A
midwife has been jailed for life for murdering her musician teacher
husband, who received 78 separate visible injuries at their heavily
bloodstained family home.
Hannegret
Donnelly, 55, confessed to striking 55 year-old Christopher Donnelly
with a rolling-pin at the Berryfields, Aylesbury house they shared
with their four children.
She
called 999 on March 31, last year, twelve hours after Mr. Donnelly, a
biochemistry graduate, died of bronchial pneumonia on the bathroom
floor while his entire family were at home.
Grey-haired
Donnelly, who showed no emotion in the Kingston-upon-Thames Crown
Court dock, was ordered to serve a minimum of sixteen years.
Today
prosecutor Eloise Marshall QC told the court: “The victim was
particularly vulnerable due to disability. This deceased deteriorated
over a period of time.
“He
was unable to walk, we say he was disabled and on her own admission
Hannegret Donnelly continued to assault him at this time.
“She
has said these repeated injuries were committed with a rolling pin.
The Crown are unable to say if that was the only implement used.
“There
was mental and physical suffering inflicted on the deceased before
death. He would have been in considerable pain and continued to be
assaulted.”
Her
four children, aged between fourteen and twenty-two years-old
witnessed the murder, but refused to co-operate with the police, did
not give evidence at the trial or make victim impact statements
following the conviction.
The
victim’s Roman Catholic older brother, Peter Donnelly said
afterwards: “As far as Hannegret Donnelly’s actions have harmed
me I must be in a position to forgive.”
Mrs
Justice Amanda Yip told Donnelly: “Hannegret Donnelly, you
have been convicted by the jury of the murder of your husband,
Christopher Donnelly. I must now sentence you for that offence.
“On
the morning of 31 March 2018, you called for an ambulance, reporting
that your husband had died the previous evening.
“When
paramedics attended, they found his body lying on the bathroom floor.
He was clearly dead.
“The
paramedics noticed that he had numerous wounds to the head in various
stages of healing. You admitted to them that you had caused those
wounds by hitting him over the head with a rolling pin.
“This
was an unusual case. Despite the obvious wounds to the head,
Christopher had not suffered any apparent brain injury and the
visible injuries were not the direct cause of his death.
“Post-mortem
examination revealed that Christopher had died of bronchopneumonia in
circumstances where his body had been subjected to repeated episodes
of blunt force trauma.
“He
was found to have seventy-eight separate visible external injuries of
varying severity.
“Internally,
he had fractures to the vertebrae of the neck and the thoracic and
lumbar spine, and to both scapulae.
“There
were two injuries to the larynx, indicative of neck compression.
“Tellingly,
the more recent injury, inflicted within one to three weeks of death
suggested the application of pressure the size of a thumb print.
“Although
other mechanisms were suggested to the experts, there can be no
sensible doubt that Christopher had been subjected to partial
strangulation in the weeks before his death.
“Christopher’s
ears showed the appearance typically seen in rugby players and
boxers, so-called cauliflower ears.
“Such
injuries result from repeated trauma to the cartilage of the outer
ear.
“There
was chronic remodelling of the bone across the whole skull,
evidencing repeated trauma.
“Some
of that was long-standing. There was also evidence that injury to the
skull had been inflicted on more than one occasion within a few days
of death, most recently haemorrhage had occurred within 2 days of
Christopher dying.
“The
pathologist said that he had never seen a case involving so many
injuries inflicted over such a long period of time with so much
resulting scar tissue.
“Viewed
together, the injuries point to a sustained campaign of serious
physical abuse over a prolonged period.
“Medical
opinion confirmed that this contributed to Christopher’s death, at
the age of fifty-five.
“His
body was weakened by the repeated trauma and the need to continually
repair itself.
“By
January, 2018, he was described by a neighbour as clearly unwell and
looking more like a man in his eighties.
“There
was no other underlying cause to account for his condition. Even
when he reached that point, the evidence is clear that you continued
to assault him.
“Examination
of your house revealed numerous areas of blood staining on walls,
ceilings, doors and the bathroom blind.
“This
was the house in which you and your husband lived with your four
children then aged thirteen to twenty-one.
“It
is hard to imagine the horror that they must have witnessed or the
harm that has been caused as a result.
“Forensic
evidence confirmed that all the blood markings came from Christopher.
“The
blood spatter across walls, ceilings and furniture was indicative of
repeated beatings occurring in various parts of the house.
“Repeated
blows with a weapon, such as a rolling pin, are required to produce
the observed blood patterns.
“You
admitted to the police that you had repeatedly assaulted Christopher,
causing the wounds to his head.
“There
can be no doubt that the other injuries were also inflicted by you.
“The
fractures to the back and associated tissue scarring suggest a
defensive position, perhaps curled up but certainly with his back to
you.
“You
said in interview that you had hit Christopher not every day, but
every few days.
“You
sought to minimise the harm you had done, claiming that there was
something strange in the house that had affected your health as well
as Christopher’s.
“It
is notable that no signs of illness or injury were found when you
were medically examined after your arrest.
“You
gave various reasons for what you had done, none of which make much
sense.
“You
talked about Christopher being in a time warp, reminiscing about
earlier stages of his life, and about him descending into foul moods.
“You
also suggested that at times he welcomed the beatings and that he was
not really affected by them.
“You
claimed that there was an occasion around New Year 2015, 2016 when
Christopher assaulted you by punching you and then pushing you into a
cabinet.
“Since
your children apparently confirmed this, I am prepared to accept that
there was an incident in which Christopher used some violence towards
you.
“However,
it is clear from all that I have heard that this was out of character
for him.
“There
is no hint that he had been violent before.
“I
do not know what lay behind this, in particular, I have no way of
knowing whether it was entirely one-sided.
“However,
as is readily accepted on your behalf, it cannot begin to excuse your
later conduct.
“What
is clear is that the violence you inflicted was one-sided.
“You
have not suggested that Christopher was violent to you at any time
after that; there were no signs of injury on you when you were
arrested, and the blood found in your home all matched his.
“No
one but you really knows what caused you to repeatedly assault your
husband.
“It
does not appear your relationship was always troubled.
“You
had been married twenty-three years at the time of his death.
“I
have heard that you were an exceptionally close family.
“You
and your husband apparently shared similar views about many things,
including concerns about the modern education system which led you to
home educate your children and a rejection of modern means of
communication.
“None
of you had mobile phones and although you once had a landline that
had been discontinued.
“It
appears that the family were leading a somewhat isolated existence at
the time of Christopher’s death.
“I
have seen photographs and video clips of happier times and have heard
evidence about enjoyable times spent with your wider family.
“However,
around 2014, it seems that all contact with your extended families
ceased. The family were not often seen by neighbours.
“When
you did go out you all tended to go out together. You were a
qualified midwife, but you gave that occupation up to raise your
children.
“Your
husband was a music teacher, but he gave his job up in 2015.
“You
talked of Christopher experiencing “mental decline”.
“You
said that he had begun losing weight a couple of years before his
death and photographs appear to support this, although he still
looked physically well then.
“From
things you and the children said to the police, it may be that
Christopher started to experience mental health issues around 2014 to
2015, coinciding with him ceasing work and cutting off contact with
his family.
“It
is said on your behalf that this was before you had begun assaulting
him and so was not caused by your abuse.
“However,
what that must mean is that your abuse began at a time when
Christopher’s mental health was declining.
“At
a time when he needed the support of his wife of over twenty years,
you instead inflicted terrible violence on him.
“Having
said that, I am prepared to accept for the purpose of sentencing you
that initially this decline may not have manifested itself as an
obvious vulnerability.
“Things
the children said suggest that Christopher may at times have been
quite difficult to live with and that, as is contended on your
behalf, you experienced a decline in the quality of your family life.
“None
of this though can begin to excuse what you did.
“You
continued to abuse Christopher when he was in a state of obvious
physical decline, as was apparent to your neighbour and is readily
visible on the CCTV video of your trip to Kew Gardens, just ten days
before he died.
“The
medical evidence confirms that the neck injury was significant and
would have been very painful.
“You
talked about Christopher being stooped with very stiff shoulders and
shuffling, all of which are compatible with a painful injury and
spinal cord irritation.
“Still,
you continued to inflict further injury.
“As
the jury have found, you intended, at least, to inflict really
serious harm.
“I
cannot be sure that the injuries were inflicted with an intention to
kill.
“I
must therefore sentence you on the basis of the lesser intent to
cause serious harm.
“However,
the extent to which this affords mitigation is tempered by your
actions at the time of Christopher’s death.
“The
events of the night of his death suggest that even if you did not
wish him dead, you at least did not wish to save his life.
“Although
it is said that you took some steps to help him when he was very
unwell, the fact remains that Christopher suffered further injuries
within his last twenty-four hours alive.
“He
died on the bathroom floor that night. The various excuses you gave
for not calling an ambulance sooner are simply not credible.
“You
waited until all signs of life were absent before calling the
emergency services.
“You
have, of course, also deprived your four children of their father.
Sadly, your separation from them through your arrest and now
imprisonment can only add to their trauma.
“You,
Hannegret Donnelly, are fifty-five years old. You have no previous
convictions.
“I
have listened to all that has been said on your behalf. Your
situation is unusual.
“I
accept that until this abuse started, you had led a blameless life,
had been happily married for many years and had apparently been a
good mother to your four children.
“There
is only one sentence that the law allows to be passed for murder:
that is a mandatory life sentence.
“The
circumstances are unusual, involving repeated incidents of violence
over a prolonged period. It is clear that Christopher had
experienced real physical suffering for a long period before death.
“It
is inconceivable that he did not also suffer mentally.
“Although
I identify these matters as aggravating factors, I must guard against
double counting them. The unusual circumstances of Christopher’s
death call for careful consideration.
“Although
there were repeated episodes of violence before his death, I bear in
mind that it is the cumulative effect of those assaults that has
given rise to the conviction for murder.
“Further,
the vulnerability I have identified arose from those earlier
assaults. To treat the prior suffering and the vulnerability as
separate aggravating factors requiring separate uplifts to the
starting point would, in my view, risk overstating matters.
“I
will therefore look at the matter in the round. I must though have
in mind that you persisted in inflicting serious harm on Christopher
as he was very obviously suffering and becoming weaker.
“It
is also a serious feature of your offending that your children must
have witnessed your repeated violence towards their father and were
present when he died.
“The
effects on them are hard to imagine. The fact that they lived a
relatively isolated existence magnifies the impact upon them.
“I
am pleased to hear that they are now getting on with their lives as
best they can.
Ms
Marshall told the jury, who unanimously convicted Donnelly of murder
after a 13-day trial: “In the last year of his life Mr. Donnelly
was subjected to repeated serious domestic abuse.”
She
said the victim had 78 exterior visible injuries, plus fractures to
both shoulders; his back; neck and voice box.
“The
majority of the injuries were caused by blunt force trauma, mostly to
the head, neck, shoulders and back.
“The
Crown’s case is Mrs Donnelly murdered her husband by repeatedly
inflicting injuries on him that resulted in his poor health and
eventual death.”
The
court heard paramedics felt the Christian family, who had become
increasingly isolated, were strangely detached from Mr. Donnelly’s
death.
“They
noticed his head was covered in multiple wounds, gashes, about twenty
in all,” added the QC.
The
defendant told the paramedics they occurred two weeks previously. “I
did hit him over the head with a rolling pin after a falling out,”
she told them.
“Christopher
wouldn’t have wanted to go to the hospital. He doesn’t like
doctors,” added Mrs Donnelly.
Old
blood staining from the victim was found on the walls and ceiling by
the front door, hallway, staircase, dining-room, kitchen and
bathroom, plus on radiators, furniture, window blinds and wall tiles.
Mr.
Donnelly was described as a “talented musician” who studied at
London’s Guildhall School of Music and Drama and played the
saxophone and clarinet.
He
met German-born Hannegret in 1992 and the couple’s four children
are aged between fourteen and twenty-two years-old.
“Their
household was a complex and strange one and even though they seemed a
conventional family over the years they withdrew from life outside
and the children were home taught.”
Family
members described the defendant as “controlling” the jury were
told, with the couple having “lost a grip on reality” and talking
about “living in end times.”
When
Mrs Donnelly was asked by the 999 operator why she waited so long to
raise the alarm, she replied: “We wanted to grieve.”
Paramedics
arrived at the cluttered home and felt a strange atmosphere,
explained Ms Marshall. “The defendant did not appear panicked or
distressed.”
They
noted Mr. Donnelly’s nose was flat, with a large wound across the
top and his face and ears were deformed.
The
jury were told the blood staining was consistent with more than one
strike with a blunt object and Mrs Donnelly repeated her rolling pin
story to the police, but now said it was months previously.
“She
told the police she hit him with the rolling pin in self-defence and
said: ‘I had to defend my corner somehow.’
“Even
if violence occurred in 2015 as she said it is minimal compared to
the injuries she inflicted on her husband.
“He
appears never to have retaliated when she inflicted these injuries.”
Police
found her diary, which included an entry in January, last year, which
translated as: ‘I didn’t let him go to the toilet.’
“This
exhibits the control she had over Mr. Donnelly,” said the
prosecutor.
Senior
investigating officer Detective Chief Inspector Felicity Parker of
Thames Valley Police’s Protecting Vulnerable People Investigation
Unit said: “Hannegret subjected her husband to a prolonged period
of domestic abuse, systematically hitting him with a variety of
objects, including a rolling pin when he said or did something she
did not approve of.”
