|diamond splinter wrote:|
|A WOMAN has been convicted of deliberately aborting her seven-and-a-half-month-old baby.
Maisha Mohammed, 22, showed no emotion as a jury at Manchester Crown Court convicted her after considering the evidence for less than 90 minutes.
Mrs Mohammed was then remanded on bail and will be sentenced on May 24 after reports had been prepared by the probation service.
She was convicted following what was a landmark prosecution of the crime of child destruction. The Crown alleged she had aborted the baby, probably during a trip to Liverpool during a half-term school break.
Prosecutor Neil Fryman told the jury it was not known if Mrs Mohammed, of Wray Gardens in Levenshulme, Manchester, had carried out the abortion on herself or whether someone else terminated her pregnancy.
But it was alleged her motive was that the child was illegitimate, having been conceived during an affair while her husband was in Ethiopia.
The case centred around medical evidence after a midwife, who had examined Mrs Mohammed just weeks before the trip to Liverpool, concluded that she could hear a foetal heartbeat during two sonic aid scans.
Mrs Mohammed did not give evidence herself during the trial, but, when quizzed by police, claimed she had miscarried the child.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/new s/s/1006/1006766_woman_convicted_over_seve nmonth_abortion.html
|What a shame this poor lady felt the need to abort due to the backwardness her culture adheres to (that illegitimate children are a big no-no). Again, however discomforting her abortion may be, it was still her choice: the foetus was occupying her body, so she had the choice and the right to do as she pleased with it.|
|What if it really was a miscarriage?
Hypothetically speaking, you can hear a fetal heartbeat just hours before a stillbirth.(later miscarriage)
This makes me uneasy, that she 'could' have miscarried, but there is no evidence that it happened either way :/
Quite obviously she did not have the right or she would not of been in court.
No, my belief is that she did have the right, though this right is prohibited because of our anti-individualism Government.
|diamond splinter wrote:|
|She was tried in manchester court 90% of manchester are pro choice but thats has nothing to do with it it was a judges descion not a jury descion|
The article says "jury at Manchester Crown Court convicted her after considering the evidence for less than 90 minutes." I don't know anything about English law (other than it's the basis for our own), but is a jury there the same as here?
I'm just surprised they would convict someone such circumstantial evidence. I wonder if that will be reflected in the sentencing?