A woman was cleared of illegally ending the pregnancy, after taking miscarriages during the closure.
Nicolas Baker took the pills at home in November 2020. Mivipriston and Supostol described after a remote consultation.
She later handed over the fetus, which listened to the court of about 26 weeks in pregnancy, which she brought with Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, the Ilorth Crown Court heard.
She was arrested in the hospital and was later directed to her “illegally managed her to herself in a name or something harmful” with “the intention of buying abortion.”
Packer is described by the drug under the Emergency Function – which has always become always – it is allowed to send birth control pills by mail after a remote consultation in cases of pregnancy up to 10 weeks.
The prosecution claimed that she believed that she was more than 10 weeks pregnant while she took pills.
But she denied the charges, and created a non -guilty by a jury of nine women and three men, who brought back a unanimous judgment, after the two -week trial.
“The facts of this issue are a tragedy, but it is not a crime and that Mrs. Bakr is not guilty of this crime,” said Viona Horlik KiC, to defend Baker, in her closing speech on Tuesday.
The jury said: “It is difficult to imagine a terrible extent from a strict point of view. Mrs. Baker should think that she will only see blood clots to look into the toilet bowl and see a small child, but it has been completely formed.” “After four and a half years, you can see how it’s still completely painful.”
Recipe legislation allowed the distance of the introduction during the epidemic that birth control pills have been sent by post pregnancy up to 10 weeks. It is the normal task of miscarriage in England and Wales 23 weeks and six days, with no time limits in place if there are certain criteria in place, such as extreme homosexuality or danger to the mother’s life.
The prosecution claimed that Baker knew that she was carrying more than 10 weeks when she took the pills she received in this position.
Baker, 45, who was supported by five people in the general exhibition, wiped her eyes where the ruling was delivered by the jury, which has been circulating since Wednesday morning. She was allowed to sit at the back of the court, behind the defense team, not in the dock, for most of the trial.
In his speech to the court, Judge Edmunds Ki City said that “one cannot only hope that if there are cases related to other events that occurred during that very difficult period of Covid” that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) “will do” that balance whether it is in a public interest to sue these matters. “
In a previous hearing, before the case goes to the trial, the judge asked the CPS a review on whether to continue the case in the public interest.
A CPS spokesman said: “After a judge was asked to review the case in light of the length of time it has been approved since the alleged violation, we have been acting to implement another complete review of the case before making the decision to continue the prosecution. The judge was informed of our decision,” said a CPS spokesman.
The case, which was looming on the horizon, has led to Baker for nearly half a decade, and led to the most personal details of her life, including medical history, sexual preferences, and even intimate, common photographs in court, to renew calls to remove abortion from the books of the criminal statute.
“The woman who sought medical attention was forced after she was subjected to a painful event to withstand police investigations and long public trial, and she chose her private life by prosecutors and mentioned in the national press, at a huge emotional and financial cost,” said Katie Sixon, chief strategic communications employee in the advisory service for the British pregnancy.
“The trial of women for abortion” illegal “is never in the public interest, and no woman should go through this again.”
“As a doctor, he fully realized how important women are in reaching basic health care in a safe and supportive environment,” said Dr. Rani Thakar, President of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
“Laws of restrictions in England and Wales take care of an environment of fear, stigmatization and criminalization. They are unnecessarily subject to prolonged investigation, criminal charges, and guard rulings to end their pregnancy.”
She said that the issue of Baker “shows only old and blow to these laws,” adding: “Reforming the abortion is required urgently and now is the time to change.”
