Emma Tustin, who murdered her stepson, aged six, Arthur Labinjo-Hughes was convicted of suicide after being imprisoned for the horrific crime.
Emma is currently serving an indefinite sentence at HMP Peterborough in Cambridgeshire after being convicted of manslaughter according to the Mirror says.
After being detained, Tustin has been threatened with a slap and a kicking out of her cell following the shooting dead a child in the house she lives located in Solihull, West Midlands.
The report of Tustin’s attempt on her life, as reported through The Evening Standard comes as senior judges are looking at the possibility of challenging her as well as Arthur’s late father Thomas Hughes prison sentences, and three other notorious prisoners.
Tustin and Hughes who were sentenced to prison for 21 years for manslaughter, have their sentences reviewed.
Arthur was struck with a fatal brain injury during his exclusive care of Tustin who was imprisoned for life and sentenced to the minimum sentence of 29 years for assaulting Arthur.
Tustin and Hughes are appealing the sentences they have imposed, they are also being challenged for being too lenient.
In the course of the trial, the jury was informed that Tustin attempted to end her life in the course of trial, using an overdose and then attempting to hang herself in order to escape punishment for killing Arthur, Coventry Live reports.
A doctor deemed Tustin as being able to continue the trial, but she’ll remain a suicide threat according to the court during her trial.
Mary Prior QC, representing Tustin she argued that the murderer had tried twice to kill herself, through hanging or overdose of drugs, in her trial for criminality, and she made another request just a few days after her sentencing hearing was held in December last year.
She stated: “Her prison report indicates that there was a second attempt at suicide.
“On January 1st 2022, she put an elongation around her neck. The documents from the prison indicate that she’s in the hospital wing and is currently in the hospital wing due to significant concerns about suicide.”
This week, Tom Little QC, representing the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) stated that Tustin’s case “merited in the minimum the consideration of a life-long order”.
He added: “This was, we acknowledge, not a simple sentencing process. The trial was clearly painful for everyone involved.”
Mr. Little stated that Arthur suffered “subjected to the greatest suffering” and added: “This was an extremely grave case of child murder in the backdrop of the cruelty.”
In his written submissions, Mr Little claimed that the judge did not properly assess the extent to which Tustin’s crimes were grave that they warranted a life-time order.
The author wrote that: “In the context of sadistic behavior that predated the murder, it’s claimed that the murder itself was motivated by a sadistic motive.
“Even even if it wasn’t the case, (Tustin)’s behavior as a whole was so serious that it was possible for the judge to make an all-life sentence.
“This was not an instance of periodic criminality prior to the murder, but rather a pattern of brutality that could be described as torture.”
The barrister added that the 30 year starting point for the Tustin sentence could have been substantially raised.
However, Mary Prior QC, for Tustin, said that the sentencing judge used the “fair and appropriate approach in this extremely challenging case”.
Ms. Prior stated that she believed that the “toxicity in the relationships” among Tustin and Hughes led to a situation in which they both used Arthur.