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.

None of that proves it should have been infanticide. Brutally killing the baby might just indicate that she was that cruel and sadistic because the brutality of the attack would also indicate that wouldn't it?

It is surprising that the expert is criticised for his conclusions based on watching video but people on here are so confident of their non professional diagnosis when they haven't even seen or heard her, just the bits reported.

The purpose of a prison sentence is punishment for a crime. I'm surprised if people don't know that. A man was sentenced to 40 years today for killing his wife and kids, would anyone say what purpose does that serve, his family are dead he isn't going to kill them again. I don't think anyone would suggest such a thing so why is it different?

I'm a mum, I was a pregnant teenager with my first, I've had my moments when I've felt like shaking them or throwing them in the cot, I didn't but I still understand someone being at the end of their tether over something but torturing a baby for 2 hours? No there is no understanding that from me.

Agree @Iwasafool

After 900 posts, I'd only be repeating myself to write a lengthy post but I'd echo your last comment.

To me, it seems that nobody is advocating for 15 year olds who stab to be let go, despite also being young, ill-supported and vulnerable, sometimes involved in gangs. You can't just let people walk free after killing someone because things weren't perfect in their life.

Punishment is one component of justice.

Women who kill their newborns are deeply unwell, so why are they being tried for murder?
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/30/women-kill-newborns-murder-infanticide-paris-mayo-courts

The writer of the Guardian article seems not to have realised that the Tunstill murder conviction was overturned by the Court of Appeal 2018 and changed to Infanticide.
https://www.newlawjournal.co.uk/docs/default-source/article_files/013_nlj_7824_specialist_crime-brennan-milne.pdf?sfvrsn=21a00d0e_3

Apparently, as reported this Guardian article, the same judge from Paris Mayo’s trial, Mr Justice Garnham, also sentenced a 38 year old woman, who had given birth by a roadside and then killed her newborn child by abandoning it in woods , to life imprisonment for murder (instead of Infanticide) in 2021.

Here are details of that from the BBC at the time (read in full to see all her gruelling and stressful circumstances while pregnant):

“Mr Justice Garnham told her she had "denied the pregnancy to yourself, pretending it was not happening".

"Abandoning your baby was a truly dreadful thing to do," he said.

"This was an act of desperation of a vulnerable woman" who was suffering

"acute stress and anxiety" at the time of the birth, the judge said.

"I accept you acted in a way that was wholly out of character and you would not have done what you did but for the extreme nature of your personal circumstances," he added.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-59509306

Back to the June 30 Guardian article, I am sure this is true ( my bold):
Milne points to the structural shifts that negatively affect the outcomes for these women, such as massive cuts to legal aid so that defence teams, with medical experts and criminal barristers, are paid from ever-shrinking budgets and have less time to prepare their defence. The lack of financial support for legal teams makes it much harder to present complex cases to a jury.

The Guardian is taking comments on this.

@Iwasafool
Brutally killing the baby might just indicate that she was that cruel and sadistic because the brutality of the attack would also indicate that wouldn't it? If she hadn’t been diagnosed with pregnancy denial, that might be possible. However, she was diagnosed with pregnancy denial so your speculation is not consistent with the psychiatric examination of her.

It is surprising that the expert is criticised for his conclusions based on watching video but people on here are so confident of their non professional diagnosis when they haven't even seen or heard her, just the bits reported.

Our opinions largely reflect that of the other expert who did a full review of Mayo’s medical records and formal assessment of her. Which is the gold standard for psychiatric assessment versus watching body cam footage and diagnosing based off that.

We havent diagnosed her with pregnancy denial. The only thing that has been suggested is that she might have the psychotic subtype of pregnancy denial given how she fits the profile and appears to have suffered delusions and perhaps even hallucinated blood coming out the baby’s mouth. That’s not the sort of detail that would be published for the public though.

@Iwasafool
Brutally killing the baby might just indicate that she was that cruel and sadistic because the brutality of the attack would also indicate that wouldn't it?

I agree with AP5Diva’s answer to you.

But, how likely is it really that any girl or woman who has just given birth, kills their own baby for sadistic satisfaction or the fun of being cruel?

In this case, apart from anything else, nothing formerly known about this girl seemed to reflect that sort of character.

Especially since the judge stated it was “wholly out of character” indicating Mayo is not a teen that has a record of torturing and killing small animals, bullying younger children, and similar behaviours associated with an emerging sadistic and cruel personality.

If this sentence is successfully appealed or overturned in some way, will all those who approve of the current sentence immediately change their minds as obviously the decision will have been made by people with more information than them?

We are not qualified to question the decision made by the judge and jury, as they say.

Overturned by the Court of Appeal like the murder verdict was (in favour of Infanticide) in the similarly brutal killing of a newborn baby by its mother in the Tunskill case 2018/2019?

The end of that Guardian article by Julie Wheelwright suggests the system has very little money to help accused people. I wonder if it would be unlikely for a properly legally supported appeal to be funded?

Paris Mayo and her mother would not seem to be assertive people who might keep pressing for help.

Didn't the psychiatrist who diagnosed pregnancy denial also say she could just be lying?

I would accept the verdict of the people who have seen all the evidence and I suspect most would be the same.

Me too. The only verdict I want is the correct one.

What sort of jury, who would have been honest upstanding citizens, have been present at murder/other criminal trial of a black man in the Southern States of America in the 1950s?

Would another jury, in New York, in the 21st Century, necessarily come to the same verdict when presented with the same alleged perpetrator and the same evidence?

Why are so many alleged rapists acquitted?

Juries, the police, the CPS and even judges can have ignorance of something, or even prejudices, which make them effectively biased

I am not at all secure in the belief that the jury in this trial were actually instructed about the nature of Infanticide and how it can go with denial/suppression of pregnancy.

They were however instructed in the opposite view from the CPS and one of the expert witnesses that the 19 year old standing in front of them in the dock, in an adult court room, who had started having sex at 13 (slut) had four years previously, deliberately and cunningly lied about and hidden her pregnancy, then hidden her labour, all so she could viciously kill her newborn child by the nastiest means possible, and then throw him away once he was born. … even though she knew she had loving, supportive parents who would have helped.

Moreover, the expert suggested, she was not remotely disturbed or distressed by her pregnancy and giving birth. Indeed she was such a psycho that she was perfectly calm afterwards. Then the jury saw in court that she proved herself a liar by not admitting her guilt to any of it.

Only a vicious horrendous psycho would kill their baby that way.

Precisely; there are a range of explanations. The jury assessed the facts and the evidence, including the defence expert evidence, and reached a view.
people seem to think that there is only one valid interpretation here, which is theirs. That is not the case.

Of course, if there was an error or misconduct within the trial and the conviction is overturned, that should be accepted (subject to appeal to SC on matters of law). As I’ve already pointed out though, the C of A won’t question the jury’s assessment of the evidence.
the trouble the shriekers here have is they can’t actually point to any errors within the trial. They just aren’t suited by the verdict.

This is what bothers me. Will there even be an appeal for someone with no money to pay for it? How does it work?

'the shriekers' ?? Why do you feel it neccessary to insult people with different views from your own?

He was asked on cross examination if Mayo could be lying and responded that it is possible.

Which of course it is, an expert opinion is at core an opinion. No reputable psychiatrist is going to claim they know the exact thoughts of a person.

Her mother doesn’t care. She couldn’t even support her daughter at the trial or sentencing. No surprise one of the things Mayo has said is her parents had called her useless and a disappointment of a daughter …this was growing up long before she started having under age sex to feel affection and liked.

So he accepts she could be lying but people on here, who have never met her, are determined she wasn't.

We “shriekers” have pointed to a few issues that could be grounds for an appeal. I distinctly recall you posting in response that I was on a windup because no one could be so stupid [as me.] I did report it for the personal attack it was, but don’t know if it got deleted.

Re the youth court. This is helpful.

https://yjlc.uk/resources/legal-terms-z/which-court

I agree that Paris Mayo's mother didn't care and certainly her dying father was abusive.

There's no reason at all why this punitive sentence should have been imposed. It serves no purpose to society.

We arrived to largely the same conclusion as the expert that conceded it is possible that she lied, and his conclusion and expert evidence to the court was that it is his view after reviewing her medical records including observations and conversations she had with other HCPs, plus his face to face formal assessment of her that she isn’t lying but suffering from pregnancy denial.

So basically this expert has said beyond a reasonable doubt, he thinks she is not lying.

Agree entirely. It displays a mindset that is 'my way or the highway'.

This important thread is nearing completion. Does anyone else want to start a new thread?