Was the Gilderdale assisted suicide case, a set up by the Director of Public Prosecutions?

I was reading the articles this morning about the case of Kay Gilderdale who was charged with attempted murder in the death of her daughter Lynn Gilderdale in the UK. Lynn had lived for many years with a significant disability. Kay had already pleaded guilty to assisting the suicide of her daughter, but last November the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer decided to prosecute Kay Gilderdale for attempted murder and assisted suicide.

Yesterday, the jury who heard the case acquitted Kay Gilderdale in two hours.

Whether Starmer intends to make a mess of the law in the UK or not, he is certainly accomplishing it. I wonder if he is working on behalf of the Dignity in Dying lobby group in the UK?

The fact is that Kay Gilderdale admitted to assisting the suicide of her daughter by giving her sleeping pills, antidepressants and injecting air into her veins in December 2008 after her daughter had injected herself with morphine.

Gilderdale's actions could be interpreted as attempting to murder her daughter, but considering the facts, her act is more likely defined as assisting the suicide of her daughter, the charge that she had pleaded guilty to.

After the jury had acquitted Kay Gilderdale, Mr Justice Bean asked the prosecution why she had been charged with attempted murder as well as assisting a suicide.

In today's Telegraph newspaper Keir Starmer was quoted as saying:

He "fully respected" the not guilty verdict. Mrs Gilderdale was a "devoted mother who acted out of love and devotion" for her daughter Lynn.

In other words, Starmer not only respected but he expected that the jury would find her not guilty. The reason to prosecute her in this case was to allow the jury to find her not guilty and thus create pressure to change the law.

The same Telegraph article pointed out that last year, two judges questioned whether it was in the public interest to prosecute her for attempted murder, given that she had pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting suicide.

One of the judges suggested that the case be dropped rather than "let this defendant get tangled up in a messy trial for the sake of some legal mumbo jumbo."

It looks like Keir Starmer has expanded his job definition to include the role of public lobbiest for law reform on euthanasia and assisted suicide in the UK.

Either he resigns from his position as the Director of Public Prosecutions or the government should ask for his resignation.