Star Hobson verdict in

[Lougle]

Savannah Brockhill Guilty of murder. Frankie Smith Guilty of causing or allowing death.

The picture of star with bruising on her face is shocking. I feel for the family and friends who did report this to social services. That poor baby.

I agree with other posters here that we need a conversation about the extent to which a parent with such a low IQ can be entrusted with the upbringing of a child.

^

This. Tough conversation.

@Itsnotover

The reports from court do support that. Which is why I changed my mind about FS. Stop being so rude. I’m not going to bother arguing with you. I read the whole trial.

I'm not being rude. I am stating the fact established in court - and which FS admitted - that she was incredibly abusive to Star herself, aside from what her girlfriend did. There is video footage proving it and she admitted all 8 counts of child cruelty that she was charged with.

Social services have a lot to answer for here. How could they decide that the reports were malicious? That poor baby.

Have N/C as know other person involved is a member, so will be extremely vague.

Just have a couple of questions.

Are Social Services able to access police and medical records of someone making allegations that have had no further action? Would it also include current partners records?

I agree - 5 social services referrals resulting in no action that prevented death. Police accepting 'clumsiness' despite SS evidence - nothing joined up. Just like all the other cases the system failed to hold anybody to account to prevent a tragedy.

All the media focusing on the parents - the system is the problem there are always going to be cases like this unless the system work but the media focus is always on the parents as people find it more interesting.

Hell, there was a late 19th C Edinburgh case like this, a young girl of low intelligence 'adopting' and murdering babies at the behest of an older abusive partner. But the system is supposed to function.

Pickles you asked, I told you. I’m not here to debate the death penalty, I’ve already explained my position and how I feel.

@casinoroyale4ever

I agree - 5 social services referrals resulting in no action that prevented death. Police accepting 'clumsiness' despite SS evidence - nothing joined up. Just like all the other cases the system failed to hold anybody to account to prevent a tragedy.

All the media focusing on the parents - the system is the problem there are always going to be cases like this unless the system work but the media focus is always on the parents as people find it more interesting.

Hell, there was a late 19th C Edinburgh case like this, a young girl of low intelligence 'adopting' and murdering babies at the behest of an older abusive partner. But the system is supposed to function.

Children don't get a vote. So if we want change, we as adults have to vote for children's services and care to be funded properly, and put pressure on MPs to massively lower the thresholds for children being removed from their "parents".

Low IQ is not a get-out clause. She was crafty enough to dupe social services. I agree with pp that it was the Defence which submitted the IQ results. Defences have also come up with Alzheimer’s and cancer diagnoses for accused persons, and from which those persons have miraculously and conveniently recovered.

Social services have a lot to answer for here. How could they decide that the reports were malicious?

SB was a member of the traveller community in a same sex relationship with FS. I wonder whether this meant that SS were more inclined to believe the reports were malicious? It would fit with other SS behaviour in Keighley and similar deprived northern towns when they dismissed some allegations of child sexual abuse as racially motivated and took no further action.

[quote Pickles89]@Malibuismysecrethome

because babies and children are defenceless and can’t advocate for themselves

What about a young woman raped and murdered in a park, or an elderly one in her own home, or a disabled man in an institution? They're pretty defenceless and not able to advocate for themselves. Are their murderers deserving of the death penalty too?[/quote]
Yes.

@immersivereader

Tough one. She could have another child once out.

Really terrible situation all round.

You can't decide the length of a sentence based on whether someone will get pregnant once released.

@DottyHarmer

Low IQ is not a get-out clause. She was crafty enough to dupe social services. I agree with pp that it was the Defence which submitted the IQ results. Defences have also come up with Alzheimer’s and cancer diagnoses for accused persons, and from which those persons have miraculously and conveniently recovered.

Indeed

That bruise on Stars face was sickening how cd social services see that and say it was accidental Fux sake sickening

@TheNamelessGirl

When tested the mother was found to have an IQ of 70, in the bottom 2% of the country. This would indicate she lacked the capacity to understand her actions.

If that really is the legal position, then such people can't be allowed to have children in their care, they should be taken away at birth. We cannot have a situation where a mother's rights are prioritised over a child's if legally there is an objective test which apparently means they are not capable of safe parenting.

I agree.

I can well believe that FS, with her low IQ and high compliance, would have stood by and let SB harm her little girl. The Milgram experiment showed how often people are willing to comply with perceived authority figures, even if that results in harm to someone else, and, to my knowledge, the people involved in that experiment were neurotypical.

It's so sad to think of how different Star's short life could have been if SB had been a kindly person who wanted to nurture instead of to control and destroy - I get the impression that FS would follow someone because they move, frankly, and wouldn't need to believe that they're kind as long as she thought they were right and it is tragic that the person she met and attached herself to was such a destructive, malevolent influence.

My DD was born two months before Star was and I've followed this case closely because there are photos where they look so similar, and it broke my heart to think of that little girl, who should be doing the same things as my baby, suffering so much instead of being loved and doted on. I wondered during the trial if the FS's defence strategy was to make her appear as stupid as possible (like when she asked what 'contrast' meant, and when SB's barrister asked her if she knew what a pronoun was and she said no), so I found her IQ test result very believable. I think the verdict is right; I think she did allow Star to be killed through her inaction and willingness to ignore or cover for SB's behaviour, but I do think that her low IQ and behavioural traits mitigate when I bear in mind how many NT people go along with bullying or causing harm because they believe that the person doing it or causing them to do it has authority, somehow.

@Bagelsandbrie

I’m not sure about the whole IQ of 70 thing in the context of this. My son aged 9 has severe and complex autism and learning disabilities. He attends a complex needs school. He is seemingly far more impaired by his disabilities than Frankie - who has by all extents led a fairly normal life and was able to live independently- and yet he absolutely knows the difference between right and wrong and would never hurt a baby / child. I can only think of people with severe and profound autism / disabilities who literally have no rational control who wouldn’t or who would unintentionally hurt someone during a meltdown etc. I think Frankie absolutely knew what she was doing.

I was thinking this earlier. One of my kids aged 8 has low level intelligence and autism but has a loving nature, is caring and understanding towards other people and animals and knows what is right and what is wrong. Frankie can't have been a good person to stand by and allow her partner to do those things or be encouraged to do them to her own child.

@DottyHarmer

Low IQ is not a get-out clause. She was crafty enough to dupe social services. I agree with pp that it was the Defence which submitted the IQ results. Defences have also come up with Alzheimer’s and cancer diagnoses for accused persons, and from which those persons have miraculously and conveniently recovered.

She didn’t ‘dupe’ SS though 🙄 she had a constant fear that Star would be taken even before she met SB.

When SS did an unannounced visit, Brockhill did all the talking.

People should read all the facts before assuming stuff that never actually happened.

And nobody in social services loses their job.
Blood on their hands again...

@Bagelsandbrie @furbabymama87 I would have said exactly the same when DD1 was the same age as your children. Unfortunately, as she has got older and the gap between her and her peers has widened into a great yawning chasm, I can well see the potential for her to be manipulated by someone stronger.

@Itsnotover I've followed this case as I live in the area. It absolutely was reported in court that she herself manipulated SS.

@furbabymama87 that’s the thing isn’t it.. maybe it’s not actually about low IQ in the sense that you can be a good or a bad person and it has nothing to do with that. I think we have to be really careful when talking about people with learning disabilities and / or low IQs as if they’re automatically capable of doing this sort of thing due to being vulnerable to manipulation- because that’s just not true and it’s horribly discriminatory to the vast majority of people in this bracket (like my own son and others) who are empathetic, sweet natured and literally wouldn’t hurt a fly.

[quote Lougle]**@Bagelsandbrie* @furbabymama87* I would have said exactly the same when DD1 was the same age as your children. Unfortunately, as she has got older and the gap between her and her peers has widened into a great yawning chasm, I can well see the potential for her to be manipulated by someone stronger.[/quote]
I respect your experiences, I guess I just feel there’s a gulf between ending up being manipulated in some smaller sense and being accepting of and participating in abusing your own child.

[quote KurtWildesChristmasNamechange]@Itsnotover I've followed this case as I live in the area. It absolutely was reported in court that she herself manipulated SS. [/quote]

Do you have a screenshot of that part of the trial? She delayed appointments with her housing officer but there is no evidence that FS tried to mislead SS as far as I was aware?

Halfway through the seven-week trial, Smith pleaded guilty to eight instances of child cruelty against Star between April to September 2020.

Also can I query why these 8 instances of child cruelty aren't being accounted for in her sentencing?