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.

As previously said, and I quoted the law, a woman who kills her baby soon after birth is usally charged with infantacide. It has nothing to do with what anyone on this thread personally thinks about the case.

Other women who have killed their babies 2 weeks after birth have still been charged with infantacide and were sentenced based on that.

A woman who gave birth alone in a park and the baby was foundcdead with injuries similar to this case, was charged with infantacide.

Added to which she was under age and it would seen did not have family support.

So it is entirely inconsistent that she wasn't charged with infantacide and suspect will have good grounds for appeal. The CPS needs to explain why they didn't do that.

If there are some on this thread who dont believe there is such a thing as infantacide, (I previously posted the legal definistion of this) then its pointless saying if she killed it murder. You need to contact your MP or start a petition saying the crime of infantacide should not exist.

That is the issue, not speculating on the mental state of a young woman you know nothing about bar a few comments in the media.

Lots of I would never have done this: This does not mean we do not understand the state of mind she must have been in at the time of this baby dying.

People talking about options which were/ are available to her: She was 15! Knowledge and understanding don't match at that age.

Branding her an intentional baby killer/murderer, knowing fully well what state of mind she'd have been in, is totally heartless. It doesn't stop the act from being murder. Sympathy for the struggle she'd have had does not imply you condone her actions.

"There, but for the grace of God, go I" would apply to many women who have been in the same position at roughly the same age.

it's right of course that this is treated as a crime but her age and everything else seem to be to offer very significant mitigation which should plainly be reflected in sentencing.

To the poster who said it was a post-mortem that had detected the baby had cried, I don’t think a post-mortem could know that.

If the coroner said it happened, let's trust the coroner. If the baby was alive for 1-2 hours, the coroner concluded it was likely that the baby had cried. They would have known better than us.

Are we really now disputing the Coroner if they don't say what we want?

I think infanticide does sound a more sensible verdict, as the judge would be given a lot more sentencing discretion.

However, the jury knew all the facts and the judge gave them infanticide as an option.

Sad though it is, she clearly does need to be punished, as well as helped. I just hope she is sent to an appropriate unit where she can use her time productively and the time given reflects both the severity of the crime and the mitigating factors.

15 is young but much older than Jamie Bulger’s killers. If we accept criminal responsibility starts at 10, she is plenty old enough.

BMustard · Today 07:48

To the poster who said it was a post-mortem that had detected the baby had cried, I don’t think a post-mortem could know that.

If the coroner said it happened, let's trust the coroner. If the baby was alive for 1-2 hours, the coroner concluded it was likely that the baby had cried. They would have known better than us.

Are we really now disputing the Coroner if they don't say what we want?

I was the one who said how would a post-mortem detect that the baby had cried, and then another poster - thank you for the explanation - said they could know from whether or not there was fluid in the baby’s lungs: no fluid would mean he had cried and breathed.

But the reason for me saying that in the first place was not to doubt the baby had cried. It was because someone had said the girls’ mother must have heard the baby cry so why hadn’t she gone down stairs, and then another poster had said it had been the post-mitten not the girl’s mother
who knew he had cried.

Can anyone tell me how the girl’s mother would not have known she was pregnant, especially as the baby was a full grown and 8lbs? What about school? Talk about neglect.

post- mortem, not post- mitten.
girl’s not girls’

So it is entirely inconsistent that she wasn't charged with infantacide and suspect will have good grounds for appeal. The CPS needs to explain why they didn't do that.

I hope she does appeal. @IwantToRetire The judge did say that the jury could consider infanticide - which is basically manslaughter of an infant under one. My question is: can a judge say to a jury if the person is charged with murder of a person over the age of one that the jury might want to consider manslaughter? I thought that charges could not be changed when in court.

Manslaughter under grounds of diminished responsibility.

Men can get away with killing women in the UK, if they claim it was ‘rough sex’ that went wrong. But a frightened child who was scared to call for help is convicted of murder. Sorry I haven’t rtft. I’m sure others have noticed this too.

@Ofcourseshecan ,

She actively killed her newborn, it didn’t die of neglect.

What do you want to happen here?

Ofcourseshecan · Today 09:18
Men can get away with killing women in the UK, if they claim it was ‘rough sex’ that went wrong. But a frightened child who was scared to call for help is convicted of murder. Sorry I haven’t rtft. I’m sure others have noticed this

There is extra rage and punishment for a woman/girl who does not behave according to what we think is natural.

There's extra rage when a baby is murdered in any circumstance. Add to the mix people defending the killer and the active discussions around it, and you have an illusion of 'more outrage' against women.

Anyone who uses the rough sex defence is also a murderer and needs to go to prison. It's not always successful anyway, and where it is, it's a clear miscarriage of justice.

Disapproving of both isn't mutually exclusive.

Maybe some feel empathy for a helpless baby who suffered an absolutely horrific death. I had a baby as a teenager with an abusive partner but I can't imagine attacking the baby and deliberately killing it.

I also feel empathy for the jurors who will have heard terrible details that will live with them forever, for the police officers and medical staff who had to deal with this.

Maybe empathy gets a bit stretched by the time people get to the person who committed the murder.

So if a teenage boy battered a baby, fractured it's skull and then stuffed it's mouth with cottonwool to stop it breathing you think he wouldn't be subject to rage and punishment? I don't think there would be a split on MN, he would be condemned with 100% agreement.

This gives a slightly better idea of the 15 year old girl who killed her newborn baby.

Paris Mayo: Schoolgirl who was 15 when she killed her newborn son is found guilty of murder

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12226779/Schoolgirl-15-killed-newborn-son-guilty-murder.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12226779/amp/Schoolgirl-15-killed-newborn-son-guilty-murder.html

I don’t think “the mother who would have cared for her” had really been able to care for her so far, in any optimal way, for whatever reason.

There's this article also, which is troubling.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/23/trial-teenager-paris-mayo-guilty-killing-newborn-tragic-troubling

The prosecution waited to put her on trial as an adult and not a teenager of 15. Four years they waited to prosecute her.

Family and friends reported they had noticed Mayo wearing loose and baggy clothing in the weeks running up to the birth, which the prosecution allege showed she had purposely tried to conceal the pregnancy.
From the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/11/fifteen-year-old-girl-killed-her-newborn-baby-with-cotton-wool-court-hears

The prosecution said the fact she was wearing loose clothes meant she knew she was pregnant.

Did the prosecution ask if her parents “knew” she was pregnant given her increasing size and other sickness symptoms she had had, and her mother’s knowledge that she had been having sexual partners ( illegal) since she was 13 (Daily Mail in previous thread) ?

Whilst this is an absolutely tragic situation I wish people would stop calling her a child. 15 is not a child, adolescent yes but well on the way to adulthood. At 15 my mum left her home town and loved to London by herself. At 15 I was mature and travelled by myself.
At that age you know right from wrong. You certainly know killing is wrong.
I have sympathy for the girl. I can't imagine the fear she felt. But she was not a child.

She was a child under legal terms. Her parents were responsible for her going to school, for example, otherwise they would have faced a fine. She was 14 when she conceived and 13 when she started having sex. That is a serious problem and flags up all sorts of issues regarding the parents.

Legally a person is responsible for prosecution from the age of 10 in the UK. I would class a 10 year old as a child.

I've no doubt that some posters will reply that when I was ten, I was walking to school on my own and regularly made Sunday roasts.

Yeah but children under 16 can still commit crimes. Teenage boys stab each other and sexually violate girls but we wouldn't be saying they're just children.

Oh gosh yes, 10 is still definitely a child. I know under law she was a child and parents are absolutely still responsible. I was more referring to other comments from people saying "she was a child, didn't know what she thinking" rubbish. Unless there are special needs involved 15 is old enough to understand consequences.

Exactly this.

It's probably taken so long to come to court because of covid delays. NAL but pretty sure crimes committed as a child are sentenced as a child. I would imagine her lawyers would also have tried to persuade her to admit infanticide/negotiate a plea bargain.

If one of the lads she slept with had murdered this baby would you all be just as sympathetic? There are often just community sentences for infanticide, is that enough for murdering a baby? She'll get help in prison.