Preston Elijah court case TW: sa, physical abuse and child death

[scarfonthestairs]

I just want to say first im using an old name on here to show i am a mom who's adopted my son years ago.

I've got myself obsessed with this awful case to the point im following the court reports. I know I meed to work on this.

But im just reading the defence now and some of the things he says sound so familar. Like his family being his only social circle, not having a huge amount of knowledge of how to deal with the baby and feeling like he'd got post adoption depression.

I am not saying at all that he is innocent but he answers things so well. But then sok of the evidence is just awful. I guess what I'm trying to say is do you think he could be innocent? I just dont get why you'd go through all of the adoption process to then do that to the poor little baby.

Sorry I know I'm brain blurting.

I just dont understand if he is guilty how he managed to get through the process, how tje hospital admissions and the schools worries about him didnt ring any alarm bells. It actually makes me feel quite sick

I feel the exact same. Most of the things he’s saying sounds realistic. He has the right answer for everything. I am in two minds. We all take pics of our kids in the bath etc, he took videos of baby struggling to breathe for future evidence, spinning him around not realising it was cruel, he was a first time parent probably didn’t know how far he’d gone. The fact they have so many happy videos, the fact they never mentioned any of the abuse via text. I don’t know what to think

Child abuse in adoption happens. That's not knocking adopted parents. Yes he passed all the assessments. That's in no way a foolproof catch all. It's naive to believe or think differently.

Taken from the bbc website:

In the just under four months the child was in their care, he had been routinely ill-treated, had indecent images and videos taken of him, was sexually abused and physically assaulted, and suffered 40 traumatic injuries, Preston Crown Court has heard. @MyNavySeal that's hardly innocent or cutesy photos or videos. That's concrete proof of abuse.

He was a high school teacher who confided to a colleague:

During the visit, a month before the child's death, Varley had "unburdened" himself about not "bonding" with Preston and struggling with the demands of looking after a baby.
This included having "dark thoughts" towards the child, who he had renamed Elijah, during the adoption process, Wright told the jury.
"He disclosed to her that he had harmful thoughts towards Elijah and had thoughts of drowning him or of suffocating him but that he would never carry them out," Wright said.

Varley told the woman he had disclosed this as part of welfare checks involving his employer and social workers involved in the adoption of Preston.
It was only after the child's death that the former work colleague approached police with the information, the court heard.

There were bruises and grazes to his head, face and mouth, upper limbs, chest, back and left thigh.
Preston also had injuries to his mouth, throat and bottom.
There was no evidence to support natural disease or drowning as the cause of death and the internal injuries were caused shortly before death.
The post-mortem gave the cause of his death to be acute upper airways obstruction, a result either of a smothering most likely with a hand or soft fabric or by the insertion of an object or objects into his mouth.
Wright told jurors both defendants had a "sexual interest" in the child and while Varley is accused of being responsible for the murder, his co-accused could and should have protected the child and stopped the sexual assaults and cruelty which were becoming increasingly serious

This guy had an excellent understanding of child welfare, safeguarding training and had a position which would in most assessor's opinions be a fantastic fit as an adopted parent. The colleague he confided in should have made a call straight after their conversation. They could have saved that child's life. I believe they are criminally at fault for failure to report as they to would have had safeguarding training.

Revolting case entirely.

It’s an awful case, that poor baby. Thinking of @ForDearSwancomment about how on paper he looked ideal, I wonder what impact that had on the assessing social worker? The assessment process is intrusive but the “halo effect” is well known whereby someone ascribes positive attributes to a person based on limited positive impression.

It takes a very skilled worker to dig under that very professional, knowledgeable persona to see where the cracks are, but that’s the job. Abusers are very very good at appearing credible which is why the assessment process needs to be robust, which prospective adopters really push back against.

I agree some of what he was saying sounds par for the course in early placement, there needed to be much fuller exploration of how he was coping, what supports he was drawing on. Observation of parent and child in early placement is so important but this was a baby only just placed so lack of connection, withdrawal etc could reasonably be explained by that rather than something wrong with the placement.

It’s a difficult one but no, I don’t think he or his partner are innocent. No one causes that level of injury to a baby by accident or by being an inexperienced parent, and certainly no one sexually abuses a baby without know that’s exactly what they’re doing. Abusers will go a long way to achieve their ends.

Thank you everyone for your replies.
I dont think the assessments are a way to get rid of all potentially abusive people @ForDearSwan .
I think I struggle with the thought of that poor baby being killed in that way (penis in mouth) its just something I cant bare to think about.

If he is guilty once more its "in plain sight" isnt it? A teacher, head of year, caring uncle, adoptive father. He had so many chances to abuse because he went through all of those hoops to get to this.
@MyNavySeal thats it entirely he has an answer for everything and so puts that doubt there. But then the bruises. And how he went to sleep hung over the cot. Does any baby do that?

I know these are brain blunts. I just have no-one else to discuss it with and cant get it out of my mind

He's obviously guilty. The reason he knows what to say on the stand is the exact same reason he passed all the adoption assessments. Psychopaths are known to be highly skilled at turning on the charm and knowing just what to say. Many abusers devote their whole lives to targeting children. They will spend years getting into the perfect situation, or training for careers that give them access to vulnerable children. They often spend years grooming not just children, but all the adults around them.

I also cannot stop reading about and listening to podcasts about this case. There does seem so much evidence against one of the dads - the injuries mainly - but it is so hard to get your head around how someone could do this, immediately upon a baby being placed with him for adoption - that it sows a seed of doubt in your mind. I don't think his partner knew what was happening although he must have been complicit in covering up or changing stories about some of the physical injuries for fear of the adoption going wrong.

If the partner 'covered up' or 'changed stories' it means he absolutely knew something was criminally wrong. He's as guilty as him for allowing/covering up or helping his partner.

Children unfortunately die at the hands of abusive parents, its not often, but it happens. Why on earth does this child's death have some of you ringing your hands so much? Doesn't make much sense tbh. Adopted parents aren't infallible, this happens, probably as often or rarely as biological parents abusing or worse, their children.

I wonder if with John vardys (?) Answers it's to make it seem not 100% whether it was one man or the other so the most serious accusations cant be without a doubt. Especially with him saying him and the other man are still together. I wonder if the other man (I'm sorry I cant remember his name and dont want to call him the Dad) will give evidence?
There are so many failings by people not reporting things. And I know he looked on paper like a good understanding person (safeguarding, works in a school etc) but ultimately I think it stands at the point of them being approved for adoption. Years ago when we were in the pathway to adoption their were people on their who we recognised as not being suitable. By the mast part of the course which was a few months later, 2 families had been weeded out not right and they were the ones we'd thought the same about.

I know it’s a very minor point in the grand scheme of things - and I won’t go into the allegations of abuse as it is an ongoing court case and so could be considered as prejudice - but I was struck by the fact that the couple changed the baby’s name. Anyone who has completed their training and who has understood the importance to children of their identities knows that this is not necessarily advisable.

I noticed that as well. There was another awful case of a child murdered by her adopters Elise Scully Hicks where they changed her name as well.

Elsie, not Elise.

Leiland-James Corkill was also murdered by his adoptive mother, and his adoptive parents called him James against the instructions of SWs and birth mother's wish.

To be honest I am finding the trial very difficult, and am limiting my following of it to reading the BBC news summaries.

The checks to become an adoptive parent are significant, but are efforts directed to the right areas?

Also I know my SWs asked me about post adoption depression and how I was really coping, 1 asked with sincerity and gave me lots of time and space to talk, the others asked because they were supposed to and if I had have been struggling I wouldn't have shared it with them easily. Also, in my opinion, they were not invested enough to be reading between any lines if there was stuff going on.

Mine were both in education when they came to me, so they were seen not in my presence by professionals regularly, and school staff saw me daily so could see how I interacted with the children. I do wonder how things can be made more safe for very young ones who aren't seen in the same way.

In early placement I had weekly visits from both the kids social worker and my own, times to make sure they saw the kids out of school, at home with me. That continued at a gradually reduced schedule for about 3 months and was hugely supportive for me, DH and the DC.

The difficulty with very small children is that signs of discomfort or distress can be due to early placement as much as indicating problems in placement. There needs to be regular (weekly at least) home visits, with the social worker observing both parent and child, how the parent relates to and provides care for the baby. That takes time, resource and willingness from the new parent who often finds it intrusive and exposing. There’s no doubt there needs to be better assessment of adoptive parents and ongoing face to face support post transition, but what that might look like who knows.

I think also the details of the social worker meed to be shared with all areas eg nursery, dr etc so that it can all ne reported to a central "hub".
Our LO was out of area so his sw only came once. And our s.wrker was so lax she barely came out either and used phone calls as visits. I was struggling a lot at the beginning and told someone at a council run playgroup but nothing was done. I wonder if there jad of been a hub they might of mentioned it snd I would of got come support.
The judge has given his closing remarks so now its down to the jury.
I think jv will be found guilty to lots but not sure if there is enough for murder. I worry that the other one (cant remember his name again) will get away with everything as he was just on the periphery.

I have listened to "The Trial" podcast on this case. A few thoughts...

1. Varley seems to have almost no understanding of attachment theory or how to meet the emotional needs of a baby/toddler. In so much of what he says in interview/in court, this is obvious. Often, when he talks about Preston displaying obvious emotional needs, he talks with irritation and impatience.
2. Varley had some family experience with babies and toddlers but McGowan-Fazalerley had almost no experience. I was so surprised that they would be allowed to adopt a baby without much more experience and training in how to meet the needs of a baby (not just buying toys and clothes...)
3. I say this with extreme difficulty but I can see that SOME of what Varley says sounds plausible wrt sleep deprivation and feeling isolated, however, surely this is exactly what should be covered before an adoption placement happens and also, just because some of what he says might ring true, absolutely doesn't show innocence. I had nights when I was beside myself with tiredness, didn't feel myself and also felt genuinely angry. I didn't harm them though and I didn't blame my babies. (I did have pretty dark thoughts about some of the baby sleep books and probably hurled one or two out of the room at one point!)
4. The emotional abuse and more minor physical abuse was horrific enough. Taking photos of him sleeping awkwardly for several minutes before helping him for example. Sure, we might take a photo of our child in a funny position, but then we move them straight away and if it's not a safe position you move them straight away. It's not a photo moment before safety. The dancing with him roughly, spinning him roughly, shouting BOO at him and keeping him awake - one of those videos has been released and anyone who has ever been a parent/carer of a toddler can see a child who is beside himself with tiredness and not being cared for by a loving parent. I found that video so hard to watch. That poor child just wanted to sleep and feel safe.
5. The way Preston (probably) died has already been alluded to here. I don't want to even think about it. It seems that there was no doubt as to what happened forensically/medically.

This case has really got to me. I keep thinking of his foster parents who loved him and were clearly amazing with him.

But I also can't understand how these men were approved with so little experience of babies/toddlers and (apparently) no rigorous training in attachment parenting and supporting a child's emotional needs. I am not an adoptive parent and friends I have who are adoptive parents seem to have been much better prepared.

It just seemed that they either "wanted a baby" without really thinking through what that meant and that the baby's needs would have to come first for the rest of their lives, or that one or both of them wanted to adopt a baby to abuse. The former points to negligence from the social workers etc who approved the adoption.

Or, they wanted a baby, didn't think it through that much and once they had him, one or both found themselves feeling tempted to abuse a baby who couldn't speak out and who they might think wouldn't remember what they did to him. Neither of them seemed to have any shred of genuine emotional parental feelings of love and protection and nurture. It is truly sickening. I hope changes are made and adoptive parents are given much more support but also monitored much more closely.

Sorry for the lengthy post. I'm interested in other people's opinions.

@User76443998 The csa and other abuse seems to have started as soon as he was placed with them so I'm pretty sure they adopted him for the purpose of abusing him. 😢 What Varley said about finding the sleep deprivation and isolation difficult may well have been true, he may have been very annoyed that the baby he was torturing kept crying and stopping him getting a full nights sleep. He must be a psychopath to have done what he did so he probably didn't see little Preston as a real person but as an object for him to satisfy his monstrous desires, and then was surprised that Preston actually had emotions and needs and showed distress at the horrific abuse he put him through. Something obviously went very wrong with social services for not assessing them and monitoring them properly.

Thank you. He did seem annoyed with Preston when the baby’s needs clashed with the adults expectations and tolerance.

So awful. I hope changes are made. I know most SW are doing their best.

I believe by labeling these abusers as Psychopaths isn't right. Firstly unless you're his psychiatrist you've no business attaching a label to a child abuser. He was a pedophile and ultimately killed a defenceless child.

Many adopted parents are abusive. Many of the posters on this thread appear to be making excuses, re sleep deprivation and post adoption depression. Let's not do that. From this thread and the other that's trending it seems many posting like to demonise or use extreme examples when talking about their adopted children's bio parent/s but seem to want to give or make allowances for adopted abusers. Parents, of babies will suffer from sleep deprivation that's not the reason for this child's murder.

I believe that many of you on this board really need to look at the bias and, in many cases, the contempt you have for bio family.

If you think that I'm saying that sleep deprivation caused the abuse or murder, then you didn't understand my post. And by referring to Varley as a psychopath I'm obviously not trying to diagnose him with a condition. Psychopathy isn't a condition, it doesn't appear in the DSM. It's just a general term referring to someone with a complete lack of empathy and remorse. That's how it's defined in the dictionary. It's pretty clear Varley fits that description. You may be getting it confused with antisocial personality disorder, which is an actual condition someone can be diagnosed with.

Yes I hope so too. The system as it is is failing so many children in different ways.

I'm not saying that I think you said that sleep deprivation caused this infants murder. I fully understand what you posted. I said, some poster's seem to be making allowances and it shouldn't be done.

Psychopathy is not officially listed as a separate diagnosis in the DSM-5; instead, it is classified under Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD). The terms "psychopathy" and "sociopathy" are often used informally, but they fall under the broader category of ASPD in clinical settings. From what I've read Varely has not been diagnosed with ASPD. I believe people should be careful about throwing about words that don't apply and as it makes excuses for murder and pedophiles. Varley and is partner have not been diagnosed with any severe mental health disorder and you are doing a disservice to Preston by flippantly using words like psychopaths to describe chosen behaviour, not behaviour caused by any mental illness or disorder.

I don’t see anyone demonising birth parents, or indeed posting about birth parents in this thread, nor anyone excusing the vile behaviour of these two perpetrators.

Saying that some of what they were saying about sleep deprivation isn’t excusing their behaviour - it’s acknowledging that early placement is very difficult and adopters are often unprepared for how hard it is and need support. It’s not saying their behaviour is anything other than abhorrent - but may explain why the various services involved weren’t concerned enough about the baby placed with them. Because it’s not uncommon to feel exhausted and at the end of your tether, and most parents - adoptive or otherwise - don’t take those feelings out on their child.

I don’t know what drove those men to hurt and kill this baby, and honestly I don’t care. There’s no excuse or reasonable explanation and they carry full responsibility for their actions.

I think it's quite reasonable to call him a psychopath because psychopath is a general term being used colloquially to describe someone who has no empathy or remorse. It's not a clinical diagnosis and isn't being used that way. If I had meant to say 'this man has anti personality disorder' then that is what I would have written. It's certainly not making excuses for anyone. I don't think other people are excusing it either, we're just discussing what happened and trying to wrap our heads round it as it's such a shockingly horrific crime. Do you have anything relevant to contribute to this discussion or are you just planning to hassle everyone about their choice of words and accuse them of all sorts of imagined sins? If the latter then it's getting a little tiresome so perhaps you could consider popping off to another thread? I'm sure you could find one where someone says their DD is feeling anxious about exams and lecture them that they mustn't say that as the DD doesn't have generalised anxiety disorder? Or perhaps one where someone refers to their partner as paranoid as he doesn't want them having male friends and tell them off because they haven't been diagnosed with paranoid personality disorder?