HMA V INETA DZINGUVIENE

At the High Court in Glasgow Judge Beckett sentenced Ineta Dzinguviene to life imprisonment after she was found guilty of murdering her son on the 12 April 2010 in Fraserburgh. The punishment part of the sentence was fixed at 15 years.

On sentencing Judge Becket made the following statement in court:
 
“Ineta Dzinguviene,  you have been found guilty of murder and the punishment is fixed by law. You will be sentenced to life imprisonment. I am obliged to fix a period of time which you must serve in custody before being considered for parole.


In fixing this period, known as a punishment part, I must reflect the need to punish you for the crime of murder and to deter you and others from committing murder. In fixing the punishment part of your sentence the law requires me to ignore the risk that you may pose to the public in the future.
In fixing this period I am obliged to take account of the seriousness of the crime of which you have been convicted.


Your victim was an innocent child, your own baby, who was no more than a few hours old when you ended his life by smothering him with clingfilm. As a newborn baby he was wholly defenceless and extremely vulnerable.  He should have been protected and nurtured by you. Instead, you killed him and the jury determined, correctly, that this was murder.


You did this while  your young daughter was listening outside the bedroom door, puzzled by the sound of a baby crying. You abandoned your baby’s body in a holdall which you secreted amongst unwanted rubbish.


You have not sought to put forward your family circumstances as mitigation, but I have taken account of what is contained in the social work report, in so far as it was not in clear conflict with the evidence in the trial. 


Whilst you had not been long in this country you were not unsupported. Even if there were some difficulties in your relationship with your husband and his family, not least because of the long hours that he worked, he and his family were offering you practical support with your three children. Your husband told the jury that he did not object to having another child and that he would have welcomed an addition to your family. You could have asked your family to look after baby  Paulius or you could have sought to have him adopted. There is no justification at all for the dreadful crime which you committed. You gave birth and allowed your baby to feed from your breast.  You took him home, concealing his birth from your family. You then deliberately ended his life,  for reasons which you have still not explained.


Both the Crown and your own lawyers have investigated the possibility that you suffered from a mental disorder which might cast light on why you committed this crime. Those investigations included the seeking of advice from a peri-natal psychiatrist,  but there is no information to suggest that there was anything which affects your responsibility for your actions.


It is difficult to find mitigation in these circumstances. I do however take account of everything said on your behalf by Miss McMenamin. I note that you have no previous convictions. I accept from the evidence that I heard in the trial that you had been a good mother to your three children. It is to your credit that you brought up your eldest daughter from such a young age.

I recognise the impact that the commission of this crime, and your punishment for it, will have on you and your children.  I recognise that being sentenced to imprisonment in a country far from your homeland, and your sisters, will be particularly difficult for you.  However, you have brought these consequences about through your own wicked actions.

In these circumstances,  the punishment part will be one of fifteen  years. That will be backdated to 15 April 2010.


This does not mean that this is a sentence of fifteen  years. You are sentenced to life imprisonment and you will serve at least fifteen years before you can be considered for release on parole. It will be for the Parole Board to determine when you will ultimately be released and regard will be had to the safety of the public in reaching that decision.
You also become subject to automatic listing in terms of the Protection of Vulnerable Groups (Scotland) Act 2007”.

 

Sentencing Statements

HMA v Kevin Shand

Friday, 15 September, 2017

HMA v George Thomas Currie

Thursday, 7 September, 2017

HMA v Alan Buick

Monday, 4 September, 2017

HMA v Mark Renton

Wednesday, 30 August, 2017

HMA v Stephen Kane

Tuesday, 29 August, 2017