THE tragic events of January 16, which claimed the life of a 16-month-old boy, reached a conclusion of sorts at the High Court at Wanganui yesterday.
The pain and grief will no doubt continue for the boy's family for some considerable time, but at least the legal formalities - whichsaw the boy's mother charged with manslaughter - are, mercifully, at an end.
It is a tragedy - the toddler died after being mistakenly left in a hot car by his mother - that has raised a number of issues.
The Chronicle was criticised both for its reporting of the incident - and for its initial non-reporting, as the boy's death was only made public some days afterwards. It has been suggested there were efforts to keep it under wraps, with the mother's employers, quite understandably, keen to support and protect her as much as possible.
However horrendous, it was an event of importance and of significant public interest and the Chronicle treated it as such, knowing we would be in the gun with the publicity perceived as adding to the mother's already unimaginable anguish.
There was the initial naming of the child and then the court suppression order that he could not be named, even though his identity was already in the public arena.
There was, for a time, the order that the relationship between the boy and the accused (his mother) could not be made public, now rescinded.
Where the incident took place was widely reported. Now that fact is suppressed.
One of the more serious questions raised was whether the mother, already suffering the loss of her child, should have been prosecuted at all.
Clearly the death of a 16-month-old has to be thoroughly examined by the authorities, and the mother admitted her guilt, but the Crown does have discretion on whether to lay charges or not. What was the thinking in this case ... too serious not to prosecute?
Whatever, the legal machinations, yesterday's result would surely have pleased all. A discharge without conviction - even the prosecution had no doubt it was the right outcome.
