Paris Mayo convicted of murder (TW)

[Whitakers]

NB v distressing content

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/23/teenager-guilty-baby-herefordshire-hide-pregnancy-paris-mayo

The jury was asked to consider an alternative verdict of infanticide but found her guilty of murder. I’m surprised by this- surprised she wasn’t just charged with infanticide in the first place, to be honest. It’s a terrible case.

Im.not getting into.a discussion about late, termination, s because i, don't know anything about themr ,but I'm sure people must have them for very good reasons
But this was a living ,breathing baby ,being pro choice doesn't mean we can condone,murder,and a vert brutal one at that.

Thankfully, the vast majority of people would find it impossible to murder an innocent person. Even fewer would be able to murder an innocent newborn baby. The fact that Paris could and did, demonstrates that she was already a deeply damaged person. She is exactly where she deserves to be.

Of course.

I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise. The Judge acknowledged her immaturity in his sentencing remarks and said she must have been very frightened and traumatised.

But the point about her being convicted of murder and sentenced is that the overwhelming majority of people in her situation and of any age, would not have caused significant head injuries to the baby and when that did not result in death, would not have forced cotton wool so forcefully into the baby's mouth and throat that it caused injuries to the mouth and oesophagus.

Everybody can empathise with how frightened and traumatised she was. But her reaction and actions went way beyond what most people would contemplate doing, let alone actually do.

And at the point of arrest and interview she lied repeatedly about how the baby may have sustained the injuries. With a degree of planning and forethought of how she hoped her lies would be believed.

That's why she was convicted of murder.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/abortion/what-happens/

how are they carried out then?

Usually using a large dose of Misoprosol = synthetic oxytocin

Please @secretbinger3 ,can you just give it a rest. This has nothing to do with terminations. This was a baby who was born alive, he was killed by the person who should have been the first to care for him.

they are carried out surgically as well with suction and medical instruments

And?

Abortion is legal under certain circumstances.

Murder never is.

What don't you understand? It's not hard.

For late TFMR the mother is induced and gives birth to her baby. The mother has the option for the baby to have an injection first, to stop it's heart. It is done in the best interests of the baby, usually when the baby is not compatible with life.

If you think.its ok to.murder a newborn ,what about a child of say 6 weeks ,,six months ,two.years ?
This was a living breathing baby it was alive .

Ugh just no, @secretbinger3 . Don’t know what point you think you’re making.

i dont see much difference - unborn babies are also killed by the person who should have been the 1st to care for them...just legally in a clinic with medical supervision

Late stage terminations are carried out using synthetic syntocinon as described above - not using suction or medical instruments

So.you condone murder then?

And? its still ending a life in awful way - just that 1 method is legal.

Are women who have late D & E abortions all sick twisted heartless murderers?

''Late D&C abortions'' don't exist

Not responding to you again - it's been explained several times by different PP

You seem to just be de-railing and provocative

Well of course there's a difference. One is legal, one is murder.

The laws are clear.

You thinking it's the same is irrelevant. The criminal justice system says otherwise.

Trying to distract from the discussion probably.

I agree, it should have been infanticide. I hope Mayo appeals.

yes i know what i think is irrelevant but it is essentially the same thing - 1 is legal and the other isnt

Yeah, you keep saying that despite this case being considered by the jury as potential infanticide and the evidence not being there to support it.

Mayo can try to appeal all she likes. She has no grounds for it so it won't happen.

She was convicted of murder because she committed murder.

Any of you minimisers Googling and thinking otherwise are wasting your time posting.

She has NO grounds for appeal against her conviction and her sentence was light in terms of what it could have been as a convicted murderer.

It's so f-ing laughable to me that based on Google, some posters are so very sure she should have been charged and convicted of infanticide.

Completely disregarding the evidence that was presented to the jury and the fact they deliberated on that as a potential charge, as directed by the Judge but the evidence was not sufficient to support that conviction.

She was arrested and interviewed by Police after her own Mother reported her to Police. During Police interview she did not appear to have a 'disturbed balance of mind' that would support her being mentally unwell as a consequence of the traumatic birth.

What she did was lie. Repeatedly. To try and avoid accountability for her actions. She said she didn't know she was pregnant. When presented with the evidence that her dead child had sustained serious head injuries which must have been caused by her as the only person in the same room as the baby she said the baby probably hit their head when she gave birth. When presented with the evidence that the baby had had cotton wool pushed so forcefully into it's mouth and throat it caused injuries to the mouth and oesophagus she said she'd been trying to clear the fluid out of the baby's mouth. She also claimed the baby was born with the umbilical cord round it's neck and she thought it was stillborn. Despite all the evidence that it was her actions that led to the death of the baby over at least an hour.

She wasn't presenting as confused, psychotic or in some kind of fugue state following a traumatic incident. It certainly was a traumatic incident and the judge supported that but she lied in a very calculated manner in an attempt to suggest the baby died of natural causes and she'd done nothing to contribute to the baby's death.

The facts did not support this.

I find her smirking and lack of remorse utterly chilling in these photos.

Very well articulated ,but this is mums net ,and some posters will minimise and justify any abhorrent crime simply because the perpetrator was female .

This is the biggest shite yet you’ve posted on this thread and by Christ is there stiff competition!

This. She's a remorseless murderer.