To think the John Hunt family murders show how poorly coercive control is still understood?

How horrible to reply so dismissively to someone who has been a victim, shared their experience and not even say to them that you’re sorry they went through that. Good grief.

And still the OP is dogmatically doubling down. And refusing to answer what she thinks John Hunt should have known/done in order to protect his family.

she appears to be trying to justify starting this thread because John Hunt and his surviving daughter chose to do an interview. Which seemed to me about wanting to describe his wife and daughters and not let them be defined by their horrendous deaths. Not for his situation to be hijacked by someone on social media. The OP could have started a thread about coercive control without bringing a grieving family into it. She could even have used her own lived experience if she chose. To use someone else’s like this is disrespectful and distasteful.

control is often silent to others. there's an analogy about it being like a dog whistle - as in only a dog can hear it. i was in that situation and you end up not knowing up from down.

it's hideous what John and his family went through and are going through.

No. I'm saying direct the education at victims/potential victims. They're the only ones who know what's actually going on.If the man seems normal and your friend/family member seems happy then how are you supposed to know?

What risk mitigation techniques would you have suggested. An armed former soldier against three unarmed women. Hire a security guard? Guard dogs? All the women carry mace at all times? Even when men are coercively controlling as my ex was the vast, vast majority do not go on to harm their ex's family! Or do you mean in terms of talking to Louise? I don't know about your experience but in mine my DB in particular said to me several times to leave (not because he thought I was being controlled or abused, he just didn't like him). I didn't, because that is the nature of coercive control.

OP your tone in this thread is way off the mark. By all means, advocate for more education on this for the person IN the relationship (love bombing, isolation etc) but bringing Louise's family into it is in poor taste to say the least.

I also feel that you're expecting them to have come to that interview to educate the British public on coercive control. I'm sorry but that is not their role. They spoke about their lives experiences and emphasised that, in THEIR experience, there was nothing to suggest any of this. I felt that they were essentially warning that people who seem completely normal 'just a man' could actually be capable of horrific acts. I'm not sure what more you expect? They probably already feel extreme guilt, are you expecting them to sit there reading up on every sign they failed to spot and delivering a lecture on the subject rather than a heartfelt interview? Victims and their families owe the public nothing.

OP I don't think you're saying anything the Hunt family haven't and tbh I think it's best coming from them. Amy said that, to them, 'he was just a man' and towards the end they didn't think he was particularly nice but they never saw any sign of what he was capable of. The whole point of coercive control is that the controlling partner is usually a master manipulator who both controls their partner so they don't tell anyone, and simultaneously charms their friends and family.

My ex was incredibly controlling, systematically isolating me from family and friends. This escalated into violence but he'd only hit me where the bruises wouldn't show. At one point after a particularly vicious attack we were invited round to my parents' and my mum was enthusiastically asking when we were thinking of having kids etc. I just wanted to lift my top and show her the bruises all over my torso but at that point he'd convinced me that nobody would believe me so I played along, smiling and laughing.

I don't blame my family at all. How can you tell? Really?? My siblings never liked my ex but (after we split) said they couldn't put their finger on why. My mum loved him. The thing is, nobody is inside another person's relationship and if everything seems fine and they seem and sound happy, why would you not trust their judgement?

This is getting out of hand. You have no idea whatsoever that Clifford had the trust of the ‘man of the house’ at all or what their individual relationship was.

Armchair psychology at its absolute worst.

I agree with this, part of the perpetrator's mo would have been gaining the trust of the 'man of the House'.

There are a lot of maybes there @OrangeCrushes . I wouldn’t want to blame a specific family for their lack of knowledge (and when I said ‘we’ know that leaving a relationship is dangerous, I really meant fellow mumsnetters) but I agree more could be done to educate society as a whole. And of course to educate men in how NOT to be abusive controlling murderers, but that seems
like a pipe dream.

I've skimmed the thread and I don’t think anyone’s mentioned what Amy, the sister said. She was clear that he was ‘just a man’, and isn’t that the point? These men look and sound like any other to most of us, even if they are monsters underneath. They don’t let their guard down to the families, they even charm them. They know what they’re doing.

And by the time anyone realises, it’s almost too late. Ok if the mum had sensed more danger, she might not have let him in. But he was a man, and she was a woman alone, he could have forced himself in. Once Clifford had decided on his plan, how could she or anyone have stopped him?

I agree, more needs to be done in educating women about the dangers of coercive control. But Louise DID realise, she dumped him, and as we all know, that’s when these men are the most dangerous. So the answer is not to get involved in the first place - but how is the possible when, as Amy said, they’re just men, and at the start of the relationship, they’re lovely and charming?

@OrangeCrushesbut what, specifically, do you think John Hunt should have known, or done, which would have helped protect his family from this? And when you answer this, can you let us know what irrefutable evidence you have to base your answer on? What do you actually know* *about what John Hunt saw/heard/ experienced before these events?

because unless you can answer that, I fail to see why you’re using another family’s experience on social media. By all means start a thread about coercive control. It can be from your own lived experience if you choose. Or without referencing a specific person. It’s just awful to hold this man up as an example of somehow not ‘knowing’ or ‘seeing’ something and therefore not being able to protect his wife and adult offspring.

Just read back on your first sentence. Has something very minor happened in this man’s life eg his daughter hasn’t passed an exam she worked hard for?

Or something unimaginably horrific and catastrophic?

Perhaps have a little think OP about how your horrible thread would read if you printed it out and handed it to the surviving family.
If you wouldn't have the balls to do that maybe think about what you've posted
This is not the context to debate education around DA using these extremely brave and dignified people as canon fodder to prove your argument.

Or….. he tells himself he didn’t see it because he didn’t see it.

To your question OP…yes I think the signs is subtle coercive control are very difficult to identify. Louise lived with her parents and yet these signs went unnoticed. Did John ever say he and Carol spoke with Louise about Clifford or asked her about the breakup? As in “how did he handle the break up”? One image that haunts me is Carol opening the door to Clifford and allowing him into the house. Clearly he wasn’t recognized as dangerous or did she think…let him get his belongings and get going? I find myself saying….oh she was too controlling with DS. Didn’t want him going out with his friends but the controlling of appearance activities friend group each of of themselves seem “jealous boyfriend” not murderous mentally ill psychopath intent on annihilating the family.

@OrangeCrushes your situation sounds awful for your poor daughter with her father x

I heard part of the interview and, whilst having every sympathy with Mr Hunt, I think he maybe slightly naive about what was going on in his daughter's life. He may not have observed any abusive behaviour - fair enough, as maybe the boyfriend was able to control himself when the parents were around. And his daughter may have chosen not to discuss any of this with her parents, if anything, in order that they didn't worry. Even in close families, parents don't know everything about their adult children's lives
But maybe Mr Hunt doesn't want to consider the idea that something was going on, and he didn't spot it - that might just be too much for him to handle, so not blaming him at all.

This.