Father jailed for eight years over baby's death

Father jailed for eight years over baby's death

Father jailed for eight years over baby's death

First published in News
Last updated

A father has been jailed for eight years for killing his baby daughter after being frustrated by her screaming as he tried to play a computer game.

Mark Sandland, 28, sobbed as he was sentenced for picking up five-week-old Aimee-Rose by her torso and shaking her during a sudden loss of temper.

He claimed he suffered an epileptic fit and came round to find his daughter underneath him at their flat in Church Road in St Leonards.

Police who attended the flat after Aimee-Rose was admitted to hospital on November 5 2012 found a PlayStation game controller on the sofa opposite the TV.

Sandland was charged with murder but pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of lack of intent, which was accepted by the Crown.

Sentencing him at Hove Crown Court, Judge Mr Justice Sweeney said that after he inflicted the injuries, Sandland lied and sought to cover up his actions.

Prosecutor Sally Howes QC told Lewes Crown Court on Monday that Sandland's mobile phone internet history showed he logged on to a website offering tips on how to play Assassin's Creed 3 on his PlayStation at 2.22pm.

The detail of the website, giving step-by-step instruction, meant there would have been little point accessing it unless the game was being played, she added.

Mr Justice Sweeney said: "It's the Crown's case that thereafter, frustrated with the game and with Aimee-Rose screaming, you lost your temper and you assaulted her, gripping her torso hard and violently shaking her.

"Whilst it's impossible to identify the precise detail of what you did, the injuries that you caused Aimee-Rose speak for themselves."

Her injuries included bruising to her face, chest, abdomen, hip and lower limbs. She also suffered a range of other injuries, including subdural haemorrhages in a number of locations.

Some 16 minutes after Sandland logged on to the website giving tips on Assassin's Creed 3, he dialled 999.

Mr Justice Sweeney told him: "Whilst you have no recollection now of the fatal incident, it's obvious that at the time you appreciated what you had done and in consequence lied and sought to cover up what had actually happened.

"You pretended on the phone that you had a fit. You turned off the television to cover up the fact that you had been on the PlayStation.

"Thereafter you continued to lie and cover up to those who were trying to treat Aimee-Rose, although I stress that they wouldn't have done anything different if you had told the truth, and to the police."

The judge said there were a number of aggravating features, including the fact that Aimee-Rose was a vulnerable child aged just five weeks old.

In addition, he said Sandland was in a position of trust, made repeated false accounts to cover up his actions, and had shown no real remorse.

The judge accepted it was a "momentary" event lacking in premeditation and he sought emergency help, albeit giving a misleading account.

Mr Justice Sweeney said Sandland - who sobbed with his head down as he was sentenced - will serve half his jail sentence.

On release, he will be on licence for the remainder of his sentence and if he breaks the terms, will be liable for recall.

After the hearing, Detective Inspector Jon Fanner from Surrey and Sussex Major Crime Team said: "My thoughts and sympathies are with the family of Aimee Rose.

"Mark Sandland denied the charge of murder but accepted that he was responsible for her death and has admitted manslaughter.

"In fact he had a sudden loss of temper while he was looking after his five week old baby daughter in her own home.

"I welcome the plea to manslaughter. The judge found there were significant aggravating circumstances and today he has been sentenced to eight years in prison."

 

 

Comments (14)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:57am Wed 9 Jul 14

Martin999 says...

Out in 4
Out in 4 Martin999
  • Score: 8

11:00am Wed 9 Jul 14

matlock says...

Martin999 wrote:
Out in 4
If he's still alive, of course
[quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Out in 4[/p][/quote]If he's still alive, of course matlock
  • Score: 16

11:24am Wed 9 Jul 14

straightasadye says...

Face of British justice
Face of British justice straightasadye
  • Score: 13

11:29am Wed 9 Jul 14

Levent says...

No doubt you "libs" are banging the table in anger until he gets his playstation handed back to him? Yep..thought so!!
No doubt you "libs" are banging the table in anger until he gets his playstation handed back to him? Yep..thought so!! Levent
  • Score: -1

11:40am Wed 9 Jul 14

Cory and Trevor says...

The headline's wrong, he's not "jailed for eight years", but four, as explained in the ensuing report. The headline should say "jailed for four years". Only four years..

Light sentence for one who's shown no remorse and repeatedly lied on top of what he did.
The headline's wrong, he's not "jailed for eight years", but four, as explained in the ensuing report. The headline should say "jailed for four years". Only four years.. Light sentence for one who's shown no remorse and repeatedly lied on top of what he did. Cory and Trevor
  • Score: 18

11:47am Wed 9 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

Cory and Trevor wrote:
The headline's wrong, he's not "jailed for eight years", but four, as explained in the ensuing report. The headline should say "jailed for four years". Only four years..

Light sentence for one who's shown no remorse and repeatedly lied on top of what he did.
Amazingly for The Argus, the prison sentence is accurate.

You are correct, however, about the length of the time he will serve.

It's time that 8 years meant 8 years, and this is a still not long enough for his crime.
[quote][p][bold]Cory and Trevor[/bold] wrote: The headline's wrong, he's not "jailed for eight years", but four, as explained in the ensuing report. The headline should say "jailed for four years". Only four years.. Light sentence for one who's shown no remorse and repeatedly lied on top of what he did.[/p][/quote]Amazingly for The Argus, the prison sentence is accurate. You are correct, however, about the length of the time he will serve. It's time that 8 years meant 8 years, and this is a still not long enough for his crime. stevo!!
  • Score: 21

12:46pm Wed 9 Jul 14

SonnyJim55 says...

I have no doubt that he will be able to carry on playing his video games inside
I have no doubt that he will be able to carry on playing his video games inside SonnyJim55
  • Score: 6

1:08pm Wed 9 Jul 14

TheDrive says...

matlock wrote:
Martin999 wrote:
Out in 4
If he's still alive, of course
Hope he isnt.
[quote][p][bold]matlock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin999[/bold] wrote: Out in 4[/p][/quote]If he's still alive, of course[/p][/quote]Hope he isnt. TheDrive
  • Score: 8

2:35pm Wed 9 Jul 14

hubby says...

A joke sentence.
A joke sentence. hubby
  • Score: 8

3:31pm Wed 9 Jul 14

gazzamagoo says...

If he shows no real remorse why only 8 years?
If he shows no real remorse why only 8 years? gazzamagoo
  • Score: 9

4:09pm Wed 9 Jul 14

Joshiman says...

No justice in this Country.Soft on crime .This monster will be out in 4 years.Poor baby had no chance .
No justice in this Country.Soft on crime .This monster will be out in 4 years.Poor baby had no chance . Joshiman
  • Score: 5

4:25pm Wed 9 Jul 14

Withdean-er says...

Aggravating factors including the baby was just 5 weeks old! What does that mean? That it makes it less of a crime as it's easier to fatally damage a baby? What tosh ..... If reported correctly, an example of pathetic liberal justifications (excuses) that have crept their way into law. If anything, the most vulnerable in society like the poor baby need more protection, not a readymade excuse to lessen the sentence for the cowardly killer.
Aggravating factors including the baby was just 5 weeks old! What does that mean? That it makes it less of a crime as it's easier to fatally damage a baby? What tosh ..... If reported correctly, an example of pathetic liberal justifications (excuses) that have crept their way into law. If anything, the most vulnerable in society like the poor baby need more protection, not a readymade excuse to lessen the sentence for the cowardly killer. Withdean-er
  • Score: 11

6:44pm Wed 9 Jul 14

GoldenTorch says...

Out in 4? REALLY?! I never knew people only served half their sentence you amaze me!

Can't see a problem with the sentence, he didn't mean to do it and he called the emergency services. He's not a monster, most of you are just hate filled idiots who probably shouldn't be let near children.
Out in 4? REALLY?! I never knew people only served half their sentence you amaze me! Can't see a problem with the sentence, he didn't mean to do it and he called the emergency services. He's not a monster, most of you are just hate filled idiots who probably shouldn't be let near children. GoldenTorch
  • Score: -2

8:17pm Wed 9 Jul 14

gaay buoy says...

GoldenTorch wrote:
Out in 4? REALLY?! I never knew people only served half their sentence you amaze me!

Can't see a problem with the sentence, he didn't mean to do it and he called the emergency services. He's not a monster, most of you are just hate filled idiots who probably shouldn't be let near children.
TW4T
[quote][p][bold]GoldenTorch[/bold] wrote: Out in 4? REALLY?! I never knew people only served half their sentence you amaze me! Can't see a problem with the sentence, he didn't mean to do it and he called the emergency services. He's not a monster, most of you are just hate filled idiots who probably shouldn't be let near children.[/p][/quote]TW4T gaay buoy
  • Score: 6

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree