You're just repeating the prosecution and tabloid line, adding in your own fantasy about corpse violation. Preferenced own needs (really?), were "repeatedly advised" (health visitors tell everyone about co-sleeping), festival tent (yawn - what even is one of those?), fleeing to Ireland (yes - it's a shame they didn't succeed - in practically no other country in the world is there such a high rate of forced adoption as there is in Britain, the birthplace of eugenics, or the designation of so many women as unfit to breed), handing over their baby to a trusted person (is it wrong to use such means when you're under SS persecution?), and lastly we who support this couple are a disgrace to millions of volk who love the state just as they should do, especially when they're in hardship.
Her trust fund is totally irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether she benefits from 10 trust funds. If you knew more about this case, you'd know her parents and especially her father were helping to sicc the SS (and courts) on to them, as well as having had her watched by private investigators for years. Her father is having his actions blow up in his face right now. They can't call him to rebut, but they can't not call him to rebut, so how does the judge direct the jury in relation to the evidence she gave yesterday? Bit of a difficult one. The court is sitting today, but in the absence of the jury - they've been told there's no need for their presence for the whole of today. The likelihood is the prosecution will "offer no evidence" on Monday morning - bang, acquittal. Victory.
You'd have supported the Magdalene Laundries while they were running, and the Mother and Baby Homes in Ireland. What the SS does now in Britain is a similar evil. how did the baby die? why were all her others taken into care.
