Warning: This article deals with sensitive content and may be distressing for some readers.
In 2017, Brooke Skylar Richardson, then 18 years old, went to her gynaecologist to ask for birth control. Looking at her records, the doctor, Casey Boyce, noticed the teenager had been pregnant less than three months prior.
When asked why she wasn’t still pregnant, the former high school cheerleader cried, telling Dr Boyce she had recently given birth to a stillborn baby.
Richardson shared with the doctor that no one knew she was pregnant and, after giving birth, she buried the stillborn’s remains in her family’s backyard in Carlisle, America. She named her baby “Annabelle”.
Dr Boyce was concerned and called the police who later discovered the infant’s buried body.
What has since been revealed is on May 7, 2017, the former cheerleader gave birth on the bathroom floor in her family home. It was two days after her high school prom.
Top Comments
Well, not guilty of everything but the abuse of corpse.
It's just a pity the abuse of a corpse meant there was no hard evidence to judge her on.
I don't understand how this even gets to trial if they can't determine if the child was alive when it was born. Theres no evidence she harmed it at all, theres no way that it can be beyond reasonable doubt.
I'm sure we don't have all the evidence.
Beyond reasonable doubt is up to the courts to decide.
She is undeniably guilty of abuse of a corpse which she plead not guilty too.
Is burying a corpse abusing it? I can’t really see how it is. Sure she should have taken the corpse to the hospital to be registered as a still birth but ultimately it would have ended up buried just the same. It’s a pretty weak thing to drag a traumatised teenager through court for.
And yes a jury decides if someone is guilty beyond reasonable doubt, but prosecutors are responsible for deciding which cases can fit that criteria. That’s why almost no cases come to court without a body, it’s a huge waste of money and resources and manifestly unfair.
Sure. It easily fits the definition of abuse of a corpse. And that's not even taking into account where she said she tried to cremate it.
Not weak at all. Easily avoided too.
Not sure where you get that idea. There are tons of prosecutions without a body.
Because there was overwhelming circumstantial evidence which carries the same weight as direct evidence in these instances. There is already a precedent set for murder and manslaughter convictions based on circumstantial evidence alone, including ones with no body.