Mother Jailed for Six Years After Fatally Exposing Baby to Hairdryer Heat

A 28-year-old mother from Peterhead, Aberdeenshire, has been sentenced to six years in prison for the culpable homicide of her three-month-old daughter after subjecting the infant to significant and sustained heat from a hairdryer.

Courtney Gartshore was sentenced on 14 August 2026 at the High Court in Edinburgh by Judge Simon Collins KC. She appeared via videolink from custody, sobbing during the hearing. The sentence was backdated to 16 July 2026, the date she was first remanded after conviction.

Gartshore was unanimously found guilty in July 2026 at the High Court in Aberdeen of culpably and recklessly causing the death of Dahlia-Rose on 30 September 2023. The charge stated that, having consumed alcohol and while in sole charge of the child, she caused the baby to be subjected to significant and sustained heat from a hairdryer on her head and body, resulting in injuries so severe that she died.

According to sentencing remarks and court evidence, Gartshore had been out socialising the evening before, consumed a significant amount of alcohol, and returned home around 4 a.m. with Dahlia-Rose still in her care. The infant was routinely co-sleeping with her mother in bed rather than in a cot, which was being used for storage. The home was described as messy and untidy. At some point between approximately 4 a.m. and 9 a.m., Gartshore caused the baby to be exposed to heat from a hairdryer later found plugged in beside the bed. The exposure lasted at least 20 minutes and potentially up to an hour.

Dahlia-Rose suffered severe and disfiguring burns covering around 18 percent of her body surface, particularly affecting her head, face, neck, upper body and right arm. Expert evidence indicated the burns themselves were likely survivable. The Crown’s position, accepted by the jury, was that the likely cause of death was hyperthermia and heatstroke rather than the burns. A defence expert suggested the baby may already have been dead from another sudden unexplained cause before the heat exposure; the jury rejected that position.

Emergency services were called after Gartshore reported that the child had gone “purple” while she was asleep. The baby was pronounced dead at the scene. The infant’s DNA was found on the hairdryer. Gartshore has maintained she has no recollection of using the appliance.

Judge Collins described the case as “uniquely disturbing and distressing” given the child’s age and the manner of her death. He said it was “tragic as well as terrible” because evidence suggested Gartshore loved her daughter, yet she would have to live with the knowledge that she was responsible for the death. He characterised the actions as a gross breach of the most basic parental duty and a high degree of carelessness or gross recklessness, though not intentional harm or the culmination of prolonged neglect or abuse. He assessed culpability at a medium level and harm at the highest level.

Aggravating factors noted by the judge included the child’s extreme vulnerability and dependence, the influence of alcohol, and indications of an attempt to conceal involvement (including moving the body and denying knowledge of the burns or hairdryer use). Mitigating factors included Gartshore’s lack of prior convictions, her status as a young single mother with a history of poor mental health who had come off medication during pregnancy, limited support, caring responsibilities for an older child, and a subsequent suicide attempt. The judge stated he did not accept that she had yet expressed genuine remorse, as she did not fully accept her guilt.

Defence counsel Murray Macara described the case as “truly tragic and distressing” and noted Gartshore had spent approximately 23 hours a day in her cell for her own safety since being taken into custody. He said no reasonable or compelling explanation could be offered for the use of the hairdryer, though it was speculated it may have been used recklessly as a source of heat.

Detective Inspector James Callander of Police Scotland previously stated after the conviction: “Children are defenceless and should be protected. The death of any child is particularly harrowing, but a child’s death at the hands of a parent is incredibly disturbing.”

- Advertisement -spot_img

More articles

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisement -spot_img

Latest article