It's totally abhorrent that she neither had the wit, the intelligence, the human decency, or a sufficient shred of love towards those children to alert the authorities to the fact that her husband was planning to set light to the house where they lay sleeping. Even if we give it a kind interpretation and say she allowed herself to be persuaded by Philpott, or was too scared of him to disagree, the plan had been in the making for six weeks and involved a third party. Surely it must have crossed her mind at some point that her children were in serious danger?
The thing that jumped out of that You Tube film was that she saw Philpott, unlikely as it sounds, as her "rescuer" because she had previously been in a very abusive relationship. Her previous bf had shaved her head as some sort of punishment. So she went from abuser to abuser.
It's interesting why she had such low self esteem in the first place that she was susceptible to that level of abuse, unlike her sisters who were brought up in the same environment. Perhaps her alleged low IQ might explain this? She claims that she was sexually abused by her father, but her father and her sisters categorically deny that this is true. And it's entirely possible she made up that allegation to explain and justify her own hideous behaviour.
Even allowing for all of the above though, and allowing for the possibility she was paralysed by fear - Philpottt seemed quite verbally able and quick thinking on that film, even if not intelligent in a traditional sense (the conversation in the van saying the police case only amounted to "a few discrepancies" struck me as quite articulate) and who knows what physical and emotional hold he had over her - this doesn't explain her behaviour after that night.
Once the plan had gone horribly wrong, once you realised your husband's actions (which you had helped with) had killed your six children, when you knew that he had plotted it all on the eve of a custody hearing for his other children , to make himself look like a heroic father, for financial gain, once you knew he was someone who was prepared to put his own, and your, sleeping children in mortal danger, why for the love of God would you still stand by him? Why would you not only stand by him, but go singing karaoke with him in a pub , and shopping with him using finds people had donated, shortly after your children had died?
You could argue she was still being controlled - and she most definitely was as Philpott made her have oral sex with their co-conspirator to keep him quiet against her will - but surely the death of one child, never mind all six, would affect some change in you?
I doubt any "normal thinking" woman would feel the need to protect Philpott or herself after they'd lost six children. Would you care what happened to yourself after that? I doubt any normal woman would care if she were to go to prison or not, as everything would surely be meaningless from that point on? And as for still being under his control, surely the worst thing that could happen to her, already had?