Body-in-garden trial told three-year-old died after ‘breathtaking’ cruelty

Tai and Naiyahmi Yasharahyalah, 42 and 43, are accused of causing or allowing the death of Abiyah Yasharahyalah, who is believed to have been buried in early 2020 at the couple’s then home in Clarence Road, Handsworth, Birmingham.

A trial at Coventry Crown Court has been told that Abiyah died after a respiratory illness at a time when he was suffering from bone fractures, severe malnutrition, rickets, anaemia, stunted growth and severe dental decay.

His parents both deny causing or allowing death, perverting the course of justice and child cruelty by failing to provide adequate nourishment or summon medical care.

Prosecutor Jonas Hankin KC, delivering the Crown’s closing speech to the jury on Monday, said it would have been obvious to both defendants that Abiyah was in considerable pain before his death.

Mr Hankin said of the defendants: “They had control over their own lives, they were responsible for their actions. At any time they could have made different decisions or reversed decisions whose consequences were obviously detrimental.”

Addressing jurors in the eighth week of the trial, Mr Hankin told the panel: “Consider how easy it would have been to seek medical assistance.”

Alleging that the Yasharahyalahs were motivated by a belief system including a restrictive vegan diet and a desire to avoid unwanted attention, that might lead to an investigation into their misconduct, Mr Hankin said they were prepared to allow their child to “suffer the consequences” of inadequate nutrition and a lack of medical or dental care.

“They acted together,” he said. “They shared parental responsibility, they shared their belief system.

“One parent could not have secretly buried Abiyah’s body in the garden without the support of the other. Each played a part in burying Abiyah or agreeing to his being buried.”

The Crown’s barrister also alleged that each parent had played a part in attempting to obstruct social services.

The couple both claim they did not act wilfully while providing inadequate nutrition, the court has heard, but Mr Hankin said their evidence had the “hallmarks of an unreliable witness” including changes to their accounts of what happened.

“You will have to assess the plausibility of their evidence,” he told the jury.

Mr Hankin also said that the couple’s argument that Abiyah was symptom-free before his death other than a cold-like illness was “for the birds”.

Evidence from examinations of Abiyah’s skeletal remains, which were discovered by police in December 2022, showed he had suffered five broken bones, including a fractured arm, which led to a “false joint”, and rib fractures.

Mr Hankin continued: “He must have been in very considerable pain from the moment the injury was sustained and thereafter for several weeks.

“Neither defendant was able to explain satisfactorily why the emergency services were not called.”

Both parents must have realised Abiyah was not getting enough nutrition and needed medical care, but chose not to provide it, it was alleged.

“Neither of them is stupid,” Mr Hankin said. “They were zealous in their beliefs.”

Disengagement from society and social services had left Tai barely able to walk, and Naiyahmi able to stand but unable to walk, by the time they were interviewed by police, the court heard.

“This child started life small but normal and over time he became abnormally small,” Mr Hankin told the trial. “Those features must have been discernible to his parents if, as they claim, they were caring, loving and attentive.”

Referring to a comment made by Abiyah’s mother that “nature has a way of doing things”, Mr Hankin said: “That is their attitude ‘We’re right and nature will decide’.

“It is breathtaking arrogance and cruelty,” he added.

Bernard Tetlow KC, representing the boy’s father, said the central issue for the jury was whether the defendants had acted wilfully when they failed to provide enough nutrition and medical care.

Arguing against prosecution claims that the couple had “prioritised” their beliefs, Mr Tetlow said: “Tai and Naiyahmi were not saying to themselves we realise our diet, we realise our healthcare is bad for us, but we are going to do it anyway.

“They genuinely believed they were doing the right thing. They genuinely believed that their diet and the belief in natural and holistic medicines was the best way.

“They may be morally blameworthy and culpable but that does make them criminally liable for what happened.”

When Abiyah fell ill with the symptoms of a cold in January 2020 the couple had treated him with natural remedies, including raw garlic and “various other pastes”, in what did not seem like an emergency at the time, Mr Tetlow said.

Charles Sherrard KC, representing former shop worker Naiyahmi Yasharahyalah, also addressed the jury with closing arguments.

After saying the emotions surrounding the case were “beyond sad and depressing”, Mr Sherrard urged jurors to return not guilty verdicts on all charges.

He said of his client, whom he claimed was well-intentioned and loving: “The notion that she had no regard for the welfare of her child is, in our submission, simply contrary to all of the evidence.”

The judge is expected to begin summing up the evidence in the case to the jury on Tuesday.