Tustin and Hughes thread 2

[Bagelsandbrie]

Continued from www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/4416690-Emma-Tustin-is-a-murderer

Thanks @Bagelsandbrie

I suspect Hughes Mum is finding it hard to accept her son was as much a part in Arthur’s murder as Tustin. I imagine it will hit her like a ton of bricks once the trial coverage has died down.

I'm so glad they got hefty sentences (although it could never be long enough).

Big boohoo that she has been bullied in prison and has felt suicidal. Deal with it, you evil woman.

Emma Tustin sentenced to a minimum of 29 years for killing 6-year-old stepson

f7td5.app.goo.gl/MML73e

@Bagelsandbrie

I suspect Hughes Mum is finding it hard to accept her son was as much a part in Arthur’s murder as Tustin. I imagine it will hit her like a ton of bricks once the trial coverage has died down.

I think you're right. I can understand that she would be loyal in court (I think).

I guess it's hard to accept that your own child would be capable of such a thing - easier to blame someone else, although obviously ET is more culpable.

Juts read that they'll be a review of why both police and SS failed Arthur.

*Just

I'll try that again..

Just read that there'll be a review of why both police and SS failed Arthur.

I'm sure there will be many reviews of this appalling crime, but will anything actually change, if it turns out that more money needs to be spent? Will a review result in a huge increase in funding for SS? Somehow I doubt it.

@KurtWildesChristmasNamechange

I'll try that again..

Just read that there'll be a review of why both police and SS failed Arthur.

Let me guess: "Lessons will be learned"

No @Harriet1216 I don't suppose much will change, does it ever? It's a sad fact that as soon as this story starts to diminish in the public eye things will simply carry on as if it never happened. Juts as they did after Victoria Climbie, which is 21 years ago now.

Just read ET has got 29 years. At least she can't breed once she is out.

A poster on the previous thread wondered: All I keep thinking is how to try to prevent more cases like this, and I can't think of a way that's not draconian, discriminatory in some way, or virtually impossible to implement. Has anyone got any thoughts?

And I just wanted to say that there are many good suggestions for reform on the previous thread that aren't draconian or difficult to implement.

Bubblesbubbles suggested that 'some circumstances/known events in a child's life [should] automatically trigger a "red alert" status for any child'

(2) Having a day to day carer who has previously had children taken into care themselves (i.e. ET)

(3) There being accounts where the child has said that they feel in serious physical danger in the presence of any parent or care giver. Maybe I am wrong but i don't think most children go around saying "daddy is going to kill me" or the like and if children come out with that it should trigger a high alert situation

(4) Multiple reports by different family members

Shewalksinbeauty suggested:

- enhancing PHSE around children’s rights from nursery onwards so its not just about the declaration of the rights of the child but so children know they have the right to a bed, a mattress, bedding, clean clothes and bodies, food that fills them up, not to be left alone or hurt - and to raise it persistently with adults outside the home if not

- public information so that adults like the hairdresser can identify cruel and unusual treatment of children and how and where to report

- public information for carers to help them identify if their own behaviour os inappropriate and seek help

- all social work assessments or initial visits to be unannounced and to speak to children outside the home and without immediate carers eg with teachers

- where there’s more than one report or significant risk factor children must be medically examined including xrays and blood tests away from their carers

I do think that all parties involved should have their actions reviewed. Social services, (he was known to them for 3 years!) the police, the school*. Obviously the hairdresser and boyfriend have some serious question marks over them but there’s no option to “review” their actions officially outside of criminal proceedings.

• I don’t think there is any indication the school failed him in any way, but it’s always worth reviewing procedures in these cases to see if there was anything else they could have done.

I can't stop wondering why she kept telling EVERYONE he had headbutted her?
The 999 operator didn't need to know that.
Was it to explain away a bruise she had or something?

@Bagelsandbrie

I suspect Hughes Mum is finding it hard to accept her son was as much a part in Arthur’s murder as Tustin. I imagine it will hit her like a ton of bricks once the trial coverage has died down.

I think I read somewhere that hughes mum is preventing the release of arthur’s body to his maternal family.

Was she in court for sentencing, or as I heard she refused to appear in person and wanted to stay in her cell.

@bergam I don't think she appeared.

@PleaseGoDontGoAgain

I can't stop wondering why she kept telling EVERYONE he had headbutted her? The 999 operator didn't need to know that. Was it to explain away a bruise she had or something?

I think it was to demonstrate that he was using his head in a violent way, head butting her and the floor- which was her story of how he got injured.

I’ve just read the sentencing remarks linked on the other thread and he only needs to do two thirds of his sentence, minus remand time. So he’ll be out in under 13 years. It’s not enough.

I’ve also never seen the point of concurrent sentences (and I worked in the CJS for years). Serving 2 sentences at once doesn’t make it any harder for the prisoner. Effectively you get away with whatever the lesser sentence is for. It should be consecutive.

There were lots of insightful suggestions from posters on the previous thread for how the system might be reformed. Will any of these suggestions be taken seriously or heard?

Drinkingallthewine posted (on p.30 of the previous thread):

So here's what I think I'd like to see, based on my own experiences: I would like to see a system where Arthur's grandmother could have taken him to a healthcare professional trained in child abuse, for an extensive check, well away from a scary parent, before any coaching can take place. Similar to SARC centers, but specific to child abuse. That theoretically I should be able to turn up with my GC/niece/other relative for a full independent check and not be threatened with a kidnap charge for trying to help a child.

I would like to see unannounced visits to the home. And a detailed look at the living conditions of all the children, and know all and any red flags to spot. Where all children spoken to away from their potential abuser, before any coaching can take place by SS workers who are extensively trained and have a manageable case-load. Where police attend if there's a possibility of things kicking off. Where the welfare of the child is the only thing that matters. Not rights or feelings or any of that. Just child welfare at the very heart of it all.

A number of posters raised the important point that social workers are often afraid of the parents they investigate, and may not push as hard as they could as result, and in some cases avoid even entering the home where a child is at risk.

As unpalatable as it will be to people who want to defund the police, maybe there needs to be more muscle behind child abuse investigations.

@MaryAndGerryLivingInDerry

I should clarify - The judge in his sentencing referred to her as a loving mother to her own children. That I can't be sure of, because one of the fathers of her two elder children said she's a terrible mother. Myself I'm of the opinion that she was a shitty, indifferent and self-centered mother to her own, but there's no evidence that they were subjected to any cruelty or harsh discipline - that she reserved soley for Arthur.

What I meant was from the point of view of the children in that home with Arthur. Their mother only directed the abuse towards Arthur. They were not 'disciplined' even remotely akin to Arthur. In fact, Hughes got beaten up by Tustin's ex because he dared to tell off one of Tustin's kids.

The Tustin children had beds, and their toys and their teddies. They were not starved, beaten or made to sleep on the floor. They were fed and given takeaway treats and icecream while there was a boy through a doorway crying for food and a glass of water.

The headfuck would be from seeing the Jekyll & Hyde of their own mother's behaviour played out in front of them. Have you ever felt the ice-cold horror down your back when you witness a sibling being beaten? I unfortunately have. And it comes back to me physically every time I think of it. Funnily enough I don't have the same reaction to the times I got the beating. It's only when being a witness. It takes a long time to reconcile the angry raging adult parent with the one that moments later cuddles up to you on the sofa to watch cartoons with you. That's the headfuck, because you are hyper aware of what she's capable of, but you are also trying to work out what Arthur 'did' so that you never get that punishment, and because it's unjustifiable cruelty, you as a kid, can't figure it out. So there's stress and fear and probably a fair bit of trauma bonding etc.

I’ve also never seen the point of concurrent sentences (and I worked in the CJS for years). Serving 2 sentences at once doesn’t make it any harder for the prisoner. Effectively you get away with whatever the lesser sentence is for. It should be consecutive.

Exactly. They’re essentially getting away without doing the lesser sentence. Probably a money saving scheme.

Just read that there'll be a review of why both police and SS failed Arthur.

A review by whom? An external authority or an internal inquiry? If it's the latter then surely nothing substantial will come of it.

Thanks for explaining @Drinkingallthewine.