Lauren Dickason trial

Dickason did not have to establish her innocence to the charge of murder.

The Crown must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the acts were murder and not a case of infanticide, Justice Mander said.

He cited the law of infanticide – where a woman causes the death of any child of hers under the age of 10 where the balance of her mind was disturbed by the effects of her not having fully recovered from giving birth, to such an extent she she shouldn’t be held fully responsible.

“Mrs Dickason will be entitled to verdicts of infanticide, and to be acquitted of murder, if there is a sufficient evidential foundation for infanticide that leaves you in reasonable doubt."

Infanticide was a hybrid of a defence and criminal offence, the judge said.

If the jury considered it reasonably possible that Dickason’s actions were acts of infanticide, then, depending on whether she was insane at the time, their verdicts would be ones of not guilty to murder but guilty of infanticide.

There was no dispute Dickason caused the death of her three children, the judge said.

The Crown did not contest that the balance of her mind was disturbed at the time of the killings. 

What was in question was whether her disturbed mind was from the effects of giving birth, and if so, if it was disturbed to such an extent that she should not be held fully responsible.

This was for the jury to consider for the issue of infanticide.