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.

And if she, as a 15 year old, had done that to a baby she hadn’t literally just given birth to alone after concealing a pregnancy for 9 months and having conceived as a result of statutory rape she would quite rightly deserve every minute of her sentence. But this is slightly more nuanced.

Asking whether we would have sympathy for the dad is complete nonsense. The whole concept of infanticide is based on the physical and hormonal stresses that a lady goes through when giving birth.

Add to that her age, and the additional stressors on her I can only assume that the jury took against her refusal to plead guilty to infanticide and any other facts that are not public knowledge. Otherwise, it would appear to clear cut a case.

Sad but the way she killed that baby was brutal and heartless.

It’s not me making stuff up and pretending to be an expert on stuff I know nothing about, or on the evidence and jury decision in the case.

the jury had all the evidence. They made their decision. I’ve not said whether I think it was right or wrong or not. I’m not in a position to do that. If there’s an appeal to be had out of it, her legal team
will address it.

Poor child was damn right traumatised. The shock, the pain, the hormones the child didn't know what the hell was going on. She must have been so scared and not thinking straight. Any level headed adult would think 'oh I'm having a baby ' and if they didn't want the baby they would take proper measures like adoption or taking the baby to a hospital and leaving but we are talking about a child who was terrified and traumatised. She probably couldn't see past what her families reactions would be. She says she didn't even know she was pregnant which is possible and even if she did she could have easily convinced herself otherwise due to stress and fear. I hope she appeals, jail isn't the place for her

she battered the baby's skull
and suffocated the baby with cotton wool, didn't she? I can see why they came to a verdict of murder. That's what it was. Many panicked Mother's leave babies on doorsteps etc. I'm not sure why she didn't do this.

I'm guessing the evidence suggested otherwise.

Not all 15 year olds who have tried to hide their pregnancy have brutally attacked and killed the newborn.

Orchestrating something like this can be a marker for future violence.

Convictions do actually set precedent unless they are appealed and overturned - which you are obviously not in favour of for this case.

Im sorry you are embarrassed and are lashing out at me. It’s easier to call me ignorant than it is to admit I have a point. I get it.

Where do.you think.is appropriate for someone who brutally murdered her baby then
And what about the poor baby?

I agree with this. I think anyone who has the capacity to violently murder a newborn baby is worrying, whether they are in shock or not, and that it seems to have been the default response is also very worrying.

I think a custodial term is appropriate and I hope she receives some counselling and help while in there.

She did an awful, awful thing but she was also a child in an awful situation.

What you have cited does not say that juries make law. You have not understood it correctly. They do not make law. They cannot. They only decide on questions of fact in the individual case. The opportunity to make new law does not arise.
case law is made by decisions of the higher and appellate courts. If this case is appealed and the court of appeal decides the judge misdirected the jury, and gives guidance on how juries in such cases should be directed, that will make new law.

My saying she may have had psychosis as she fits the profile and pointing out the evidence supporting that is not making stuff up.

If you truly think juries cannot make mistakes and any discussion hinting they might have been wrong is of zero relevance and a worthless opinion, then perhaps just scroll on by?

I see though you are targeting my opinion for your criticism, so that is hardly a fair or consistent application of your stated opinion.

I do think it's unhelpful to suppose a man had done this. I definitely accept that pregnancy and childbirth can cause trauma. I would have sympathy perhaps if this murder hadn't been clearly premeditated to a degree, extremely violent (unusually so) and then concealed and lied about (indicating a lack of remorse). The murderer in question is obviously a disturbed individual but she is still a violent child killer.

She was 14 when she got pregnant. Legally, that's a rape. Being able to conceal a full term pregnancy almost guarantees that there's significant dysfunction, for family denial or for noone to really notice. To give birth alone and in total silence to a larger than average baby would be beyond most adult women, let alone a teenager. Something was terribly wrong.

What she did was awful. It's also awful that she's getting a sentence far harsher than people who do so much worse, without the vulnerabilities. From a societal level, this is unlikely to be a meaningful deterrent, and all we are doing is paying huge amounts to lock up a vulnerable teenager for long enough to ensure she comes out more damaged and likely more dangerous. Nobody wins here.

We need a system of community notes for this poster. She is as determined a purveyor of disinformation as you could hope to find.

I rather think you misunderstand and think case law & precedent is only developed when there are appeals and it goes to a higher court. These are merely the more newsworthy and thus the types of precedents that come to mind. But, the truth is that if cases are decided and never appealed, they too set precedents and form part of case law. We have tons of common law based on decisions that do not get disputed and therefore never go through the appeal process.

Yes to all of this.

And yet, I’m the only poster posting links to reputable sources backing up my information. Whereas you and others are simply stooping to personal attacks and have not posted any links to back up your dismissal of my information.

Legally its not rape ,unless she didn't consent ,its sex with an under aged person
If the person she had sex with wss if a similar age than the police wouldn't be interested. .

Well said

This is just babble. The jury did not, could not, adjudicate on any question of law. They could only decide guilt or innocence based on the facts in front of them. The next jury in the next case will do the same, as will all the juries after that.

Seriously? She battered and smothered that baby! Crushed its skull with her foot! She deserves every single second of a life sentence!

No, sorry- I think the charge is fair. Didn't say anything to her parents whilst in labour, but saying that only aware was labour a few minutes before birth.....so several hours at least of abdominal pain that she told no one about. The baby was violently assaulted, and then smothered, so two different attacks, not a scared one off reaction. Whilst I don't necessarily beleive she is an ongoing risk, this was vicious and more than would fall in the realms of infanticide to me- although I fully admit to not being a lawyer.

Your sources don’t back up what you say. You can’t even understand the results of your googling. Give up.