Both sides appeal for space and time

Investigators have spoken of the “unimaginable pain and suffering” that the parents of Rehma Sabir are enduring as they come to terms with the death of their baby daughter.

In an appeal to the media on behalf of Sameer Sabir and Nada Siddiqui, the Middlesex district attorney’s office issued a statement in which it said: “Very few people can understand the sorrow and pain that they are enduring and we all need to allow them the appropriate time and support they require to cope with this tragedy.”

The priest in the Cavan hometown of Aisling McCarthy Brady, the woman accused of causing the death of Rehma Sabir, has also appealed for the 34-year-old’s family to be given space.

Fr Kevin Fay told Northern Sound Radio: “Of course they are devastated by the news as any family would be. She is a girl on American soil and you would always be slightly nervous of a situation like that.

“I know the neighbours and people in Lavey generally were concerned. She [Ms Brady’s mother] is fine, but like any mother when she hears news like that, naturally enough she would be very, very upset and very annoyed.

“I do think we need to respect the immediate family, we need to give them a bit of time. The media were down on them very quickly and that is very unfortunate.”

Fergal Curtin, a local Fianna Fáil councillor, described the Brady family as “very popular”.

Meanwhile, the lawyer who defended British nanny Louise Woodward when she stood accused of killing eight-month-old Matthew Eappen in 1997, has accused the district attorney’s office of “jumping the gun yet again” by pinning responsibility for the killing on Ms McCarthy Brady before the full autopsy reports on the baby are completed.

Ms Woodward was also prosecuted by Middlesex’s district attorney’s office.

Elaine Whitfield Sharp, who represented Ms Woodward said: “This is exactly what happened in the Woodward case. Lots of people have had access to the child besides this woman.”

Prosecutors are said to be putting together a case for “murder one” — that the accused with malice aforethought did kill a one-year-old child. It will go to a grand jury, which will indict on that charge.

However, it has been speculated Ms Brady is unlikely to be convicted on that charge, unless prosecutors can prove she thought about it well before and decided to kill a child in her care.

In general, prosecutors go for the highest charge, then either the accused pleads down to a lesser one or, if it goes to trial, a jury convicts or acquits on that lesser charge.

If Ms Brady did something that led to the death, she could opt to plead guilty to manslaughter. It would likely be accepted by a court unless more damning evidence is revealed. If she had nothing to do with the injuries that led to the death, she and her family will fight the charges.