A mother and father experienced two different outcomes yesterday when they appeared in a Bridgetown court on charges connected to their two daughters.
This Content Is Only For Subscribers
The 47-year-old mother was not required to plead to causing serious bodily harm to each of her girls on November 16, with intent to maim, disfigure or disable them, or to do them some serious bodily harm.
On the other hand, their father, 55, pleaded guilty to two counts of neglect, in that between November 16 and 19, while he had care of the children, he wilfully neglected them in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering to their health.
Although he had no objection to the father being granted bail, prosecutor Sergeant Randolph Boyce strenuously objected to bail for the mother, whom he said knew the witnesses and might either intimidate or influence them.
“This is a case where the complainants are the children of the accused. She is here on not one, but two indictable matters. The two children are still at the QEH (Queen Elizabeth Hospital); one had surgery and I dare say we do not know what will happen next to her. The situation is grave,” he told the District “A” Magistrates’ Court.
He submitted that the accused was in a position of trust, was responsible for the children and “is a mother”. The Child Care Board was already involved, he added.
“She is not a fit candidate for bail,” Boyce argued, as he asked the court to imagine what the public outcry would be should she be granted bail.
Defence attorney Corey Beckles said any case involving children was serious, but the court needed to look at the circumstances of each. “We don’t know the circumstances of the surgery. There are minor and major surgeries.”
He said there was no record anywhere at the Child Care Board “to indicate she was a bad parent”. Adding that he understood the seriousness of the charges, counsel said, “There are certain things which can happen without intent.” He also mentioned an older child belonging to the mother, who is studying medicine and whom his client is putting through school.
Beckles asked the court to weigh the accused’s character, her employment, family life and economics, and grant her bail.
In terms of influencing or intimidating the complainants, he said the Child Care Board has the power to remove them from the environment.
Chief Magistrate Ian Weekes, in remanding the mother to Dodds Prison until December 20, said while he agreed with some of the points made by the defence attorney, and that situations such as these were “always unfortunate”, the court “cannot just wish away the fact that we have a mother charged with serious bodily harm”.
“It is not a situation where it is her niece or nephew, but those she brought into the world,” he added.
He said that by the time the matter comes up again, the court expects to be updated on the condition of the children.
In relation to the father, a pre-sentencing report was ordered on him, he was granted $10 000 bail and the case adjourned until April 8 next year.
The court heard that on the date, the children’s mother called the father and asked him to come for them. After she did not give them permission to go to a guest house with friends, an argument ensued between her and the girls. Their father collected them after they suffered injuries and while in his care, he neglected to get them medical attention, although he gave them home remedies.
Police received information and they, along with Child Care Board personnel, went to the father’s residence and after noticing the state of the girls, took them for medical attention.
The court ordered that until further notice, he is not to contact the children in person nor via social media, except under supervision from the Child Care Board. (SD)