Baby Elijah murder trial: Jury retires to deliberate verdict, rare 85-year-old law

Melody Ngawhika has been found guilty of infanticide. Photo / NZME

Warning: This story contains distressing content

A jury has retired to consider their verdict in the case of a Rotorua woman charged with murdering her 6-month-old son.

The eleven jurors will also need to consider the defence’s argument that the case wasn’t murder but in fact infanticide - an older charge on New Zealand’s statutes that has remained unchanged for 85 years.

Melody Ngawhika, 28, has for the last week faced trial after being charged with the murder of her baby son Elijah. Ngawhika denies the charge, with her lawyer Fraser Wood telling the jury his client is instead guilty of infanticide.

Ngawhika sat in the dock with a support person Monday, as Crown prosecutor Amanda Gordon and Wood both delivered closing statements.

In her statement, Gordon ran over the facts of the case, which are generally agreed upon by the defence.

Those facts are that Ngawhika was responsible for the child’s death on August 29 due to asphyxiation, after she held Elijah tightly against her shoulder until he suffocated.

Ngawhika called the police later the same night, saying “the voices told me to do it”. She admitted in a recorded police interview played to the jury that she suffocated the child.

It is also accepted by both Crown and defence that Ngawhika was suffering from mental health issues at the time of Elijah’s death. The defence’s sole witness, Dr Peter Dean, told the jury she suffered from an abusive background and demonstrated signs of psychosis and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Ngawhika told Dean in an interview that she had seen demons and that the Government was tapping her phones.

The Crown’s expert witness, Dr Jeremy Skipworth, reached a similar conclusion, saying it was clear to him Ngawhika had a “disturbed mind”.

Whether or not Ngawhika had a “disturbed mind” during the alleged killing is precisely what her defence rests upon.

Infanticide, as Wood has stated Ngawhika is responsible for instead of murder, is a historic charge that has sat unamended on the statutes since 1937.

It is defined as the killing of a child by its mother “where at the time of the offence the balance of her mind was disturbed, by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth”.

But, while it’s clear evidence points to Ngawhika being in mental distress, it must be proved that distress was the result of childbirth in order to meet the test for infanticide.

Whether or not Ngawhika’s disturbed mind could be attributed to childbirth six months earlier was “questionable”, Skipworth said.

“It’s clear the law and medicine do not match up on this matter,” Crown prosecutor Amanda Gordon told the jury, referring to Skipworth’s evidence that mental health issues are typically the result of multiple, often compiling factors. Gordon previously labelled the wording of the law “from another time”.

Gordon suggested there were other factors at play, including a person who sexually and physically abused Ngawhika, whose identity is suppressed, re-entering her life.

“I am not standing here advocating a particular verdict. I’m not saying you should find her guilty of murder,” Gordon submitted. “It is your job to consider the facts and evidence.”

Wood, in his statement to the jury, said it was clear her mind was disturbed as a result of childbirth.

“It was clear from the [police] interview we saw, she couldn’t really comprehend what she had done or why. She will never be able to get over or forgive herself for what she did. Regardless of the verdict, she will live with the consequences of what she’s done forever.”

Wood said prior to the death, Ngawhika was a “good mother”, with no evidence of abuse, a pantry full of food, and a genuine love for her two children.

“I suspect none of us will truly understand why she did this. Melody doesn’t understand why she did this either.”

Deliberation will continue today.