5) delay in my dialing 111.

5) 15m delay in my dialing 111. Judge Stevens at sentencing. (807) “I take into account to a limited extent” The crown had to stretch out the ‘delay’ as much as possible as it is a good inference that I would have deliberately shaken or bashed Melissa’s head to delay getting help. They loved being able to say it shows I was only worried about myself and being found out. I was interviewed whilst in shock. Normally people are given the courtesy to not be interviewed whilst in shock, but CYFS put immense pressure on the police to detain me under threat that they would remove the children from my husband if not. Despite their looking for homes to split up my children from each other and my husband immediately, whilst they were also in shock and living experiencing the trauma, they could not find any immediate placements. So the police had to find excuse to arrest me immediately. I estimated at my original interview that it would have been 10-15 minutes before I called an ambulance. When in shock as I was, time goes in slow motion and estimating time is extremely difficult and unreliable, for me I would say impossible. I do not wear watches and was not thinking in a calculated manner to be using one anyway. For my second interview I estimated the time much more accurately as I could compare it to similar episodes whilst I was under such intense shock and because I had time to think straight on how very rapidly I did what I did to get a response from Melissa, was much more like 5 minutes if that. S (in D), Crown neuropathologist, not said at trial: “Injury has not caused severe depression of breathing that the brain suffered damage from lack of oxygen before medical assistance was available”. This was sanitised for trial (Trial 16) “no evidence of universal nerve cell damage in the brain from lack of oxygen due to impaired breathing”. (Trial 422), small, but numerous areas of tissue damage was due to circulation being cut off prior to surgery, not deprivation of oxygen, which is why some parts of the brain were spared of damage. (Trial 66) Dr B upon admission at Tauranga hospital, “decided to intubate then, gurgled breathing”. E, paramedic, (Trial59) “We obviously had good airway at that point, which later required suctioning just to keep her O2 sats up”. (Trial 60): “respirations became irregular” as they approached Tauranga. Melissa deteriorated rapidly, but ambulance staff had arrived well before Melissa was likely to experience respirational hypoxia. I had no watch. I estimated time while in shock due to trauma, when it seems to move very slowly and everything is silent and in slow motion, but I know what I did to try and get a response was done rapidly. (Hence, the scratched nose with the manner I took off her tee to put her in the shower to try and get a response from her). I also took her outside to show her the animals she so loved to try and get her awake. The manner I tried to get a response from unconscious Melissa clearly shows how I was not thinking straight prior to calming down enough to think to call an ambulance. My later statement had my lower estimate of 5 minutes. This was most correct, but it was re-edited to 15 minutes for the jury. I had evidence of coping poorly in similar circumstances and trauma that I had told my lawyer that could have been verified. It was part of the psychological issues I had at the time. This was another refusal of instruction and response by my lawyer.