A WOMAN who stabbed her new-born baby girl to death seconds after she was born and put her lifeless body in the kitchen bin has had her murder conviction quashed.

Preston Crown Court heard how Rachel Julie Tunstill stabbed her daughter Mia Kelly 15 times in the bathroom of the Burnley flat she shared with the baby’s father, Ryan Kelly, in January 2017.

Tunstill, 27, denied murder on the basis of diminished responsibility, but was found guilty by a jury and jailed for life by trial judge Mr Justice William Davis.

But the conviction was today quashed by High Court appeal judges who said the indictment put to the jury should have contained infanticide as an alternative verdict to murder.

Infanticide is the deliberate killing of a child under 12 months by a mother who was ‘disturbed by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to the child’

During the trial, two psychiatrists supported the infanticide defence, while another rejected it. Mr Justice Davis, found there was ‘no proper basis on which to leave a count of infanticide to the jury’.

But that decision has now been questioned by Mr Justice Colman Treacy and his fellow High Court judges.

Giving his judgement, Mr Justice Treacy said: “This was a case where the child was killed soon after birth so that this case can be distinguished from the situation where mental ill health, usually post-partum psychosis, develops over a period of time.

“Nonetheless, there was evidence from Dr Bashir and Dr Khisty which showed that notwithstanding the existence of the appellant’s pre-birth mental disorder, the effects of giving birth had led to a further condition, characterised by Dr Bashir as an acute stress reaction which was a causative factor in disturbing the balance of the appellant’s mind.

“In the circumstances, we are persuaded that the judge should not have withdrawn infanticide from the jury. There was evidence fit for the jury’s consideration. It is not for this court to assess the likelihood of its success. Dr Barlow’s evidence was to the contrary, but the issue for us is whether a jury should have had this alternative option to consider. We think it should have had that opportunity.

“In the circumstances, therefore, the conviction for murder is unsafe and the verdict is quashed. In our judgment, the interests of justice require a re-trial and we so order.”

Tunstill now faces a re-trial.