Parents in child abuse case get stiffer punishments on appeal

A couple convicted in a disturbing child abuse case, in which they beat three children with belts and burnt them with cigarettes, had their sentences raised on appeal.

While the children's 30-year-old mother still got a suspended sentence, the potential jail term she faces if she relapses was raised from six months to 14. Her partner, who is not the father, will now spend 14 months in prison instead of the original six.

The couple, who cannot be named by court order to protect the children, had admitted to slightly injuring and neglecting them in 2002. The little one, a boy, was just over a year old at the time and his brother was just under two-and-a-half. The oldest, a girl, was five. Besides being beaten and burnt, they were left with lice in their hair, covered in bruises and without food for three-day stretches.

The youngest was found with scratches and bruises all over his body and some wounds compatible with being hit by either a belt or a ruler. After examining him closely, doctors even found paper and rubbish stuck up his nose.

The Attorney General appealed the February 2009 sentence on the basis that the punishment was too soft according to law.

Mr Justice David Scicluna agreed, taking up the legal point made by the Attorney General that the first judgment had wrongly considered the abuse against the children as a single charge when, in fact, there were three individuals against whom the crimes were perpetrated in separate incidents. As a result, when considering punishment, the charges should have been considered separately in respect of each child, raising the punishment threshold.

The judge raised the potential jail term for the woman to 14 months but still suspended it for three years after he considered the "circumstances of the case".

Lawyers Veronique Dalli and José Herrera appeared for the woman.

Lawyer Malcolm Mifsud appeared for the man.