“SHE WANTS HER FREEDOM” — MOTHER CONVICTED IN BABY DAHLIA-ROSE CASE LAUNCHES BID TO OVERTURN CONVICTION AND SIX-YEAR SENTENCE

Courtney Gartshore has launched a legal bid to overturn both her conviction and six-year prison sentence after being found guilty of the culpable homicide of her three-month-old daughter, Dahlia-Rose.

The 28-year-old was convicted following a trial at the High Court in Aberdeen in July.

A jury unanimously found her guilty after hearing evidence that her infant daughter had been subjected to significant and sustained heat from a hairdryer at their home in Peterhead, Aberdeenshire, on September 30, 2023.

Now, just weeks after being sentenced, Gartshore is challenging the outcome.

Court officials confirmed that an intimation to appeal against both her conviction and sentence has been lodged, formally beginning the appeal process.

But the appeal comes after a judge delivered a devastating assessment of the circumstances surrounding Dahlia-Rose’s death.

A THREE-MONTH-OLD BABY

Dahlia-Rose was just three months old.

On September 30, 2023, emergency services were called to a property on King Street in Peterhead after concerns were raised about the infant.

Dahlia-Rose was pronounced dead at the scene.

A subsequent investigation led to Gartshore being arrested and charged in November 2023.

The case would eventually become one of the most disturbing infant-death prosecutions heard in Scotland in recent years.

During the trial, prosecutors alleged that Gartshore had caused her daughter to be exposed to prolonged heat from a hairdryer while she was the baby’s sole carer.

The infant suffered burns covering approximately 18% of her body, including areas around her head, face, neck, upper body and right arm.

The court heard that the injuries were severe.

But experts disagreed over precisely what happened medically.

THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE

One of the most significant disputes during the trial concerned whether Dahlia-Rose was still alive when the hairdryer was used.

A prosecution expert said the evidence indicated that the baby was alive when she was exposed to the heat.

A defence expert took a different view, saying it was more likely that the infant had already died from another sudden and unexplained cause before the heat injuries occurred.

The jury ultimately rejected the defence position.

In his sentencing remarks, Judge Simon Collins KC said the jury had “no reasonable doubt” that the heat from the hairdryer caused Dahlia-Rose’s death.

The Crown’s expert position was that the likely cause of death was hyperthermia and heatstroke, rather than the burns themselves.

WHAT HAPPENED THAT MORNING?

One of the biggest unanswered questions in the case remains exactly why Gartshore used the hairdryer.

The court heard that she had been out socialising with friends and neighbours the night before and had consumed a significant amount of alcohol.

She did not return home until around 4am.

She was then alone with Dahlia-Rose.

At some point between approximately 4am and 9am, the infant was subjected to heat from a hairdryer.

The appliance was later found plugged into a wall beside Gartshore’s bed.

Judge Collins said the evidence suggested the hairdryer had been turned on and positioned close to Dahlia-Rose for at least 20 minutes and possibly as long as an hour.

The judge said that during this period it should have been obvious that the baby was experiencing severe pain and distress.

GARTSHORE’S EXPLANATION

Gartshore maintained that she could not remember using the hairdryer on her daughter.

Her defence lawyer, Murray Macara, told the court he could not provide a reasonable or compelling explanation for why she had used it.

He suggested that she may have believed the baby was cold and may have attempted to use the appliance as a source of heat.

The defence did not argue that Gartshore deliberately intended to harm or end her daughter’s life.

And that distinction was important to the eventual conviction.

This was not a murder conviction.

Instead, Gartshore was convicted of culpable homicide — a Scottish offence that can cover a death resulting from gross recklessness or culpable negligence.

Judge Collins specifically noted that the Crown case was not that Gartshore intended to harm, still less kill, Dahlia-Rose.

THE JUDGE’S DEVASTATING ASSESSMENT

When Gartshore was sentenced on August 14, Judge Collins described the case as “uniquely disturbing and distressing.”

But he also stressed that it was tragic.

The judge said the evidence suggested Gartshore loved her daughter, while making clear that she would have to live with responsibility for the child’s death.

He described the incident as a “gross breach of the most basic duty of a parent” to protect a vulnerable child.

The judge assessed Gartshore’s culpability at a medium level, while the harm was at the highest level because an infant had died.

The starting point for the sentence was four years, with a range of three to seven years.

After weighing aggravating and mitigating factors, the court imposed six years in prison.

THE FACTORS THAT INCREASED THE SENTENCE

The court identified several aggravating circumstances.

Dahlia-Rose’s age and complete dependence on her mother were significant.

The judge also noted that Gartshore had been under the influence of alcohol.

Another factor concerned what happened after the infant was injured.

Before police and paramedics arrived, Gartshore moved Dahlia-Rose’s body from the bedroom to the balcony.

The judge said she subsequently denied knowing how her daughter had died or how she had been burned.

He concluded that this indicated an attempt to conceal her involvement.

The judge also said Gartshore had not yet fully accepted her guilt or demonstrated genuine remorse.

BUT THERE WERE ALSO MITIGATING FACTORS

The court also considered circumstances in Gartshore’s favour.

She had no previous convictions.

She was a young single mother with an older child and had experienced mental-health difficulties.

The sentencing judge noted that she had stopped taking medication during pregnancy, had limited support and had attempted suicide after Dahlia-Rose’s death.

The judge stressed that none of those circumstances excused her conduct, but said they had to be recognised when determining the appropriate sentence.

NOW SHE IS FIGHTING THE VERDICT

Gartshore’s new legal move does not mean she has been released.

It does not mean her conviction has been overturned.

It simply means the formal process for challenging the conviction and sentence has begun.

According to STV, the paperwork setting out the grounds for appeal is due to be lodged by October 20, 2026.

The appeal could therefore become the next major chapter in a case that has already lasted almost three years.

For Dahlia-Rose’s family, however, the legal battle is far from an abstract courtroom dispute.

Their three-month-old daughter is gone.

And now the conviction that brought a measure of legal finality to the case is itself being challenged.

A CASE THAT STILL RAISES QUESTIONS

The circumstances surrounding Dahlia-Rose’s final hours remain deeply disturbing.

The court established that the infant suffered extensive heat injuries and that the jury rejected the defence argument that she had died before being exposed to the hairdryer.

But the exact reason Gartshore used the appliance remains unclear.

So does what was happening inside the home during those crucial hours between the early morning and the arrival of emergency services.

Those questions may become relevant again if the appeal proceeds.

For now, Gartshore remains convicted and sentenced to six years in prison.

Her legal team is asking the appeal court to reconsider both.

And as the next stage begins, one thing is certain:

The case of Dahlia-Rose is not over yet.