Girl, seven, found dead on York path, named as Katie Rough

[yorkie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-38576502

A seven-year-old who died after she was found seriously injured on a path leading to a playing field has been named by police.
Katie Rough was found in the Woodthorpe area of York on Monday afternoon.
She was taken to hospital but died a short time later. Inquiries into the circumstances surrounding her death continue, North Yorkshire Police said.
A 15-year-old girl was arrested and remains in police custody.

The Mirror states:

A 7-year-old girl died after being found with stab wounds by her screaming mother in a field near a quiet housing estate..
.

It firstly never happens around here and never happens in York. It's awful.

Shocking and sickening.

I am struggling to believe this has happened at all, let alone in York. I live in York and I know several forum members who work or live here, some of them live in the Woodthorpe area very near where it happened. It's certainly not a bad area. If it can happen here, it can happen anywhere.

:cry:

Update:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-38579407

A 15-year-old girl has been charged with the murder of seven-year-old Katie Rough, police have said.
The teenager was arrested after Katie was found seriously injured on a path leading to a playing field in the Woodthorpe area of York on Monday.

She has also been charged with possession of an offensive weapon, North Yorkshire Police said.

The girl is due to appear at York Magistrates' Court on Wednesday morning.

Katie was taken to hospital after police arrived at the scene but died a short time later.

On Tuesday, a number of people paid tribute to Katie, a pupil at Westfield Primary School.

She was described as a "kind and thoughtful child" by her teachers, while neighbours said she was a "really sweet" girl who could often been seen playing outside with friends.

 

[J-2739]

That's really painful. :cry:

 

[backontrack]

Oh my god. This is sickening.

York's not the type of place where this stuff happens, at all. I spent the first half of my childhood there - I know people around Woodthorpe and Dringhouses - and it's scary to think that if this wasn't a motivated attack, that could have been...someone I knew. The fact that it wasn't doesn't make this any less horrific, of course. Or less painful for the involved.

Of course my thoughts go out to those grieving and whose lives will never be the same at this difficult time.

 

[221129]

A teenage girl has been charged and is due in court this morning on Murder charges.

 

[37038]

I work just down the road. Not what I expected to see on beeb news whilst on a break

 

[AlterEgo]

Very depressing. I wonder what the circumstances were.

Her poor mother.

 

[RichmondCommu]

As a parent this fills me with sadness. I'm afraid that no village, town or city can be immune from this kind of thing. You do however wonder what goes off in people's heads to do such a thing.

 

[yorkie]

You do however wonder what goes off in people's heads to do such a thing.

Quite. Clearly something was very wrong in her mind.

Here's an update:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40478679

A 16-year-old girl has pleaded guilty to killing seven-year-old Katie Rough.

The girl, who cannot be named for legal reasons, pleaded guilty to manslaughter by diminished responsibility.

Katie was smothered and slashed with a Stanley knife by the teenager on a playing field in Woodthorpe, York, on 9 January. She died later in hospital.

Leeds Crown Court heard the killer suffered with severe mental health issues and was convinced people "weren't human and were robots"

Katie was a pupil at Westfield Primary School in the Acomb area of York.

In the days after Katie's death Tracey Ralph, head teacher at the school, described her as a "kind and thoughtful child who was well-liked by both pupils and staff"....

 

[Bayum]

Quite. Clearly something was very wrong in her mind.

Here's an update:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40478679

Time for forum posters to follow the Daily Fail and their questioning; 'How was she allowed to kill?' and suggest non-plus methods of detaining.

 

[Harbornite]

A truly exceptional case...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-42112979

"A teenager who killed seven-year-old Katie Rough has been detained for life and ordered to serve a minimum term of five years.

The girl, 16, who cannot be named for legal reasons, pleaded guilty to manslaughter by diminished responsibility in July.

Katie was smothered and slashed with a knife at a playing field in Woodthorpe, York, on 9 January.

Mr Justice Soole at Leeds Crown Court said it was a "truly exceptional case"....

 

[LOL The Irony]

The girl, 16, who cannot be named for legal reasons

NAME THEM! If they can't do the time, don't do the crime so to speak. They chose to kill the child, they should be named. Like John Venables' current witness protection name... But that's another story for another time.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Awful happenings. Really nasty to hear about. So young as well, it's pretty disgusting - I can only imagine what her poor family are going through!

 

[LOL The Irony]

Awful happenings. Really nasty to hear about. So young as well, it's pretty disgusting.

Amen.

 

[Steveman]

Detained for life - for a minimum of 5 years ! in other words virtually let off and possibly out to do the same again when she's 21.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Detained for life - for a minimum of 5 years ! in other words virtually let off and possibly out to do the same again when she's 21.

Very short sentence for stabbing a girl to death!

 

[Steveman]

Very short sentence for stabbing a girl to death!

Absolutely, but with our extreme liberal and soft judiciary only to be expected.

 

[Harbouring]

Detained for life - for a minimum of 5 years ! in other words virtually let off and possibly out to do the same again when she's 21.

Detained in a secure hospital. And unlikely to released unless it can be proved in court she is able to be released. It’s not like a prison sentence where it’s a parole and license situation. The crown has accepted that she had diminished responsibility, if You want to get angry, get angry at the appalling state of mental health provision in this country that allows things like this to happen.

 

[Steveman]

Detained in a secure hospital. And unlikely to released unless it can be proved in court she is able to be released. It’s not like a prison sentence where it’s a parole and license situation. The crown has accepted that she had diminished responsibility, if You want to get angry, get angry at the appalling state of mental health provision in this country that allows things like this to happen.

Didn't take long did it ?

 

[AlterEgo]

NAME THEM! If they can't do the time, don't do the crime so to speak. They chose to kill the child, they should be named. Like John Venables' current witness protection name... But that's another story for another time.

They had diminished responsibility - don’t know the circumstances, but likely a severe mental illness like psychosis or a personality disorder, or a learning or developmental disability. This is partly why they are detained in a secure mental facility and not jailed.

As the charge and conviction is of manslughter, no, they did not choose to kill - if they did, it’d be a murder.

 

[AlterEgo]

Didn't take long did it ?

For you to wade in and offer nothing other than a predictably reactionary one liner? Of course.

 

[Steveman]

Detained in a secure hospital. And unlikely to released unless it can be proved in court she is able to be released. It’s not like a prison sentence where it’s a parole and license situation. The crown has accepted that she had diminished responsibility, if You want to get angry, get angry at the appalling state of mental health provision in this country that allows things like this to happen.

She hasn't been sent to a secure mental hospital, she hasn't been detained under the mental health act, and the parole board will decide when she can be released so you're wrong.

http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/15682358.Katie_Rough_s_killer_sentenced_to__detention_for_life_/

The judge ordered that the teenager serve a minimum of five years from January, but warned that she will only be released when the parole board decides she is no longer a danger to others.
Doctors have spent the last three months assessing the teenager’s mental state to see if she was suffering from a mental illness that could be treated if she was detained under the Mental Health Act.
They decided she was not.

 

[AlterEgo]

She hasn't been sent to a secure mental hospital, she hasn't been detained under the mental health act, and the parole board will decide when she can be released so you're wrong.

Yet she was found not guilty of murder due to diminished responsibility.

The reason she hasn’t been detained under the MHA is because she has remained mute since the offence meaning she cannot reliably be assessed, hence there was no expert consensus.

She has been sent to a secure mental hospital before; that’s where the assessment happened.

 

[Steveman]

Yet she was found not guilty of murder due to diminished responsibility.

The reason she hasn’t been detained under the MHA is because she has remained mute since the offence meaning she cannot reliably be assessed, hence there was no expert consensus.

She *has* been sent to a secure mental hospital.

She's finished the 12 week assessment and the doctors have concluded she does not need a secure mental hospital but will serve the minimum 5 years in a standard young persons secure unit.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Detained for life - for a minimum of 5 years

Why is the arcane word "life" still used in sentencing terminology when the said "detention for life"(not monitoring) is not of the meaning of life in apposition to death, as commonly understood by the average person.

 

[Gathursty]

I take 'life' imprisonment in the UK to mean detention until the minimum (5 years in this example) time has elapsed and then a parole board review will discuss the possibility of release upon the prison showing clear signs of rehabilitation and remorse. These parole reviews would be every 5 years or to the parole board's discretion. I think this is a fix to get around the EU criteria of no death penalties and no imprisonment tantamount to 'looking up and throwing away the key'. I think our fix is the better as a parole board would obviously never release Ian Huntly etc... for the sheer threat to their lives from the general public (I include the parole board here too). However a wayward youth who committed something bad could show a remarkable turn around in prison to which the general public and a parole board could conclude that this person has served their time and be released.

 

[AlterEgo]

She's finished the 12 week assessment and the doctors have concluded she does not need a secure mental hospital but will serve the minimum 5 years in a standard young persons secure unit.

More specifically, doctors were unable to reach *any* conclusion or consensus which is why she is unable to be detained under the MHA. This was because the girl has remained mute since the offence, making her very difficult to assess.

In the absence of a recommendation to detain, the court can only impose youth detention (jail) at present.

 

[Cantab26]

Absolutely, but with our extreme liberal and soft judiciary only to be expected.

Mr Justice Soole is not a soft judge in any way, but he is very fair and takes no nonsense.

As the charge and conviction is of manslughter, no, they did not choose to kill - if they did, it’d be a murder.

One need not intend to kill in order to commit murder. Intention to commit grievous bodily harm will suffice.

Why is the arcane word "life" still used in sentencing terminology when the said "detention for life"(not monitoring) is not of the meaning of life in apposition to death, as commonly understood by the average person.

That is because the sentence will never expire (before death). The sentence will never be served and her return to gaol is simply a matter of administrative discretion, not judicial process.

The word detention simply means that she is under 18.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That is because the sentence will never expire (before death). The sentence will never be served and her return to gaol is simply a matter of administrative discretion, not judicial process.

Should judicial process be seen as a matter that is greater in law than of any administrative discretion?

 

[Cantab26]

Should judicial process be seen as a matter that is greater in law than of any administrative discretion?

To clarify: she need not be convicted of any new offence in order to send her back to gaol. She is subject to a sentence with no 'expiry date'.

And I think you miss the point somewhat: the law is greater than administrative discretion, for the latter must be exercised only within its proper legal bounds. It is part of the supervisory function of the judiciary to control the same, so in that limited sense judicial process "is greater in law" (although no such term will be found in the art and it is rather inelegant).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

To clarify: she need not be convicted of any new offence in order to send her back to gaol. She is subject to a sentence with no 'expiry date'.

And I think you miss the point somewhat: the law is greater than administrative discretion, for the latter must be exercised only within its proper legal bounds. It is part of the supervisory function of the judiciary to control the same, so in that limited sense judicial process "is greater in law" (although no such term will be found in the art and it is rather inelegant).

I am most grateful for your clarification above and beg indulgence for the inelegant terminology used in my posting.