot more credence than suggesting the defence KC was of poor quality, or that the clinical evidence of the crush injury was flawed with no evidence to support those assertions.

Luckygirl3

*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.

Her family circumstances were difficult, her parents separated but her mother moved back to care for her father who was ill and needed a lot of help; he died shortly after the baby was born.
Paris may not have been neglected as many children are, but perhaps sidelined and not feeling able to burden her parents with even more problems.

King's Counsel (KC) are barristers or solicitor advocates who have been recognised for excellence in advocacy. They're often seen as leaders in their area of law and generally take on more complex cases that require a higher level of legal expertise.

The above from Google.

Arguing about the experience and skills of King’s Counsel seems frankly nonsense to me. My lengthy experience of the criminal and family courts tells me anyone achieving kc status is ok, I’d be delighted to have their advice or representation.

I’m with gsm on this tragic case. The jury, the judge, heard evidence about the death of this helpless infant, his mother and her extended family. We know little about any of that.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Did the cottonwool end up in his tiny body accidentally ?

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.

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.