Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Tustin and Hughes thread 2

608 replies

Bagelsandbrie · 03/12/2021 14:40

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

OP posts:
Bagelsandbrie · 03/12/2021 17:43

@KurtWildesChristmasNamechange

Arthur needs to be allowed to be laid to rest now. It's like a final insult how they're arguing over his burial and he's been laid in a cold morgue for 16 months. I just mentioned this on another thread.. but could he not be made a ward of court so he can finally be buried?
That is the next step. There’s an article about exactly that in the Daily Mail.
OP posts:
timtam23 · 03/12/2021 17:45

@SammyScrounge @BoreOfWhabylon anyone can request the Attorney General to consider whether the sentences can be referred to the Court of Appeal under the unduly lenient sentences scheme (not many end up being reviewed but some do) it only needs one person to ask and the AG has to consider the request.
www.gov.uk/ask-crown-court-sentence-review

JustLyra · 03/12/2021 17:45

One of the things that does need to change is people’s reactions to being asked questions.

You even see it on here sometimes when folks get offended about school, nursery or medical staff getting “nosy” about their home situation or a fall/injury their child has.

If we want to protect children then we need to lose the belief that child abusers stick out - they don’t. They often look, sound and outwardly act like the rest of us.

So when hospital staff ask the same question three times about an injury, or the teacher queries one of the daft things children say about sleeping in cupboards or not having dinner for a week (my DS once told his teacher I hadn’t made him dinner for a whole week in response to a question. Missed out the bit about MIL making the dinner that week as I wasn’t well!). For some children those questions are part of the bigger picture and we all have to accept them.

MaryAndGerryLivingInDerry · 03/12/2021 17:46

And no, parents should not be prohibited from preventing their children having contact with their grandparents. Grandparents can apply to court for formal contact if they aren’t being allowed to see their child. This is the legal avenue that exists. There is no good reason to remove this and make it a legal requirement for all children to be made to see all grandparents.

SammyScrounge · 03/12/2021 17:50

@Naughtynovembertree

Tustin bad zero emotional attachments or care towards Arthur from very early on in the short relationship, remember straight in with the bloody "thinking chair" and the longest punishments for disrespecting tustin

Even normal rounded loving individual's don't instantly form bonds with new partners children! It's very rare!

I'm glad this point was mentioned today, how could such an already vulnerable boy end up with a woman he barely knew, in nearly always her sole charge!

The papers are saying tustin is crying crocodile tears on the body cam footage. I disagree, she starts crying when she talks about Arthur's behaviour, trashing her house etc. I think she's genuinely crying, but only for herself.

I have a relative who has extreme anxiety over mess, tustin has admitted the same.
REMEMBER him picking off wall paper whilst doing his long hall way stints I bet that's her interpretation of trashing the house. My relative for instance broke down in tears when she found a stray pine needle two weeks after Xmas. Stuff like that, no one can bear to be around the person, things this extreme are just as damaging to children as addiction parents.

I think the very first few lines after any accident /assault are crucial. Nothing she says makes sense at all.
Most people picking up a child are doing it in a kind way so why this need for bear hugs and wrestling with him.

I don't recall anything in the trial report about why she had to shut the door... What the door had to do with it.

Unfortunately, I don't think tustin will be able to grasp what she's done yet I bet she still blames Arthur's.
I'd really like a trained person to go through it with her, so she can fully appreciate what she's done because she doesn't get it and will feel hard done by rather than feel deep remorse.

Oh, she knows already what she's done. She thoroughly enjoyed tormenting Arthur - she made sound recordings of the child's distress and sent them to Hughes as a love token.Brady and Hindley did the same - recorded the death of Lesley Anne Downey so they could relive the great moment. If Tustin was capable of remorse she could not have done what she did to Arthur. This wasn't a loss of temper in a one off incident. It was a long campaign.
KurtWildesChristmasNamechange · 03/12/2021 17:54

@IknowwhatIneed I absolutely love your post. Without the backing of more government funding, is any of this feasible?

I live in the outskirts of a Yorkshire city where children's homes and SS are failing across the board. Many aren't fit for purpose. This has come from the latest visits from inspectors and authorities. Not to mention massive failings of staff. There's been bluster from the council about fixing this, but nothing ever changes. What chance do they have - or the children under their care - if all that's paid is lip service?

SammyScrounge · 03/12/2021 17:55

@Geppili

Why did they give poor Arthur lots of salt? Was that to make him ill? Or to make his food unpleasant? I just cannot understand any of their heinous behaviour, but I find the salt poisoning particularly hard to understand.
Sadistic pleasure in giving a very hungry little boy a meal that looked normal until he tried to eat it. He might have cried some more, or pleaded for a real dinner.
PrinzessinCressida · 03/12/2021 17:57

[quote IknowwhatIneed]**@IknowwhatIneed, are you a social worker? What do you think you would need to be able to stop cases like this? If you could wave a magic wand?

I am, though not in practice now precisely because of the level of risk I was carrying.

If I had a magic wand I’d increase SW numbers, reduce case loads, give time and space for reflective practice. I’d ring fence physical office space for social workers (many work “agilely” or hot desk) so that they can use informal supports and learning from more experienced workers. I’d build confidence in interpersonal skills needed to engage with parents, who are often challenging in their own right, core training would focus on people skills, professional assertiveness and effective relationship building. Id raise pay to attract better candidates and establish the profession as a specialist area of work rather than the current jack of all trades.

I’d change the law to make it easier/possible to intervene more directly, I’d improve children’s care services raising the bar both for residential care and foster carers so we could remove children confident that they were going to a safe, nurturing environment. I’d make sure community supports were well staffed and effective so children could safely stay at home wherever possible, with high quality care placements as an option of last resort. I’d significantly lower the threshold of “last resort”.

For starters.[/quote]
Thank you very much. That made me cry a bit, I will be honest. I thought attitudes were a big part of the problem, but from what you are saying, what we need is more money first and foremost. To pay better for social workers, provide them with better working environments and training, and work with families more constructively.

So children like Arthur are dying tortured, horrible deaths - crying out for food and for love, for God's sake - because not enough money is being directed where it needs to be. It is fucking stark, right?

Turmerictolly · 03/12/2021 17:58

@IknowwhatIneed

*That's where an unscheduled visit, a chat alone with him with the parents outside, and a physical exam, would have shown them other indicators of the abuse.

This should be the standard practice of SS visits from now on, otherwise all the talk of lessons learned is just bullshit to shut us up, once again.*

SWs do make unscheduled visits, but the parents need to allow access - SWs don’t have the legal right to demand to see the child, much less see them alone, they don’t have the legal powers to demand access to the home - even the police need a warrant to access someone’s home without permission or due cause.

In the Baby P case, Peter's mother smeared chocolate all over his face to cover the bruising, the social worker clearly lacked the basic common sense or nous to wipe the child's face.

Actually they lack the legal powers to lay hands on a child without parental permission, there’s a lot of assumptions about what SWs can and can’t do - so much of the work involves relationship, cooperation with parents, we can’t just turn up, demand to see inside kitchen cupboards, demand to see a child alone, etc etc.

If you want to campaign for a change in the law to give SWs free access to your home and your child, go right ahead.

This. These horrific cases will go on unless the scope of those who are employed to protect children changes.

PrinzessinCressida · 03/12/2021 18:02

@JustLyra

One of the things that does need to change is people’s reactions to being asked questions.

You even see it on here sometimes when folks get offended about school, nursery or medical staff getting “nosy” about their home situation or a fall/injury their child has.

If we want to protect children then we need to lose the belief that child abusers stick out - they don’t. They often look, sound and outwardly act like the rest of us.

So when hospital staff ask the same question three times about an injury, or the teacher queries one of the daft things children say about sleeping in cupboards or not having dinner for a week (my DS once told his teacher I hadn’t made him dinner for a whole week in response to a question. Missed out the bit about MIL making the dinner that week as I wasn’t well!). For some children those questions are part of the bigger picture and we all have to accept them.

I agree with you entirely. And if we all exercised some humility, and accepted that these questions are valid and come from a good place, professionals would be less scared of getting it wrong, and less likely to "wimp out" when an abuser starts throwing their weight about.
Hearwego · 03/12/2021 18:03

Are Baby Ps murderers free now? Just out of interest? If so just shows how pathetic our laws are.

Hearwego · 03/12/2021 18:05

Can a petition be started to impose whole life tariffs for child killers? In very extreme cases like this.

Hearwego · 03/12/2021 18:09

I hope they’re shitting themselves in whatever prisons they are in. Most prisoners will be watching the news now.

Kippersfortea · 03/12/2021 18:10

@Hearwego

She was released but recalled and has since been denied release. This article explains it

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/14418328/baby-ps-mum-covid-vaccine/amp/

Porcupineintherough · 03/12/2021 18:12

In Baby P's case it was actually a doctor who missed his injuries, not a social worker. The doctor didn't want to examine him because he was upset (he was in pain from his injuries).

BoreOfWhabylon · 03/12/2021 18:13

[quote timtam23]**@SammyScrounge* @BoreOfWhabylon* anyone can request the Attorney General to consider whether the sentences can be referred to the Court of Appeal under the unduly lenient sentences scheme (not many end up being reviewed but some do) it only needs one person to ask and the AG has to consider the request.
www.gov.uk/ask-crown-court-sentence-review[/quote]
Thank you @timtam23.
I think I will be filling in that form. I hope others will too.

BoreOfWhabylon · 03/12/2021 18:19

Actually, it's not a form - email or telephone.

mathanxiety · 03/12/2021 18:21

@EvilPea, they did want him.

Their bond revolved around cruelty to this child. They would have had to find another victim if Arthur hadn't been there, and as seen, the father of the other children in the house wouldn't have taken kindly to that.

Hearwego · 03/12/2021 18:27

Daniel Pelka’s mum died in prison. His step father killed himself shortly afterwards.
Probably because he couldn’t face doing 30 years inside, being hated and alone. Knowing his partner was also dead.

I actually think in this case this was the best thing he could have done for society.Although I doubt he killed himself through guilt , more the fact he didn’t wasn’t to spend his life in prison.
Atleast he died alone in a cell with no fuss over him.

timtam23 · 03/12/2021 18:32

@Hearwego I think it was the other way around, Daniel's mum's partner died first of physical illness (heart problems I think) having refused to go to hospital as he knew he'd be recognised. Daniel's mum then killed herself in her cell

Naughtynovembertree · 03/12/2021 18:34

I can't see in this specific instance of two sw visiting the home where lore money would have made a difference? They didn't look at him properly it's as simple as that!

Porcupineintherough · 03/12/2021 18:35

@mathanxiety That's exactly it. Reminds me a lot of the death of Daniel Pelka which was the similar. Sad

Fireblanket · 03/12/2021 18:36

Considering that Arthur's mother is in prison I imagine that Tustin will be very vulnerable. They won't be in the same prison, but there will be contacts between the two sites.

Sombra · 03/12/2021 18:36

@timtam23 His mum killed herself first and then his stepdad had a heart attack just under a year later

Sombra · 03/12/2021 18:37

@timtam23 sorry I replied wrong