Mother drowns baby daughter in bucket while boyfriend watches live on Skype

Run_to_da_hills

" A mother drowned her baby daughter in a bucket while her boyfriend watched live over the internet.

Norwegian Yasmin Chaudhry killed the one-year-old by plunging her into a bucket of water during a 3am Skype video call with her British partner.
Chaudhry, 26, said she had just wanted to discipline her baby for waking up and 'disobeying her".

This is sick, I hope this btich and her BF if involved are brought to justice and never sees the lihht of day again. :mad:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083006/Mother-drowns-baby-daughter-bucket-boyfriend-watches.html

MitchKoobski

o_o

Chuck Stone

Please no.

recylingbin

Darwin wins again.

seamus

She's not unique.

I can never get my head around the kind of mentality that thinks that torturing a child of any age is a good method of discipline, never mind a one-year-old who is cognitively incapable of understanding the concept.

El Weirdo

For people that don't want to click the Daily Mail link:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8997132/Norwegian-Mother-drowns-baby-while-British-boyfriend-watches-online.html

Yasmin Chaudhry, who is from Norway killed the one year old by plunging her, head first into water during the video conversation which took place at 3am.

According to a report by The Sun, the boyfriend watched the murder from London as the child was held under the surface until she had stopped breathing.

Chaudhry, 26, reportedly told the police that the couple had been discussing how to discipline the child for “disobeying her”. After she had realised the baby had stopped breathing, Chaudhry put in an emergency call, telling paramedics that the girl had fallen into the bucket by accident.

Following her arrest on suspicion of murder, Chaudhry claimed that her boyfriend, who is not the child’s father – told her to do it. Yet both deny wanting to kill the baby.

Police officers flew from Oslo to Britain to question the British man – who has not been named - with the help of Scotland Yard shortly before Christmas.

Norwegian police prosecutor Kristin Rusdel told the newspaper
‘They have the same story, but with some differences’
‘She says he instructed her to do it, whereas he says that they more or less figured it out together after talking about how to discipline her’.
‘He admits he saw it over the internet but the intention was never to kill her. They were both scared and decided to cover it up’.
The pair had met once in read life and had carried the relationship on over the internet for over a year.
Chaudhry’s five year old son was taken into care following her arrest.
Yesterday she was remanded until February 4.
Ms Rusdel confirmed to The Sun that a preliminary murder charge had been filed against the Briton adding that the police were considering extradition.
The baby’s father now lives in Pakistan after splitting with the mother, his lawyer commenting that ‘he is of course, very shocked’.
If convicted, the pair will face a minimum of eight years behind bars.

brembo26

Wow That is simply horrific!

SEPT 23 1989

The mother should be executed

A life sentence is not punishment enough when you take the life of an innocent,defenseless baby:mad:

recylingbin

brembo26 wrote: »

Wow That is simply a daily mail classic

fixed

flanum

has this been mentioned in any other newspapers or indeed the national news on tv? (just googled it) its also mentioned in "the sun".. must be true then!

Biggins

If convicted, the pair will face a minimum of eight years behind bars.

Eight?

It should be a minimum of much more!

stovelid

The 'discipline' angle is a bit of a red herring and probably just something she spouted to the police.

Stiffler2

El Weirdo wrote: »

For people that don't want to click the Daily Mail link:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8997132/Norwegian-Mother-drowns-baby-while-British-boyfriend-watches-online.html

Ye - because the Daily Telegraph is soooo much better :rolleyes:

Jaxxy

Jesus, imagine what she's been doing to the older child over the years if she could do that to a one year old baby. I fervently hope she's charged with murder and doesn't get off on some ridiculous manslaughter charge.

The whole thing is sickening.

Kevin Duffy

I feel a bit sick and despairing after reading that. What a pair of stupid, stupid people. RIP Baby Chaudry.

spank_inferno

Scandinavian society is the model for all to follow isn't it?

Biggins

spank_inferno wrote: »

Scandinavian society is the model for all to follow isn't it?

Every rose has its thorns!

ImpossibleDuck

At first I assumed she was doing it 'in front' of the bf to torture him...but if he was in on it that's even worse

El Weirdo

Stiffler2 wrote: »

Ye - because the Daily Telegraph is soooo much better :rolleyes:

Well after a quick google of the story, the choice was The Sun, The Mirror, The Daily Mail or The Telegraph.

I stand by my decision.

Noopti

spank_inferno wrote: »

Scandinavian society is the model for all to follow isn't it?

What an idiotic post.

Chuck Stone

spank_inferno wrote: »

Scandinavian society is the model for all to follow isn't it?

WTF?

El Weirdo

Biggins wrote: »

Every rose has its thorns!

Damn you, Biggins! Now I can't get this shite from hair metal band, Poison out of my head.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c56vEgA4fjU

DrumSteve

recylingbin wrote: »

Darwin wins again.

Not sure how, as it was the poor child that died here at the hands of the mother.

RIP to the baby btw.

Kevin Duffy

spank_inferno wrote: »

Scandinavian society is the model for all to follow isn't it?

If you're trying to turn the death of a baby into some socio-political point scoring, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Noopti

DrumSteve wrote: »

Not sure how, as it was the poor child that died here at the hands of the mother.

RIP to the baby btw.

It is because the parents are of questionable genetic strength, so their offspring are not surviving.

wolfpawnat

:eek: just :eek:

How can any person think that a child of one year is capable of understanding that waking at 3am??

Poor little thing, I am so glad her brother has been taking into care. He will have a chance to have a healthy and happy life away from that lunatic!!!!

Thats the second sick story I have read today. Jesus Christ, is there no end to the suffering people inflict on children.

Read another one this morning, and I swear to God when I read the headline, I felt sick to my stomach. Death penalty would be too good for this sick pair.

Its another Daily Mail story.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082618/Kristy-Bamu-15-tortured-death-witch-claim-Christmas-Day-Newham.html

Stiffler2

El Weirdo wrote: »

Well after a quick google of the story, the choice was The Sun, The Mirror, The Daily Mail or The Telegraph.

I stand by my decision.

If that's the choice of rags you had, then you probably did pick the best one !
I'll stand by your decision as well.

ciarafem

That is really shocking

Paparazzo

spank_inferno wrote: »

Scandinavian society is the model for all to follow isn't it?

Every so often a post comes up that is so stupid it defies belief. This is one of those. Congratulations.

shannie

God only knows what happened like, she clearly wasn't a fit mother in the first place is she was on skype at 3am talking to her 'internet boyfriend' ... like c'mon.

seamus

shannie wrote: »

she clearly wasn't a fit mother in the first place is she was on skype at 3am talking to her 'internet boyfriend' ... like c'mon.

Wut.

sensibleken

shannie wrote: »

God only knows what happened like, she clearly wasn't a fit mother in the first place is she was on skype at 3am talking to her 'internet boyfriend' ... like c'mon.

yes. thats the worst part of this whole story

Saila

hoe. lee. fook :mad:

jesus, thats some bad **** right there

Kevin Duffy

shannie wrote: »

I know its not the worst part of the story but Im just saying its obvious she wasn't a good mother in the first place if she was up on skype at 3am like, and the other reason with the baby... therefore she deserved to get her 5 year old child taken off her.

Complete bollocks. You'll find, without even leaving this forum, that plenty of people go online at odd hours and manage to function perfectly well, including as parents.

Edit: Had to read again to confirm, but the 5yo was taken into care following her arrest. No indication from the story that she had any history of bad parenting before this.

Saila

shannie wrote: »

I know its not the worst part of the story but Im just saying its obvious she wasn't a good mother in the first place if she was up on skype at 3am like, and the other reason with the baby... therefore she deserved to get her 5 year old child taken off her.

you've never had a baby have you

hondasam

shannie wrote: »

God only knows what happened like, she clearly wasn't a fit mother in the first place is she was on skype at 3am talking to her 'internet boyfriend' ... like c'mon.

How stupid is that statement, what in your eyes makes a fit mother?

DrumSteve

Noopti wrote: »

It is because the parents are of questionable genetic strength, so their offspring are not surviving.

Has this thread been godwinned?

That baby didn't survive becuase the mother was an evil ****, not due to any genetic disposition.

Mr.Biscuits

Chaudhry, 26, said she had just wanted to discipline her baby for waking up and 'disobeying her'.

Terrible for the old disobedience the one year olds.

Good Christ.

Downlinz

seamus wrote: »

She's not unique.

I can never get my head around the kind of mentality that thinks that torturing a child of any age is a good method of discipline, never mind a one-year-old who is cognitively incapable of understanding the concept.

Because theres a lot of idiots out there without the cognitive capacity to understand this and these people should never become parents or pet owners.

Missmiddleton

A one year old child can hardly be held accountable for disobeying when they don't even know what they're doing. Some people don't deserve to be parents.

Mr.Biscuits

recylingbin wrote: »

Darwin wins again.

It was Herbert Spencer who coined the term you are eluding to but I fail to see how it pertains to this situation anyway; as it is the child that has not survived here - the parents appear to be alive and kicking.

derfderf

Jake1 wrote: »

Thats the second sick story I have read today. Jesus Christ, is there no end to the suffering people inflict on children.

Read another one this morning, and I swear to God when I read the headline, I felt sick to my stomach. Death penalty would be too good for this sick pair.

Its another Daily Mail story.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082618/Kristy-Bamu-15-tortured-death-witch-claim-Christmas-Day-Newham.html

I'd consider myself pretty numb to how bad the world can be but that link was a difficult read.
How can anybody's brain be wired to let them do something like that?

hatrickpatrick

She'll get off on the grounds of diminished responsibility. Seems to almost always happen in cases of parents murdering their kids, probably because society (understandably) doesn't want to accept that there are just some people out there who are sadistic and twisted without a 'reasonable excuse'. It's almost like they look for a reason not to admit that someone would do this for no reason other than being an utter monster.

Very sad.

derfderf

derfderf wrote: »

I'd consider myself pretty numb to how bad the world can be but that link was a difficult read.
How can anybody's brain be wired to let them do something like that?

to be honest I could only read a bit of it. Horrified me. Thought about the poor kid since I read it.

EL_Loco

<ruffles through cliche stack, oh yes, #5493>

You need a license for a dog but they let anyone have kids.

charlemont

Sick ****ers.

RichieC

makes me fking sick... she wont get out of jail, though. not at least if her crime gets around the cells.

KeithAFC

Only one thing will sort that person out. A bullet to the head.

Icyseanfitz

ah for **** sake

Pace2008

DrumSteve wrote: »

Has this thread been godwinned?

That baby didn't survive becuase the mother was an evil ****, not due to any genetic disposition.

Mr.Biscuits wrote: »

It was Herbert Spencer who coined the term you are eluding to but I fail to see how it pertains to this situation anyway; as it is the child that has not survived here - the parents appear to be alive and kicking.

The child shares half its mother's chromosomes. The idea of the Darwin Awards is that the "contestants" have either killed themselves or rendered themselves infertile, thus disabling the from "polluting" the gene pool. I guess since the child could supposedly have inherited the mother's defective genes (and this is making the big assumption that her psychopathy is an innate characteristic) it means the mother's genetic legacy may be finished.

I would agree it's an inappropriate comment, though