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

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Thread gallery
24
TashaTudor · 16/10/2024 22:45

Mookie81 · 16/10/2024 22:41

In my area we can't take a child off roll unless the parent informs us in writing of their new school, and the new school confirms they have started there. I can't speak for everywhere else.

That's against the law. Section 7 of the home education act says that as soon as a parent informs a school that they're deregistering their child (as long as its a mainstream school) the school need to take their name off the register. The school can inform the local authority but it isn't required.

There's also no curriculum, no checks, no communication. If you home educate you're on your own.

Peonies007 · 16/10/2024 22:52

I was just thinking..
They lived a few miles down the road, close to school she attended.
They moved to Horsell in April 2023 and also pulled her out of school then.
Is the move what escalated things? I mean it's 3 bed house and there were 3 adults and 6 kids living there. I had 3 under 5 (that was crazy) at one point, they had 4 very young kids and obviously the older two.
Or did they pulled her out of school first and then changed address?

hotpotlover · 16/10/2024 23:26

Peonies007 · 16/10/2024 22:52

I was just thinking..
They lived a few miles down the road, close to school she attended.
They moved to Horsell in April 2023 and also pulled her out of school then.
Is the move what escalated things? I mean it's 3 bed house and there were 3 adults and 6 kids living there. I had 3 under 5 (that was crazy) at one point, they had 4 very young kids and obviously the older two.
Or did they pulled her out of school first and then changed address?

Their house was crazy overcrowded, but this doesn't explain what happened.

Lots of families live like this and don't torture their children.

howrudeforme · 17/10/2024 00:53

I wonder if this was a local authority move. Their previous home appears to been a flat (given their neighbour above has spoken to press).

Sara RIP.

JemimaTab · 17/10/2024 01:08

I think that cuts right to it, and why we all struggle with it. Nothing actually "explains" a crime like this. Not overcrowding - because other families live like this without torturing and murdering a child. Not the culture / religion of the parents / step-parent / uncle - because other families with the same culture / religion somehow manage not to torture and murder their child. And so on.
We all want to try and make sense of it by finding an explanation, because it is so beyond any decent person's comprehension.
There's no explanation and no excuse, unfortunately. It seems this was just a coming together of cruel, evil, inadequate people who did not value this poor child's life at all, and either perpetrated this sustained torture and violence, or stood by in full awareness of what was happening and did not intervene. (And there is simply no way they could be unaware of the violence meted out to poor Sara - we are not talking about a few bruises here, which might be explained away as normal children's rough & tumble, she had multiple broken bones, brain injury, full skin depth burns, she would have been very clearly in severe pain and disabled by her injuries. You simply could not be unaware of this under your own roof).
I have no answers. It's an incredibly distressing case.

Elleherd · 17/10/2024 05:48

howrudeforme · 16/10/2024 20:50

I understand that the eldest child is Sara’s full brother. The other children are half siblings.

Looks like the violence went on for a long time. it goes to show that the hatred for an ex partner can be much greater than the love for their child. He had the upper hand. The mother was denied contact over time. But more will come about her and why she lost custody.

this stuff about Sara being naughty is nonsense, surely? The abuse went on for a long time and if a child is subject to violence surely they will soon learn to be subdued and not display ‘naughty’ behaviour?

IME children become superficially subdued, but parts of them inside remain intact, eventually down to the look in their eyes, and it is those final parts the batterer seeks to control and annihilate. The parameters of what is deemed 'naughty' or 'unacceptable' can be unavoidable for the child and are fluid.

The child doesn't do something fast enough, well enough, forgets to do something and gets hit. Child is just like other ex parent, grandparent, whoever let parent down in their eyes.
Child is punished at school for looking manky or not having the correct uniform, which is an implied criticism of the parent in parents eyes when they find out, so they explode at the child that they aren't worthy of being supplied with uniform,clean underwear etc, but have now drawn criticism and attention on the parent. Child is battered for being punished.
Child can't stomach a type of food, and tries to not eat it, struggles to get it down fast enough, or vomits, (especially if force fed it) then the child is antagonizing the parent, then deliberately making a disgusting mess, but most of all displaying 'choice' and personality, neither of which it is entitled to have, and thus is 'defiant.'
Children are described as 'resilient' because even battered stupid they semi explore their world, and find small joys in moments. It can infuriate a batterer.
Child is locked somewhere and eventually wets itself or pees in a corner in desperation. Naughty and disgusting.
Abuser is asked about bruises, so child is failing to protect the adult well enough which translates as the child is trying to get the adult into trouble.
Child is beaten so badly they soil themselves, (it's where getting the shit kicked out of you comes from and is involuntary) Proof of how inherently disgusting they are.
Parameters change again, the child is told the abuser can see their thoughts through the look on their face, in their eyes, so looks away or at the floor to hide it, and is now guilty of not looking at their abuser when being screamed at for how they are looking. The abuser either snaps or calculatedly decides to beat it out of the child.
When it fails, strangling and waterboarding start, then the need to cover the eyes, both to stop the look, stop them looking at their abuser,and to force the child to be inside themselves while being hurt.

I suffered serious and permanent injuries as a child but they didn't change the look that angered my mother so much. In school it got me hit, in 'care' the same look caused me to be beaten for defiance, and again by my guardian/husband, and others later in life.
Sibling didn't have it, but admitted to psychiatric hospital as a child, blaming me.

My files describe a 'deeply defiant look that causes discomfort for adults' to be in a room with me. It translated as 'being bad.'
A child psychologist deliberating on placements, described it as "a penetrating thousand yard stare of judgement." I've learnt to cover it better, but it's still there, not intentional in any way and can't be beaten or tortured out.

Some children no matter what is done to them will reflect some of it back in their eyes, and abusers are particularly prone to spotting and being offended by it.

I don't want to upset anyone with what I understand and know, it's the hoods, they are such a big tell.

Elleherd · 17/10/2024 06:59

We all want to try and make sense of it by finding an explanation, because it is so beyond any decent person's comprehension.

There is a group of people who are perfectly decent, who can comprehend only too well. I believe we call it 'lived experience' if they happen to have survived it.
They cannot be heard because society needs them to either be eternally victimized, too damaged, or be perpetrators themselves. We are afraid and mistrustful of them if they don't conform to damaged and victimized status, so must be potential 'cruel and inadequate' people themselves, after all what does it say about a person if they do understand?

Prejudices we already hold must be applied as the obvious explanations of how these things happen, because decent people can't understand. It keeps the social herd connected, to 'other' those who do.

We pick on the idea of crucifying home educators, hijabi wearers, step parents, others cultures, etc because they are 'other' and we don't like it.
Abusers generally 'other' their target as well to justify their prejudices.

We all have more in common than we like to accept.

If poor Sara had survived, I doubt she'd have been listened to much.

Peonies007 · 17/10/2024 07:47

Elleherd · 17/10/2024 05:48

IME children become superficially subdued, but parts of them inside remain intact, eventually down to the look in their eyes, and it is those final parts the batterer seeks to control and annihilate. The parameters of what is deemed 'naughty' or 'unacceptable' can be unavoidable for the child and are fluid.

The child doesn't do something fast enough, well enough, forgets to do something and gets hit. Child is just like other ex parent, grandparent, whoever let parent down in their eyes.
Child is punished at school for looking manky or not having the correct uniform, which is an implied criticism of the parent in parents eyes when they find out, so they explode at the child that they aren't worthy of being supplied with uniform,clean underwear etc, but have now drawn criticism and attention on the parent. Child is battered for being punished.
Child can't stomach a type of food, and tries to not eat it, struggles to get it down fast enough, or vomits, (especially if force fed it) then the child is antagonizing the parent, then deliberately making a disgusting mess, but most of all displaying 'choice' and personality, neither of which it is entitled to have, and thus is 'defiant.'
Children are described as 'resilient' because even battered stupid they semi explore their world, and find small joys in moments. It can infuriate a batterer.
Child is locked somewhere and eventually wets itself or pees in a corner in desperation. Naughty and disgusting.
Abuser is asked about bruises, so child is failing to protect the adult well enough which translates as the child is trying to get the adult into trouble.
Child is beaten so badly they soil themselves, (it's where getting the shit kicked out of you comes from and is involuntary) Proof of how inherently disgusting they are.
Parameters change again, the child is told the abuser can see their thoughts through the look on their face, in their eyes, so looks away or at the floor to hide it, and is now guilty of not looking at their abuser when being screamed at for how they are looking. The abuser either snaps or calculatedly decides to beat it out of the child.
When it fails, strangling and waterboarding start, then the need to cover the eyes, both to stop the look, stop them looking at their abuser,and to force the child to be inside themselves while being hurt.

I suffered serious and permanent injuries as a child but they didn't change the look that angered my mother so much. In school it got me hit, in 'care' the same look caused me to be beaten for defiance, and again by my guardian/husband, and others later in life.
Sibling didn't have it, but admitted to psychiatric hospital as a child, blaming me.

My files describe a 'deeply defiant look that causes discomfort for adults' to be in a room with me. It translated as 'being bad.'
A child psychologist deliberating on placements, described it as "a penetrating thousand yard stare of judgement." I've learnt to cover it better, but it's still there, not intentional in any way and can't be beaten or tortured out.

Some children no matter what is done to them will reflect some of it back in their eyes, and abusers are particularly prone to spotting and being offended by it.

I don't want to upset anyone with what I understand and know, it's the hoods, they are such a big tell.

Thank you for explaining it so well. Sorry you went through that, that's horrible.

greenday16B · 17/10/2024 08:54

I think we try to comprehend, to apply our own experiences , our own template.

Mine wasn't great at all. Still can't comprehand the neighbour who ignored the situation.

They were locked into something absolutely wrong and evil weren't they?

Dreadfully sorry to read other people's lived experiences.

GiveMeSpanakopita · 17/10/2024 09:32

Elleherd · 15/10/2024 21:40

Ms Batool had blamed her husband, Urfan, for beating Sara 'black' in a series of WhatsApp messages dating to 2019, the Old Bailey was told.
Sara's stepmother Beinash Batool messaged her sister Qandeela in 2020 complaining that Sharif was 'always shouting and hitting' his child, it was said.
In May 2021 she allegedly messaged her sister claiming: 'Urfan beat the cp out of Sara. She's covered in bruises, literally beaten black.'
Batool claimed that she wanted to report Sharif saying: 'I feel really sorry for Sara' adding 'poor girl can't walk' and 'I really want to report him'.
In February 2022, she allegedly told her other sister Amima that her husband was 'beating Sara up…cos she's being naughty'.
She went on: 'Sara has anxiety, whatever she eats she vomits out…something happens to Sara I will not be able to forgive myself.'
In the summer of 2022, Batool is said to have messaged Qandeela again saying: 'I can't even cover it up. He beat Sara up yesterday and I can't send her to school on Monday looking like that.'

Sara was finally murdered in August 2023 in what would have been the school holidays if she had still been educated at school, having been being severely beaten while at school for at least four years.

Please look at the dates and how long this was going on for and how she was at school while "beaten black" and "poor girl can't walk"* *" I can't send her to school on Monday looking like that." but according to so many being at school during those four years was supposedly this great protective factor...

It wasn't.
It wasn't when I was a battered and neglected child either. I was eventually removed following an incident that exposed the conditions I was in, despite school having repeatedly punished me for what was clearly outside of my control as a child and disparaged me for my visible state and bruises.
I was then seriously abused in 'care', later returned to a still dysfunctional 'home' to be a child carer until parent died, later proceeded to be abused by my guardian, who is the father of most of my children and who I married two days after my 16th birthday, signed off by an approving social services.

No one is learning. From Maria Colwell to Sara Shariff the same communication issues, and supposed incorrect protective factors, failure to follow procedures, focus on abusers 'strengths' and overloaded SW's come up again, and again, and again.

People are trying to blame home education, hijabs, step parents, cultures, men, ... most of it is knee jerk reactions and will do little to stop the next child being tortured and killed. Abusers will exploit every weakness of any system.

Lessons will be learned, but rarely the right ones.
There are procedures that social services are supposed to, and often do, follow, when there are even low level concerns.
A child giving confused explanations of bruising is a major red flag that should alone have brought swift investigation.
Being withdrawn from school to be supposedly home educated or any other reason, following reports of bruising, should have ramped up the urgency of a home visit.
It didn't and we will have to wait for the serious case review to find out why not.

I don't want to hang blame on social services unreasonably, we only hear about what they get wrong most of the time, but there needs to be a massive review of what is going wrong both in failure to communicate clearly and promptly, failure to follow procedures, and in the positive weight so wrongly and willingly assigned by them, to some parents and why. Some things just aren't changing.

A few days ago I put my neck on the line for the 16th time in several years over the same set of children in a very dangerous situation. I spelled out exactly why and how Child Protection and the police where failing these children and what they where falling for, and how the perpetrators where so easily hiding and fudging easily available evidence, and running rings round them. It isn't rocket science but I acknowledge I'm only looking at the obvious behaviors of one family, so considerably easier for me to be focused on patterns and 'co-incidences'.

The incident I was reporting was very serious and very violent in anyone's book, leaving visible injuries and plentiful evidence everywhere.
I intervened at the time despite previous grief, and am now right in the firing line for inevitable revenge.
Lots of witnesses, but no one called the police. Everyone's given up reporting.

Not enough has ever been done. But plenty done to those who spoke up.
Too much stress has been put on the wrong things as being positives, and a lack of curiosity about patterns, evidence and the 'co-incidental' disappearance /un- availability of evidence especially on the children themselves, allowing the abusers playbook to run, and run, and run.

(The person who took my report did listen carefully and agreed it well over the threshold for intervention, but still needed to have words about my politically unacceptable use of 'cocklodger', (I just couldn't think how else to sum up what they did and didn't do within the family) and 'fat' as a physical descriptor, and asked me to find a descriptor other than fat or obese, also over another less offensive descriptor, even having tried and tried to get earlier intervention and now trying to prevent inevitable further extreme violence and threatened death of a child, policing the language of the witness was a part of their job...
I'm generally polite, but not quite PC enough, I'm too LC, not 'Naice', I'm from a tough background, but those are also the qualifications to know exactly what I'm looking at. The focus is in the wrong places.)

Oh @Elleherd thank you for your brave and moving post. It touched me right where I live, I too was punished at school for presenting in a poor and broken and dirty state due to abuse I was suffering at home and covering up. I agree with every word of your post and I feel your words deeply. I hope and pray that you are living a life full of joy and happiness. You really deserve that.

greenday16B · 17/10/2024 09:37

4 years, the school observed this? I can't get my head around this at all.

I feel like in the constant push to achive, to be in the top group, to assess , to examine and so on the kindness and compassion has gone out of Primary Education.

roxyro · 17/10/2024 09:46

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 16/10/2024 17:37

I haven't said a word about her innocence other that to remind the people calling for her to be assaulted that she is, in fact, innocent.

If you think the law is incorrect, then normal people petition for the law to be changed, not repeatedly assert that people should have their rights ignored, the law broken, considered guilty as soon as they are arrested, and assaulted by police to force compliance.

Frankly, it's ridiculous that I'm the one being accused of trolling, when all I've done is try to honestly answer questions and explain why the police can't just go ignoring the law, and this thread is full of users claiming they'd happily beat seven bells out of innocent people.

You’ve contradicted yourself in your first sentence. You’ve stated, quite falsely, that people on here are wishing to beat seven bells out of innocent people. We’re advocating police brutality. Just made up nonsense.

There is only one conclusion to draw from your posts - you’re a troll. On such a serious and heart wrenching issue too. Shameful.

MulinoDarco · 17/10/2024 09:56

Elleherd · 17/10/2024 05:48

IME children become superficially subdued, but parts of them inside remain intact, eventually down to the look in their eyes, and it is those final parts the batterer seeks to control and annihilate. The parameters of what is deemed 'naughty' or 'unacceptable' can be unavoidable for the child and are fluid.

The child doesn't do something fast enough, well enough, forgets to do something and gets hit. Child is just like other ex parent, grandparent, whoever let parent down in their eyes.
Child is punished at school for looking manky or not having the correct uniform, which is an implied criticism of the parent in parents eyes when they find out, so they explode at the child that they aren't worthy of being supplied with uniform,clean underwear etc, but have now drawn criticism and attention on the parent. Child is battered for being punished.
Child can't stomach a type of food, and tries to not eat it, struggles to get it down fast enough, or vomits, (especially if force fed it) then the child is antagonizing the parent, then deliberately making a disgusting mess, but most of all displaying 'choice' and personality, neither of which it is entitled to have, and thus is 'defiant.'
Children are described as 'resilient' because even battered stupid they semi explore their world, and find small joys in moments. It can infuriate a batterer.
Child is locked somewhere and eventually wets itself or pees in a corner in desperation. Naughty and disgusting.
Abuser is asked about bruises, so child is failing to protect the adult well enough which translates as the child is trying to get the adult into trouble.
Child is beaten so badly they soil themselves, (it's where getting the shit kicked out of you comes from and is involuntary) Proof of how inherently disgusting they are.
Parameters change again, the child is told the abuser can see their thoughts through the look on their face, in their eyes, so looks away or at the floor to hide it, and is now guilty of not looking at their abuser when being screamed at for how they are looking. The abuser either snaps or calculatedly decides to beat it out of the child.
When it fails, strangling and waterboarding start, then the need to cover the eyes, both to stop the look, stop them looking at their abuser,and to force the child to be inside themselves while being hurt.

I suffered serious and permanent injuries as a child but they didn't change the look that angered my mother so much. In school it got me hit, in 'care' the same look caused me to be beaten for defiance, and again by my guardian/husband, and others later in life.
Sibling didn't have it, but admitted to psychiatric hospital as a child, blaming me.

My files describe a 'deeply defiant look that causes discomfort for adults' to be in a room with me. It translated as 'being bad.'
A child psychologist deliberating on placements, described it as "a penetrating thousand yard stare of judgement." I've learnt to cover it better, but it's still there, not intentional in any way and can't be beaten or tortured out.

Some children no matter what is done to them will reflect some of it back in their eyes, and abusers are particularly prone to spotting and being offended by it.

I don't want to upset anyone with what I understand and know, it's the hoods, they are such a big tell.

@Elleherd your post brought tears to my eyes..it made me visualise what Sara has been through with the hood. I'm so so sorry what you've been through, what she's been through and other than this sadness I don't know what to do or to say... After Arthur I couldn't sleep and remember him everyday. Same now with Sara. Feel so helpless and angry at these people, the people who let the enabling factors happen...

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 17/10/2024 10:34

roxyro · 17/10/2024 09:46

You’ve contradicted yourself in your first sentence. You’ve stated, quite falsely, that people on here are wishing to beat seven bells out of innocent people. We’re advocating police brutality. Just made up nonsense.

There is only one conclusion to draw from your posts - you’re a troll. On such a serious and heart wrenching issue too. Shameful.

You’ve contradicted yourself in your first sentence.

No, I have not.

There is nothing "contradictory" about reiterating that until someone is convicted at trial, they are innocent. They are not guilty at the point of arrest, or guilty at the point of interview, or guilty at the point of criminal trial, they are guilty at the point whereby a jury concludes their guilt, and until that point their right to presumed innocence is inherent.

You’ve stated, quite falsely, that people on here are wishing to beat seven bells out of innocent people. We’re advocating police brutality. Just made up nonsense

Really?

All of the following are quotes from this thread -

I don’t care if she claims abuse of coercion, I hope someone takes pleasure in removing those teeth for her

Pity its not legal to grab her teeth with a pliers and yank them out of her head

Force her face into the teeth mould

Hold her down and force her jaw open

Bloody hold the evil creature down and take them! Disgusting to think of her 'rights' being respected like that. I feel revolted by our legal system

The idea of people pussyfooting around those filthy demons is monstrous

well someone should knock her whole fucking teeth out ! And take an impression…sadists!

It IS revolting that she is allowed to refuse and they should be taken from her by force

No doubt you'll continue to insist this is "just made up nonsense" and screech about trolls.

roxyro · 17/10/2024 10:40

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 17/10/2024 10:34

You’ve contradicted yourself in your first sentence.

No, I have not.

There is nothing "contradictory" about reiterating that until someone is convicted at trial, they are innocent. They are not guilty at the point of arrest, or guilty at the point of interview, or guilty at the point of criminal trial, they are guilty at the point whereby a jury concludes their guilt, and until that point their right to presumed innocence is inherent.

You’ve stated, quite falsely, that people on here are wishing to beat seven bells out of innocent people. We’re advocating police brutality. Just made up nonsense

Really?

All of the following are quotes from this thread -

I don’t care if she claims abuse of coercion, I hope someone takes pleasure in removing those teeth for her

Pity its not legal to grab her teeth with a pliers and yank them out of her head

Force her face into the teeth mould

Hold her down and force her jaw open

Bloody hold the evil creature down and take them! Disgusting to think of her 'rights' being respected like that. I feel revolted by our legal system

The idea of people pussyfooting around those filthy demons is monstrous

well someone should knock her whole fucking teeth out ! And take an impression…sadists!

It IS revolting that she is allowed to refuse and they should be taken from her by force

No doubt you'll continue to insist this is "just made up nonsense" and screech about trolls.

Methinks the poster doth protest too much!

Strange.

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 17/10/2024 10:45

roxyro · 17/10/2024 10:40

Methinks the poster doth protest too much!

Strange.

In what way is dismantling your nonsense post "strange"?

DalRiata · 17/10/2024 10:51

@XDownwiththissortofthingX

Something I have noticed is every single other poster on this thread has expressed horror, dismay, sadness, shock, anguish at what this child went through. Everyone single one except you. You haven't even acknowledged her.
You've spent the entire thread salivating over the word innocent in connection with the three adults that have abused and torturered a child to death. Post after post you have goaded people with your obsession with reinstating over and over again the innocence of these three and how important their rights, respect and dignity are. It comes across as wildly inappropriate on a thread where people are understandably upset. There is something very odd and unnatural about your posts which is why people are reaching in a negative way to your comments.
As I've said before, everyone understands the basic underpinnings of the legal system - you seem frantically fixated on this in way that is very unnatural.

There is a phenomenon where disturbed individuals have a macabre and ghoulish attraction to killers.. Josef Fritzel had women sending him their underwear in prison.

You are giving off those vibes.

ICantLogIn · 17/10/2024 11:07

I couldn't see what way to vote (so I didn't). I'm sure nobody thinks it's U to feel nauseous at reading this.

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 17/10/2024 11:07

@DalRiata

I only responded in the thread to begin with to provide honest answers to a couple of questions, and point out the absurdity of people demanding the law be ignored because of the anger at what this person is alleged to have done.

You immediately jumped on that, and exclaimed incredulity I was suggesting this person is "innocent", i.e. not involved in this matter, and even other posters pulled you up about that being a deliberate, disingenuous interpretation of my post.

I've since been accused of "bleating", and "trolling", and I'm not going to back down just because you and @roxyro seem dead set on having the police assault people in order to gather evidence, and can't seem to grasp the fundamental reasons why that's an idiotic suggestion.

Now you're bringing up Josef Fritzel, which is, frankly, bizarre.

The reason I haven't expressed any sort of outrage is twofold - 1. It's not why I came into this thread, 2. It goes without saying that anybody would be outraged by what has happened, and the suggestion that not having expressly commented as much equates to somehow being a ghoul, is ridiculous and offensive.

MulinoDarco · 17/10/2024 11:21

@XDownwiththissortofthingX please just go away.

Appleandoranges · 17/10/2024 11:37

That's a very remarkable description of the interaction between abused and the abuser by Elleherd above. Maybe there's something remarkable and resilient about the abused children which makes the abuser go to extraordinary lengths to take out that spark. Maybe in some way they are even jealous as they detect in the child has something unique and special they don't have. So many missed opportunities with these abused children. Why didn't the sister in law do anything? Surely if a child has such visible injuries which are inflicted at home, they should be taken away for a short time, no matter what the child says. There should be some way of taking a child away in an emergency.

Peonies007 · 17/10/2024 12:10

Appleandoranges · 17/10/2024 11:37

That's a very remarkable description of the interaction between abused and the abuser by Elleherd above. Maybe there's something remarkable and resilient about the abused children which makes the abuser go to extraordinary lengths to take out that spark. Maybe in some way they are even jealous as they detect in the child has something unique and special they don't have. So many missed opportunities with these abused children. Why didn't the sister in law do anything? Surely if a child has such visible injuries which are inflicted at home, they should be taken away for a short time, no matter what the child says. There should be some way of taking a child away in an emergency.

There already is a way. Police can take a child into emergency custody for 24hrs from what husband told me. That it went on for so long is a failure of school/SS/neighbours/system/whoever knew. Ultimately 'lessons will be learned' again

Elleherd · 17/10/2024 13:05

Your husband is correct. During that 24 hours an emergency court hearing can be convened, and further time allocated. (sadly these powers have previously been abused by SS, anecdotally leading to caution from police)
Also the police can with (or without) SS, enter any home, property or premises, without a warrant under 'Exigent Circumstances' to check on the welfare of a child. (or anyone)

It's used all the time for situations where immediate action is needed to protect public safety, secure or collect crucial evidence, and the delay in acquiring a warrant would allow the disposal or removing of evidence. This includes hiding a victim.
Probable Cause is used in welfare checks on it feels everyone except battered children.

'Removed from school to be home educated' (see also 'child/family unavailable as visiting relatives/friends') is being seen as some sort of get out clause as to why a bruised child (not the 1st either) could now not be seen by authorities, when actually the opposite is true, but it suits to hide behind the idea that these things are the issue as to why the child wasn't seen. Lets focus on the thing hidden behind rather than why we do that.
Think hard on this, it's in the abusers standard playbook, and so well known, so why does it still work?

Additionally, when coroners say 'broken bones could be more or less recent- because of healing or not ' I assume that's through x-raying and guessing.
X-rays only show so far back.

  • my history was forced back onto me when a scan suggested I had some terrible disease, because modern technology revealed large numbers of bones with different growth ages and spurts from different periods, and I had to very embarrassingly reveal that I'd been suffering untreated broken bones for as long as I could remember. Scans revealed it included before I could remember too.
They also showed up serious flesh injuries including stitching from long ago.

In such vicious murders this sort of scanning should be done. (TTBOMK death doesn't affect results particularly) It would help to show just how long suffering had been occurring and make it harder for the perpetrators to receive parole later. (It might help further subject understanding as well, ie did injuries start at the same time as specific events?)
I would also like to see luminol and blood age testing used on their residences extensively, for the same reasons.

We all need to be prepared to meet the costs of those trying to prevent horrendous abuse and also those trying to prove it, or face up to what we see as most important really.

MulinoDarco · 17/10/2024 13:14

Elleherd, I hope a real task force is formed which includes people who have gone through this like you. You have understanding and suggestions that, unfortunately, come from a real place. I admire your articulation and strength.

We all need to be prepared to meet the costs of those trying to prevent horrendous abuse and also those trying to prove it, or face up to what we see as most important really.

I'd very gladly pay taxes for real change. What I really despise is having to pay to keep such evil beings alive and comforted instead.

greenday16B · 17/10/2024 13:41

If anybody anywhere " learns" anything from this it is better to interfere and run the risk of looking daft than to be silent.