A jury was told yesterday by Chief Justice Richard Ground that they could find the Tamerrys not guilty of manslaughter but guilty of a lesser offence - failure to provide the necessities of life.

Yesterday in Bermuda Supreme Court, closing arguments were heard in the trial of two parents charged with unlawfully killing their ten-month-old daughter, A'Maya.

Mr. Justice Ground then directed the jury on the law and began his summary of the evidence. He advised the jury that the defendants, even though charged together, can face different verdicts.

The jury was told by Mr. Justice Ground that Dr. Amenemhat Waset Amen-Ra Tamerry, 48, and his wife Maatkai Hatsheput Tamerry, 36, are charged with one count of manslaughter, which is broadly defined as any unlawful killing where circumstances do not amount to murder - including causing a death by a breach of duty, gross neglect, or a reckless disregard for life, health, or well being.

Mr. Justice Ground said the Crown must prove four things including: an existence of duty of care, a breach of duty, the breach causing death, and the breach was such that it involved gross negligence which compromised the child's health.

He added the parents were under a legal duty to provide the necessities of life to their daughter, which includes food, clothing, shelter, and any appropriate medical care.

Mr. Justice Ground said the jury must take into account and judge any expertise the defendants had, for example the father is a dentist and underwent certain medical training.

He pointed out that even thought they may have been caring and loving - they still could have been reckless or negligent.

Mr. Justice Ground cautioned the jury and said: "Before you can convict, the prosecution must have made you sure of the four points.

"You can find the defendants not guilty of manslaughter but guilty of a lesser offence of failure to provide the necessities of life."

Mr. Justice Ground summed up the evidence of the 12-day trial by putting it in three different categories.

He said there were "three distinct stages" which were, the early months of A'Maya's life, the evidence of the day before she died, and the autopsy evidence.

Defence lawyer Mark Pettingill made his closing arguments first and reminded the jury that this was "a tragedy, not a crime."

He told the jury that if they have any doubts they must acquit. He added that the jury are in a "human struggle sitting in their spots" and that there is a lot of evidence for them to weigh through.

Mr. Pettingill told the jury that the Crown's allegation was of gross neglect to A'Maya.

"On a human basis not a legal basis if you grossly neglect your child you do not care or do not love it.

"This lady (Maatkai Hatsheput ) loved her child and it has come across time and time again during this case," he said.

Mr. Pettingill added: "This is a human case not a science case - an emotional family case not a technical theory case."

He pointed out the importance of the photographs of A'Maya, less than a month before she died and said: "The pictures certainly put to bed weeks and months of neglect."

He added that the illnesses may have been visible internally but were not externally, according to the many photographs of A'Maya shown to the court.

In closing Mr. Pettingill said: "I am going to submit to you hand on heart this is a tragedy not a crime. And you can not send these people to hell because they are already there."

Acting Director of Public Prosecutions, Kulandra Ratneser said to the jury: "We are in Bermuda - this is not black Africa. We are not living in a country where medical assistance is not available."

He told the jury that the defendants had a duty to provide the necessities of life whether they loved the child or hated it.

"There is a world of difference between love and the legal responsibility of care, " Mr. Ratneser said.

He added that he never said that the Tamerrys did not love their child.

"The issue you have to answer is why did she died.

"It is not a question of sympathy or anger. Don't be emotional - this case cannot involve emotion. Leave it aside and look at the evidence," said Mr. Ratneser.

He pointed out to the jury that the parents failed to take baby A'Maya to be seen by a doctor for seven months.

The child died because of that, he said. Doctors said that the child could have been saved.

He added that the photographs of A'Maya - provided by the defence - could be deceptive and needed to be looked at with caution.

Mr. Ratneser told the jury that the parents failed to follow medical advice and failed to provide proper nutrition for A'Maya.

He added that any "reasonable human being" would have done something to help the child gain weight.

He pointed out the importance of forensic pathologist, Dr. John Obafunwa's testimony and how science does not lie.

Mr. Ratneser also highlighted a contradiction with Maatkai Hatsheput's testimony. He said that a few doctors testified that she admitted to them that A'Maya was sick a few days before she died. The mother also told the doctors that A'Maya was sick for 12 days before she died with vomiting and fever. On the stand the mother denied telling the doctors that her daughter was ill for days before she died.

Mr. Ratneser closed by saying: "It is a tragedy that becomes a crime."