Life Imprisonment For Midwife Who Beat Husband To Death During Shocking Campaign Of Violent Abuse

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.”