The case concerns a deceased infant found in the village of Suure-Lähtru, near Haapsalu.

The prosecutor requested the suspect's arrest during trial proceedings, expressing concerns that the risk of the 31-year-old woman, who for legal reasons cannot be named, avoiding criminal prosecution, for instance by fleeing the country, remains present.

The defendant rejected the prosecutor's claim, and said that since her return to Estonia in July, she has been under the care of multiple specialists, and has received psychiatric help.

She told the court that she did not evade the investigation in March but maintained communication with the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), stating her intent to return.

She expressed a desire to remain accessible to the prosecutor and the court yet to be with her family also, and also to organize the burial of the deceased infant.

The defendant's lawyer petitioned the court to take into consideration the traumatic ordeal the accused experienced while incarcerated in a Moroccan prison.

She has also had time to reflect on her situation since returning to Estonia, meaning she would view leaving the country differently and, in any case, she lacks both the valid travel document and the funds needed to do so, the lawyer said.

Defense counsel added that the woman has not been able to work for over a year; at the same time she would be in a much better place to prepare for trial with the direct support of her family.

In such a situation, where a person requires support, an arrest would be unwarranted, the defense lawyer concluded.

However, the court was not swayed by these arguments, and stated that those circumstances which justified the defendant's arrest during the pre-trial phase remain the case.

The court also announced as the position held by the defendant and her defense lawyer, that she had not evaded criminal proceedings in February and March, refuted by prior court rulings on her arrest which by their very nature already contradicted this claim.

The defendant criticized the authorities for focusing on her actions in the months of February and March. The court noted that her own assessment of her behavior at the time (keeping in contact with the police, pledging to report to them, and cooperating with the investigation), suggests that she has been providing justification for her actions while still failing to recognize that she actively evaded the criminal proceedings.

The defense has argued that the "delicate" reasons that led her to leave Estonia in February are no longer relevant here.

However, neither the defendant nor the defense counsel revealed what those reasons were in the course of the hearings, making it impossible for the court to assess whether doing so would have diminished the suspicion that she may still evade prosecution if set free.

The court noted that neither defense nor defendant had provided any compelling reasons to convince the court that her arrest was no longer necessary.

The fact that the defendant requires the support of her family had already been considered in the initial arrest decision, while the court also noted that that supportive family in Estonia was already there when the woman opted to leave Estonia, avoiding prosecution in the process.

The defense meanwhile argued that the accused has now not worked for nearly a year, and so lacks the funds to travel far out of Estonia.

The court's response was that on that timescale, the woman had already not been in employment for five months when she left Estonia for Morocco in February, meaning this period of being without work had not prevented her departure.

The court also stated that no evidence was presented regarding the defendant's financial situation in February, or now.

Even the lack of a valid travel document would not categorically prevent her from leaving Estonia, the court found.

The defendant's plea to be released in order to be able to oversee the ceased infant's burial was also deemed irrelevant, as the situation again is unchanged on what it was in February, yet that had not stopped her from leaving the country at that time.

The court found that the defendant's behavior prior to her arrest indicated that she was attempting to avoid criminal proceedings, while the arguments presented to the court (many of which had already been raised during the arrest hearings) did not overturn a well-founded suspicion that she might continue to evade prosecution if released.

A less severe measure, including a movement restriction, would also not prevent her from avoiding the criminal process, the court found.

On February 5,2024 a pet dog had retrieved and brought home the body of a newborn child to the yard of a farmhouse in the village of in Suure-Lähtru, Lääne County,.

The grim find prompted the PPA to launch a large-scale search for the deceased infant's mother. After verifying her identification, was ascertained that she had traveled to Morocco, where she was arrested by Moroccan police in early March.

She was repatriated to Estonia at the end of July.

On September 3, the prosecutor charged the 31-year-old woman with manslaughter.

The case has been heard at the Pärnu County Court's courthouse in Haapsalu.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!