Zemgale Regional Court Cuts Sentence of Woman Convicted of Killing Granddaughter's Newborn
Retrying the case, the Zemgale Regional Court in Latvia sentenced a woman to just under ten years in prison for abducting and killing her granddaughter's newborn. She had earlier received 18 years, but the Supreme Court overturned that ruling.
The Zemgale Regional Court in Latvia has substantially reduced the prison sentence of a woman found guilty of abducting and killing her granddaughter's newborn baby. The court heard the case again because the Supreme Court had overturned the earlier ruling. The new verdict sets imprisonment at nine years and 11 months, plus three years of probation supervision. The woman must also pay 2,150 euros in compensation to the victim.
Background
The regional court originally found her guilty of abducting a minor by exploiting the person's helplessness, of murder while aware the victim was helpless, and of desecrating a corpse. It then imposed 18 years in prison and three years of probation supervision.
The Criminal Cases Department of the Supreme Court annulled that ruling, explaining that it had not been proven that the newborn's body was desecrated while it was being destroyed. The Supreme Court stated that storing, hiding, carrying away or abandoning a body, or failing to ensure a proper burial, does not amount to desecration under Section 117, Clause 5 of the Criminal Law unless the defendant directly acted upon the body.
Circumstances of the charge
According to the indictment, the woman is qualified as a physician assistant but lacks the education needed to deliver babies. To conceal her granddaughter's pregnancy, she delivered the baby herself, and the child was born alive. The sex of the child was not established during the investigation.
The defendant was reportedly angry about her granddaughter's relationships with men. While the young mother had lost consciousness after the birth, the woman took the newborn out of the home, killed the child at an unidentified place and in unidentified circumstances, and destroyed the body.
Argument in the cassation appeal
The cassation appeal claimed the appellate court had not established intent to kill. The Supreme Court rejected this, noting that the appellate court concluded the murder was committed deliberately with direct intent, as the woman understood her actions and wanted the baby to die. It also held that murder of a helpless person can take the form of inaction, by leaving a newborn without basic care.
When the appellate ruling was annulled, the defendant remained in custody.
