Teenager guilty of murder.

[placemats]

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

Apart from the fact that she was raped, if consent to sex is to be a legal term, I find the prosecutions allegations appalling.

'But the prosecution alleged Mayo must have known she was pregnant but chose to deliberately conceal it because she was always planning to kill the baby.'

Perhaps Mayo didn't get early abortion help she needed. I know of one woman, who had 3 previous children, who didn't realise she was pregnant, thought it was early menopause until 4 weeks before her due date. However to allege she was always planning to kill the baby is a step too far. It intimates that those in authority know this child's mind.

You are correct. The verdict is of course a matter for the jury. That is what they are there for.

Were the judge’s words to the jury, before they withdrew to deliberate on the
verdict, ever published anywhere where we can read them?

I believe not. You can apply to the crown court for a transcript, I think.
I think we can safely leave the question of whether there was a misdirection to the KC representing her though. I’m not sure there’s much we could add.

AgathaSpencerGregson · Today 19:08
I believe not. You can apply to the crown court for a transcript, I think.
I think we can safely leave the question of whether there was a misdirection to the KC representing her though. I’m not sure there’s much we could add.

I would be interested to know what he actually said to them.

According to this you can get a transcript but you pay by the folio up to about £2.30 per folio and each folio is only 72 words and then there is a copying fee on top, so as there must be 1000s of words it would cost a lot.

https://www.london-law.co.uk/what-is-a-court-transcript-how-do-i-obtain-one-and-how-much-does-it-cost-to-obtain/

Yes, it’s very expensive. Best leave it to counsel, eh? I reckon he can manage.

AgathaSpencerGregson · Today 19:37
+Yes, it’s very expensive. Best leave it to counsel, eh? I reckon he can manage*

I am not remotely interested in somehow taking over from counsel, which of course I cannot do but am interested as an individual member of the public in order to know exactly what the judge said. Anyone living in Worcester could have gone and listened for themselves.

It is a shame no reporter took it down and published it.

This is not a direct quote but says,

THE jury in the trial of a teenager accused of murdering her new born baby four years ago has retired to consider its verdict, after being told it can consider an alternative count of infanticide
www.theforester.co.uk/news/ross-on-wye-baby-murder-trial-jury-given-infanticide-alternative-622113

This is a bit more detailed from
www.theforestreview.co.uk/news/ross-on-wye-baby-murder-trial-jury-given-infanticide-alternative-622113

Trial judge Mr Justice Garnham told the jury before it retired yesterday (Wednesday, June 21):

“In the event that you believe that Miss Mayo did cause the death of Stanley Mayo, you will be asked to consider if she did so whilst the balance of her mind was disturbed by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth."

Infanticide is causing the death of a baby when the balance of a mother’s mind is disturbed due to the effect of giving birth.

The judge told jurors:

"I am sorry this has been hard to listen to, it has been hard work to read it out as well."

He urged them to "be fair and listen to one another" before they retired.

"Do not rush into a verdict, the people involved in this case deserve your complete attention,” he added.

I wonder how much information the jury were given to help them understand the nature of Infanticide?

The problem with the comparison to barbie kardashian is the facts and the ability to prove them.

In the barbie case, there were witnesses to the violence. There is no room for doubt.

If we could categorically state that this girl stamped on that baby's head, the discourse on this thread would be really rather different. the reaction to that level of proven violence is not sex based.

Here there is doubt as to what actually happened. And the girl maintaining her innocence adds to that doubt. The outpourings of armchair psychosis references and other states of mind are not to excuse any act but to highlight why it is difficult to prove anything.

Add the lack of proof to the general lack of understanding of the female body and it leaves room for an alternative explanation to the baby's injuries which we may never uncover.

Me too, if they were not adequately instructed, this could be another ground for appeal. What little is there ‘cause the death’ is quite vague and could be misinterpreted to mean accidentally not on purpose or didn’t mean to because was mad when we know infanticide covers intentional killing of an infant.

PatatiPatatras · Today 20:03
The problem with the comparison to barbie kardashian is the facts and the ability to prove them.

*In the barbie case, there were witnesses to the violence. There is no room for doubt^.

If we could categorically state that this girl stamped on that baby's head, the discourse on this thread would be really rather different. the reaction to that level of proven violence is not sex based.

Here there is doubt as to what actually happened. And the girl maintaining her innocence adds to that doubt. The outpourings of armchair psychosis references and other states of mind are not to excuse any act but to highlight why it is difficult to prove anything.

Add the lack of proof to the general lack of understanding of the female body and it leaves room for an alternative explanation to the baby's injuries which we may never uncover.

I thought that the coroner’s report made it clear without doubt that either she stamped on the baby’s head, or did something equally violent to his head, then suffocated him by putting cotton wool in his mouth. So there is no real doubt about this, presuming the coroner is trustworthy, though I agree there could be.

But, even given no doubt that she did stamp on his head and put cotton wool in his mouth and suffocate him, the question for the jury still would have been, ‘Was it Infanticide?’. (Which is sex based as Infanticide can only apply to a mother who gave birth to a child then killed it, including through violent means, within a year. )

Maybe I misunderstood what you meant though.

Mmm hmm. So who produced the symmetrical fractures to the baby’s skull and stuffed cotton wool down his throat? The little green men from mars?
you people are actually quite unwell, aren’t you?

No room for doubt? Only insanity? Despite things not adding up in the story presented by the prosecuting (as much as we can tell from the article) ?

So you can't imagine any other scenario in which a tiled floor covered in blood, faeces and urine results in an accident leading to broken bones of a symmetrical nature on a new born? None at all? No world in which she lays the baby face down in something made of cotton rather than press a pillow to its face. Or a scenario where she's covering up for someone else still? There's really only one conclusion here?

I guess we'll always be at odds. I don't mind the name calling.

I mean, the most obvious answer is usually the correct one.

I'm certain we don't agree on what's obvious and the jury wasn't unanimous on this either.

We all understand that she was responsible for her baby’s death, and I haven’t seen a single poster suggest otherwise, but some of us are not as dismissive of her mental state at the time. Try reading the article in the law journal linked upthread.

Oh yes I forgot about this angle. Before i go round this bend again: Of course, she's the mother and present at the time of this death. She's responsible no matter how we turn this.

We all understand that she was responsible for her baby’s death, and I haven’t seen a single poster suggest otherwise, but some of us are not as dismissive of her mental state at the time. Try reading the article in the law journal linked upthread.

Right, so are you saying you actually believe she was psychotic at the time? You think she had no idea what she was doing during or after the murder? Otherwise, why aren't all mentally ill pregnant teens murdering their babies?

If we understood women more maybe we'd know... are you offering to fundraise for more female based research? Especially into young mother's mental health? Past and present?

Was just about to say the same thing - the absurdity of suggesting this was the “easy option” compared to abortion!

What a ridiculous 'answer.'

There's nothing ridiculous about investing in maternal mental health.

Well, no, but you haven't told us why other pregnant girls experiencing trauma manage to refrain from murdering their babies and this one didn't?

We won't know until research is done into it would we?
There are a lot of beliefs around teenage pregnancy which i believe are unfounded.
Research in this area is absolutely called for and this could well be a case that proves that point.

It might even be more simple than that - a minority of people are violent murderers.