Woman who strangled her newborn daughter to death... spared jail.

eurokev · 05-02-2017 10:01AM

Jesus, that's f***ing tragic. I find it extremely upsetting that the baby didn't get the chance in life, and that the mother reached such a mental state to do this.

How can you hide a pregnancy though? It's fairly obvious that someone is pregnant

mud · 05-02-2017 10:08AM

eurokev wrote: »

Jesus, that's f***ing tragic. I find it extremely upsetting that the baby didn't get the chance in life, and that the mother reached such a mental state to do this.

How can you hide a pregnancy though? It's fairly obvious that someone is pregnant

It is tragic. So tragic.

Anecdotally, I know someone who did manage to conceal her unplanned pregnancy from everyone bar her healthcare providers. She was in a terrible state mentally and was almost definitely delusional regarding her situation.

Thankfully she had terrific support when the truth in the form of a baby girl became apparent. She received wonderful treatment and her family rallied around her. I feel the woman in the OP's situation may not have had that support.

RIP to the baby and condolences to anyone who is affected by this tragedy.

05-02-2017 10:13AM

The article is too scant on detail about her condition and too focussed on the salacious, the affair, how the child died, to make any informed comment based on it. For example it's scant on the findings as to her mental condition at the time if the incident, which of course is the crux of diminished responsibility defences.

volchitsa · 05-02-2017 10:21AM

Graces7 wrote: »

In the UK, at least until recently and probably now, concealing a pregnancy is in itself an offence in law.

Abortion also is freely available there.

As is support and help in both circumstances.

Whatever her state at the time of the birth?

She had decided to continue with the pregnancy. What was her intention then?

All of those points are why it seems likely that she was not in a normal state of mind and was quite probably suffering from delusions.

BTW, the implication by the OP and a couple of posters here that there is a gender difference where women get the benefit of a doubt whereas men get punished is nonsense : the man who killed his parents with an axe in Donegal a couple of years ago "got off scot free". By which I mean that he was found not to be responsible for his acts and got no prison sentence.

eurokev · 05-02-2017 10:22AM

Deleted User wrote:

The article is too scant on detail about her condition and too focussed on the salacious, the affair, how the child died, to make any informed comment based on it. For example it's scant on the findings as to her mental condition at the time if the incident, which of course is the crux of diminished responsibility defences.

Yeah waste of time getting the real story from one of the rags. Majority of their focus was on the affair and talking coldy about how the baby was killed, pure sesnseationalism.

The woman is about twice the size now that she was in older photos. She looks an absolute mess. Living with consequences every minute, if the photos are telling us anything

05-02-2017 10:29AM

volchitsa wrote: »

All of those points are why it seems likely that she was not in a normal state of mind and was quite probably suffering from delusions.

BTW, the implication by the OP and a couple of posters here that there is a gender difference where women get the benefit of a doubt whereas men get punished is nonsense : the man who killed his parents with an axe in Donegal a couple of years ago "got off scot free". By which I mean that he was found not to be responsible for his acts and got no prison sentence.

For some reason it reminds me of the man who strangled his wife in his sleep. Can you imagine
He walked free anyway

FTA69 · 05-02-2017 10:45AM

skankkuvhima wrote: »

The excuses only work for one gender. If it was the other gender there would be no excuses or understanding I can assure you.

Kind of hard to argue for post natal depression for a man.

Graces7 · 05-02-2017 10:48AM

volchitsa wrote: »

All of those points are why it seems likely that she was not in a normal state of mind and was quite probably suffering from delusions.

BTW, the implication by the OP and a couple of posters here that there is a gender difference where women get the benefit of a doubt whereas men get punished is nonsense : the man who killed his parents with an axe in Donegal a couple of years ago "got off scot free". By which I mean that he was found not to be responsible for his acts and got no prison sentence.

Depends on your interpretation. To me it smacks of quite wilful and knowing behaviour . There is a bit missing somewhere in this story too. Does not add up.

Lady is a tramp · 05-02-2017 11:04AM

I've been there.

I have Complex PTSD. Complex as opposed to regular, because the trauma of being sexually abused between the ages of 3 and 12 only really resurfaced fully when I was in labour with my child.

It was a short but traumatic labour. Both for him and for me. For him, physically - I wasn't breathing so his heart rate was dropping significantly. For me, mentally - I was suicidal throughout the labour and wanted to jump out the 2nd floor window of Holles St because of trauma that went way beyond the pain of labour.

I went from being grand that morning to suicidal that evening. To being in a completely altered state of mind. Where I was capable of anything. Even - in that moment - killing myself and my baby.

And my memories of that night are very different to my sons dads memories. That's scary too.

Its a "happy ending" in that, three years later, my son and I are both still alive. Most of that time I've spent as a psychiatric inpatient. My relationship with his dad is long over.

Its a better outcome than the alternative. And I can't and won't judge that woman. You never know what another persons been through.

volchitsa · 05-02-2017 11:05AM

Graces7 wrote: »

Depends on your interpretation. To me it smacks of quite wilful and knowing behaviour . There is a bit missing somewhere in this story too. Does not add up.

How could it be "willful and knowing" to refuse to go to hospital until she was yellow from loss of blood?

As for the fact that we don't know the whole story, well that's been pointed out, it's a very biased version, but not biased towards her. So since the jury found her not guilty, it seems likely that what's missing is much of the actual evidence that explains that verdict, and which the newspaper article didn't tell us.

volchitsa · 05-02-2017 11:09AM

Lady is a tramp wrote: »

I've been there.

Not sure what to say to that except I'm really, really sorry to hear it, and I'm glad you've sort of got through it, Lady. I hope things continue to improve and that you can put your life back together.

neonsofa · 05-02-2017 11:16AM

Lady is a tramp wrote: »

I've been there.

I have Complex PTSD. Complex as opposed to regular, because the trauma of being sexually abused between the ages of 3 and 12 only really resurfaced fully when I was in labour with my child.

It was a short but traumatic labour. Both for him and for me. For him, physically - I wasn't breathing so his heart rate was dropping significantly. For me, mentally - I was suicidal throughout the labour and wanted to jump out the 2nd floor window of Holles St because of trauma that went way beyond the pain of labour.

I went from being grand that morning to suicidal that evening. To being in a completely altered state of mind. Where I was capable of anything. Even - in that moment - killing myself and my baby.

And my memories of that night are very different to my sons dads memories. That's scary too.

Its a "happy ending" in that, three years later, my son and I are both still alive. Most of that time I've spent as a psychiatric inpatient. My relationship with his dad is long over.

Its a better outcome than the alternative. And I can't and won't judge that woman. You never know what another persons been through.

I wish you all the best.

It is also important to note that she went through childbirth alone, no painkillers, no support from midwives etc. I know that I was in a lot of mental anguish over two days of labour and went through multiple types of pain relief in that time, needed the health care professionals to motivate me and assure me things were ok etc. I can't imagine doing all that alone. I understand it was her decision not to go to hospital but it must have had an affect on her mind in that moment. Whether that excuses what she did is a different story but I imagine we just don't know all the facts.

learn_more · 05-02-2017 11:20AM

These seductive pics of that Lithuanian proves that there wasnt a thing wrong with her and what we have here is a clear cut case of cold blooded murder.

Gintare-pleaded-guilty-to-infanticide-last-year-in-court-810956.jpg

Gintare-pleaded-guilty-to-infanticide-last-year-in-court-810956.jpg

Miss-Suminaite-was-handed-a-two-year-community-order-with-a-60-day-rehabilitation-requirement-810964.jpg

Rubberchikken · 05-02-2017 11:25AM

i'm only glad that trial by internet isn't a 'real' thing or anyone who ever did anything out of line would be strung up without a chance to plead their case.
the court listens in a calm way and applies the law as fit.

Thumpette · 05-02-2017 11:32AM

I'm going to absolutely judge her. Firstly, I don't care how traumatic her birth was- as someone who has experienced the pinnacle of traumatic birth (the stillbirth of my son at 41 weeks) I get the ptsd and the anxiety and depression that can follow. Surely all people who commit horrendous murder of someone, particularly a family member is in some way unbalanced- that doesn't make it ok.

Mainly though the fact that she concealed the whole pregnancy shows that in a premeditated way she never intended to keep this child. She didn't seek out medical support in case the pregnancy or labour went wrong (perhaps she was hoping it would as an 'out'). This wasn't a decision made in the midst of the pains of labour or in the haze of pnd- this decision, though maybe not the specifics- was set in motion the minute her pregnancy threatened to reveal her affair.

She could have left the baby somewhere safe to be cared for, but instead she brutally and violently choked and drowned the life out of her. She abandoned her body without dignity.

That little girl is the real victim here- murdered by the one person who should have loved her most, and now not even valued enough for that crime to be properly punished.

Rip little one.

Jawgap · 05-02-2017 11:33AM

Graces7 wrote: »

Depends on your interpretation. To me it smacks of quite wilful and knowing behaviour . There is a bit missing somewhere in this story too. Does not add up.

Yes, because the Daily Express is interested in fully describing the nuances of her mental state, the testimony given and the examination of it.

The fact the case was transferred to the Old Bailey kind of gives an idea of how seriously it was treated and scrutinised if the local Crown Court judges felt it was beyond their capacity to hear and adjudicate on it.

cnocbui · 05-02-2017 11:33AM

thee glitz wrote: »

Maybe she is mental and needs treatment from an appropriate residential care provider to stop this behaviour.

If it was a psychosis triggered by the hormonal and chemical turmoil of pregnancy and birth, it would be self-correcting as things settle down to normal. No need for that nonsense.

Jawgap · 05-02-2017 11:38AM

learn_more wrote: »

These seductive pics of that Lithuanian proves that there wasnt a thing wrong with her and what we have here is a clear cut case of cold blooded murder.

"Tabloid uses glamorous photos of callous killer" - colour me shocked.

I wonder why they didn't use this one

.....maybe because such an image doesn't sate the appetite of the baying mob?

infogiver · 05-02-2017 11:39AM

learn_more wrote: »

These seductive pics of that Lithuanian proves that there wasnt a thing wrong with her and what we have here is a clear cut case of cold blooded murder.

Yes. The judge and jury should just have been shown these pics, taken before the tragedy, and no other evidence entered.
Then they should have thrown her into the lion pit at the zoo. Isn't that right poster?

red ears · 05-02-2017 11:41AM

skankkuvhima wrote: »

The excuses only work for one gender. If it was the other gender there would be no excuses or understanding I can assure you.

Can you imagine any circumstances where a man gets away with strangling and drowning a human being and claiming he had temporary anxiety or mental illness. I can't. She basically got away with killing a baby she tried to hide from her boyfriend. That child could have been handed up for adoption.

Wibbs · 05-02-2017 11:42AM

On the surface it looks pretty damning, but journalists tend to only look at the surface. PND is a very real psychiatric condition recognised since the ancient Greeks. It may sound odd to our ears but infanticide in the first year of life was considered a "lesser crime" in much of the western world before the 19th century and acute post birth "hysteria" was often given as a reason.

Would a new father be given the same understanding? No, simply because he wouldn't be going through the hormonal and physical results of childbirth and pregnancy. This is just a physiological fact. However, if the new father was shown to have a history of mental illness that was triggered by a powerful emotional event like fatherhood, I'd not be surprised if he would also get a diminished sentence.

Just like any crime really, though it would be my opinion that in other such crimes women defendants are more likely to a) be given the benefit of the doubt of diminished responsibility and b) get lesser sentences. The latter an established given, even without mental states being brought to bear. Women face softer punishments in the courts. And I think that wrong, but not in this particular case.

05-02-2017 11:43AM

red ears wrote: »

Can you imagine any circumstances where a man gets away with strangling and drowning a human being.

Well yes, I did post about it already

am i bovvered · 05-02-2017 11:43AM

red ears wrote: »

Can you imagine any circumstances where a man gets away with strangling and drowning a human being and claiming he had temporary anxiety or mental illness. I can't. She basically got away with killing a baby she tried to hide from her boyfriend. That child could have been handed up for adoption.

Originally that was my thoughts too, however posters in the thread have clarified that the defence was postnatal depression this defence obviously cannot be applied to any man.

infogiver · 05-02-2017 11:45AM

Thumpette wrote: »

I'm going to absolutely judge her. Firstly, I don't care how traumatic her birth was- as someone who has experienced the pinnacle of traumatic birth (the stillbirth of my son at 41 weeks) I get the ptsd and the anxiety and depression that can follow. Surely all people who commit horrendous murder of someone, particularly a family member is in some way unbalanced- that doesn't make it ok.

Mainly though the fact that she concealed the whole pregnancy shows that in a premeditated way she never intended to keep this child. She didn't seek out medical support in case the pregnancy or labour went wrong (perhaps she was hoping it would as an 'out'). This wasn't a decision made in the midst of the pains of labour or in the haze of pnd- this decision, though maybe not the specifics- was set in motion the minute her pregnancy threatened to reveal her affair.

She could have left the baby somewhere safe to be cared for, but instead she brutally and violently choked and drowned the life out of her. She abandoned her body without dignity.

That little girl is the real victim here- murdered by the one person who should have loved her most, and now not even valued enough for that crime to be properly punished.

Rip little one.

How do you explain the judge and jury in the Old Bailey, who heard all the evidence including from medical professionals, reaching a different conclusion from you( who knows absolutely nothing about the details of this case)?
They are wrong and you are right?
Explain, I'd love to hear it.

05-02-2017 11:52AM

infogiver wrote: »

Yes. The judge and jury should just have been shown these pics, taken before the tragedy, and no other evidence entered.
Then they should have thrown her into the lion pit at the zoo. Isn't that right poster?

I assumed that was the point he was making, he also used "that Lithuanian" in italics to emphasise his criticism of the article...

Jawgap · 05-02-2017 11:52AM

red ears wrote: »

Can you imagine any circumstances where a man gets away with strangling and drowning a human being and claiming he had temporary anxiety or mental illness. I can't. She basically got away with killing a baby she tried to hide from her boyfriend. That child could have been handed up for adoption.

She didn't get away with anything.....

....the original charge was murder, which was varied using the defence available under the Infanticide Act and she was convicted and sentenced under that legislation.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that an Old Bailey judge, despite what the tabloids might have you believe, is no schmuck and is quite capable of seeing through any ruse intended to allow a murderer escape their punishment especially when they've admitted to carrying out the acts that led to a baby's death.

.....and on a technical point, the judge directed that the murder charge lie on file, so no verdict has been entered in relation to it.

Thumpette · 05-02-2017 11:53AM

infogiver wrote: »

How do you explain the judge and jury in the Old Bailey, who heard all the evidence including from medical professionals, reaching a different conclusion from you( who knows absolutely nothing about the details of this case)?
They are wrong and you are right?
Explain, I'd love to hear it.

Is this not the whole point of this thread? That some people agree with the judgement and some people don't? Did I miss the part where we are all just meant to applaud their fair and humanitarian stance and never utter a word against it?

Are you saying that there has never been a miscarriage of justice, that innocent people are never locked up or that guilty people never manage to walk free?

You're right- I have no idea of the facts beyond the link to the publicly available information on which this thread is being discussed. There may be more to it- but none of us know what that is. Therefore based on the piece we are discussing I have formed and shared my own views.

The indisputable facts are that for 9 months this woman sought no care and support for her child and then took her healthy child and violently murdered her.

Wibbs · 05-02-2017 11:55AM

Thumpette wrote: »

Mainly though the fact that she concealed the whole pregnancy shows that in a premeditated way she never intended to keep this child. She didn't seek out medical support in case the pregnancy or labour went wrong (perhaps she was hoping it would as an 'out'). This wasn't a decision made in the midst of the pains of labour or in the haze of pnd- this decision, though maybe not the specifics- was set in motion the minute her pregnancy threatened to reveal her affair.

Maybe, but I've known enough "normal" people who are happy to be in denial until such denial creeps up on them. They can become like a rabbit in the headlights in the face of this. She stays in this state of denial, hiding the pregnancy, maybe it'll all go away etc, then gives birth and the dam bursts. That is not to deny the suggestion of a more cold blooded thought process, but I can certainly see that happening.

Maybe I can see this happening because of seeing something like that in a woman I knew way back when. Boyfriend left her, which she was expecting and was OK with, then she found out she was pregnant(near religious pill user, didn't want kids, great career etc, but had a bout of food poisoning/antibiotics and...). She was in an odd denial about it. Flip flopping between acknowledgment and taking the boat to the UK and was back and forth on the latter. It was only when she started to show that it really seemed to hit her and she went through a near meltdown(and only then told the perspective father). In her case the birth was the complete opposite of how this case went, in that it was an overwhelmingly joyful thing for her, that "reset the mechanism" as it were and she and the kid were fine after that. It could have gone either way looking back.

infogiver · 05-02-2017 12:01PM

Thumpette wrote: »

Is this not the whole point of this thread? That some people agree with the judgement and some people don't? Did I miss the part where we are all just meant to applaud their fair and humanitarian stance and never utter a word against it?

Are you saying that there has never been a miscarriage of justice, that innocent people are never locked up or that guilty people never manage to walk free?

You're right- I have no idea of the facts beyond the link to the publicly available information on which this thread is being discussed. There may be more to it- but none of us know what that is. Therefore based on the piece we are discussing I have formed and shared my own views.

The indisputable facts are that for 9 months this woman sought no care and support for her child and then took her healthy child and violently murdered her.

Your wrong again thumpette. She wasn't found guilty of murder.
You might at least read the report before contributing to the discussion
You've already admitted you know nothing about the case
Now you prove you haven't even read the OP.
Why do you want to have your POV taken seriously when it's littered with errors?

Jawgap · 05-02-2017 12:03PM

Thumpette wrote: »

Is this not the whole point of this thread? That some people agree with the judgement and some people don't? Did I miss the part where we are all just meant to applaud their fair and humanitarian stance and never utter a word against it?

Are you saying that there has never been a miscarriage of justice, that innocent people are never locked up or that guilty people never manage to walk free?

You're right- I have no idea of the facts beyond the link to the publicly available information on which this thread is being discussed. There may be more to it- but none of us know what that is. Therefore based on the piece we are discussing I have formed and shared my own views.

The indisputable facts are that for 9 months this woman sought no care and support for her child and then took her healthy child and violently murdered her.

You think this was a miscarriage of justice?

Plus you've no idea (and neither have I) if/when she formed the intent to kill the baby. The reports of the case that are not in the tabloids, go into a bit more detail about her social exclusion.

I wonder how well mentally an Irish person, for example, would do if they went to Lithuania and struggled with the language, the society etc. And then had a crisis pregnancy layered on top of that?

Btw, it's fairly well established that men and women form intent differently - by your logic the 'battered wife' should always be done for murder if she plots it for months then violently snaps even though the intent to kill was well formed, it was the result of a mind corrupted following, potentially, years or months of abuse.

Woman who strangled her newborn daughter to death... spared jail.

Comments