A mother imprisoned for causing serious harm to her baby has told the court of appeal she lied at her trial because of the control her former boyfriend had over her.
Ah, the modern-day equivalent of 'pleading your belly'.
The woman, known as Jenny, who cannot be named for legal reasons, told the appeal court it was her partner at the time who caused their son’s skull fractures and bleeding on the brain in June 2017.
The landmark hearing has the potential to change the way coercive control is understood in cases where a victim feels that abuse has led them to lie in court.
And of course, if she wins, there'll be a rush to the lawyers from every female incarcerated for killing her child, or standing by while her partner did so...
At the original trial the woman, Jenny, said she caught her cardigan on a cupboard door while preparing her son’s feed, causing him to fall to a concrete floor. She was given a 10-year extended sentence, later reduced to five.
On Thursday she told judges the baby’s father punched her in the head as she held their son, causing them both to fall.
So she lied. Why do they never do them for perjury when they change their story?
She claimed she was unable to tell police the truth because her boyfriend was present.
“I did not want to anger him or agitate him as he [was holding] my baby.”
While police were in the room? Pull the other one, love!
Representing the Crown, John Price QC said the appeal was seeking a “second bite at the cherry”.
Actually, a third. She's already had her sentence reduced, remember...
He said: “The evidence the applicant gave introduces nothing new about the degree of force with which the child struck the floor – whether that was caused by a cardigan catching or by a punch.”
He focused on the veracity of her reasoning as to why she failed to tell the jury the truth. “We submit there is no credible explanation for that,” he said. Price pointed to witness reports that after the incident the child’s father shouted that she had thrown the baby and she replied: “I was feeding the child, you hit me and that is how the baby dropped.”
Price argued they later changed their accounts and formed “a cynical agreement to further their mutual interests”.
Yup, no doubt. Why not? It's likely to work, these days...
(Lady Justice) Macur acknowledged that coercive control victims could find themselves isolated. But she added: “I keep coming back to that incident. We have still got to make a decision about whether her evidence is worthy of belief.”
She's a proven liar. If that doesn't help with the decision, what will?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Unburden yourself here: