Editorial: Mercy killer gets her martyrdom

Lesley Martin craved martyrdom; yesterday she was granted her wish when sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment for the attempted murder of her mother. In the end, she gave Justice John Wild no choice, just as a jury, acting on the facts of the case and the law, had had no alternative but to find her guilty.

According to the Crown prosecutor, cases of mercy killing or assisted suicide similar to that of Martin's have drawn jail terms of one to three years. Martin's lack of remorse, and her conviction to this day that she has done nothing criminal, ensured she must also face time in prison.

Justice Wild was, with cause, damning of her conduct. Martin, he said, seemed to regard herself as above the law, so much so that it seemed virtually an exercise in futility to attempt to imbue her with responsibility. In the end, the justice system had no choice but to deliver a message that it was unacceptable to break the law, whatever the circumstances.

Martin had challenged that notion right up to the week of the sentencing, when she said that "not a single day" went by when she felt guilty about her actions, and to the eve of the sentencing, when she virtually courted jail by making it clear that she would refuse to countenance home detention.

That refusal, spelled out in emotive terms - "I refuse to have my home be my prison" - was simply the final expression of a quest to be a martyr to the cause of voluntary euthanasia.

As much as it is possible to understand her behaviour, and to believe that she was acting out of what she thought were the best motives, it is impossible to overlook the woeful consequences of her obsession. Many others have suffered similar ordeals. None has written about it, as she did in To Die Like a Dog, describing in detail the administering of morphine to her mother.

Upon the publication of that book, Martin acknowledged she had laid herself open to charges. But that was a risk she was willing to take, so strongly did she want a law change. Thus, it was almost banal of her lawyer to argue yesterday that conviction was unwarranted, and that a custodial sentence was inappropriate. Indeed, it seemed almost at odds with Martin's determination to martyr herself.

In all likelihood, that courtroom plea stemmed from an 11th-hour understanding of the repercussions of conviction: that, most pertinently, it meant she could not travel overseas to continue campaigning for voluntary euthanasia.

Thus, the attempt to escape conviction, on the basis of a series of mitigating circumstances, could be regarded as further evidence of her unflagging zeal, rather than an admission of any sort.

Martin's sentencing represents a cautionary tale for all who carry obsession too far. Justice Wild pointed out how her utter single-mindedness had had a detrimental impact on her family. And how he hoped that, in the interests of her husband and two children, she would not dismiss the possibility of home detention out of hand. Such remonstration, as Justice Wild implied in his sentencing, will probably be in vain.

Most probably, the sentence will serve as a deterrent to others. Martin set a course and, to a large degree, has not deviated from it. By the time of her sentencing, it was far too late to put a case based on mitigating circumstances.

Her unilateral decisions as a caregiver, and her subsequent lack of contrition, meant those circumstances were overwhelmed by the number of aggravating factors.

Martin would warrant more sympathy if she had admitted her guilt under the present law, no matter how much she detested it. Such moderation would not, however, have sat with her wish for martyrdom. She left the law with no option but to grant it.