Teenager guilty of murder.

I think the hormonal defence is weak and plays to females as victims, a narrative that serves no one well.

Young men are also massively hormonally driven and it is a fact that the violent offender prison population:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/019188699400177T

All animals (including man) are hormonally driven and this applies to both sexes.

So,
I don’t think we know if she was raped, underage sex with someone also underage is exempt from the rape law and I haven’t seen anything as to who the baby’s father was or how old he is? Presumably it’s not her dad because he was at deaths door.

I do think murder is too harsh, it should be infanticide. I don’t agree with the court that she had a loving and supportive family who would have helped her- if they were that then she would not have concealed the pregnancy or panicked when the baby was born. If her mum cared about her, she would have noticed that she was pregnant for one. I think she was very much a neglected and unloved child left to fend for herself from an early age because mum was focussed on caring for her ill dad.

It should be infanticide and she should not have been tried as an adult.

To the poster talking about being fair to teenage boys doing the same thing: A teenage boy killing a newborn is not awash with hormones after just giving birth and carrying a pregnancy for 9 months which he's been constantly afraid of people finding out about.
Apples and oranges.

It is a crime.

BMustard · Today 12:02
Expect the judge, obviously. But it just shows how outrageous that line of thinking is, that young people can't be criminally responsible. Whether rape of killing of an infant, the punishment needs to fit the crime.
@BMustard
Please would you describe the crime “Infanticide” and find some examples from life?

placemats · Today 10:59
In the case of teenage stabbings and murder, the teenagers are sent to a youth prison and charged as youths and not adults.

This case was brought before the court when Mayo was 19, four years after the event happened

Possiblt the jury treated her as if she had just committed the crime, and as if
she were 19.

Added to that she seems to have a jaded non- innocent look, for which she may have been unfairly judged by the jury, instead of them wondering what on earth had been happening to her for her to seem that way.

Look at how many posters on this thread cannot assimilate the fact that no one is saying she did not commit this crime!

Those showing some sympathy for her are just saying she should be charged with the crime of a mother murdering her new born baby called ‘Infanticide’ under the Law, - like other women who murdered their own new born baby have been - not with the other charge called ‘Murder’ which might apply in other circumstances.

Yet people on here can’t get the difference between the legal term infanticide and the legal term murder. They are stuck with murder is murder, and this girl is extra evil.

Except Shamina Begum kept on committing crimes for the next four years including building bomb vests, sewing them onto teenagers, patrolling with a rifle and shooting/beating up civilians, and keeping Yazidi girls as slaves for her husband to rape and her to beat.

She only “stopped” when she was 19 and realised ISIS was doomed and in her own words ‘it wasn’t fun anymore’.

Expect the judge, obviously. But it just shows how outrageous that line of thinking is, that young people can't be criminally responsible. Whether rape of killing of an infant, the punishment needs to fit the crime.

And that's stupid and completely inappropriate. That is not justice for the victim, it's insulting.

The difference is that nobody said it should happen because 'he's only young, his brain inst developed, he doesn't need a criminal record'.

We all know it's outrageous and not acceptable for such a serious crime, as is the case here.

Oops, it was 270 hours: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65424028

That's exactly what just happened in Scotland - having been found guilty of repeatedly raping a thirteen-year-old he was given a sentence of 170 hours of community service.

15 is still a child, albeit a teenager. She deserves to not have her entire life destroyed. Nonetheless, she has to do significant time both to give justice to the newborn that she killed and as a deterrent. I hope the judge both gives her a sensible sentence, so she is out while still young, and allows her to do her time in an open prison.

However, there was little compassion for Jamie Bugler’s killers, despite them being much younger and one having significant learning needs. Of course, the circumstances were different but they were dealt with in an adult court, being 10 and 11 years old.

Many women don’t get that ‘rush’ either.

A boy doesnt have the mental trauma of giving birth but he also doesnt get the rush of hormones that usually ensure a mother wants to protect and care for her child. He would be as likely, if not more likely (because girls mature faster) to panic.

I also think it should have been infanticide. She was a 15 year old. Living in a home with a terminally ill, abusive father.

Newborn babies can get fractured skulls from hitting the floor at birth. Whatever happened, its infanticide and she should be treated with compassion.

This man was only convicted of manslaughter: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-64770538 despite having already dug his wife's grave before he killed her.

I've tried but I can only feel compassion for that 15 year old. It should never have happened, she was failed by everyone around her. And that poor baby paid the cost.

Fuck her, she violently murdered a child.

It’s a false equivalency. He wouldn’t have the physical and mental trauma of giving birth.

Terribly sad, I was shocked that she was originally charged with murder, for the jury to find her guilty of that rather than infanticide is appalling. She needs help, not retribution.

If it was a case of a teenager father trying to care for a baby, would anybody say 'he's just a child, poor boy' if he'd hurt the baby in any way? Not even murder, just hurt it? Of course not.

And yes, someone has said she doesn't need a criminal record.

Nobody has said she doesn’t need a criminal record.

Me too!