To think the John Hunt family murders show how poorly coercive control is still understood?

[OrangeCrushes]

Heard a little feature on Radio 4 on the Victoria Derbyshire interview with John Hunt regarding the murder of his wife and daughters (Carol, Louise and Hannah). Louise apparently was the primary target of the attacks, which were committed by her ex partner Kyle Clifford. He also raped her.

I want to say up top that I don't in any way blame Louise's family for what happened to them and I am heartbroken that another woman (and her family) have died at the hands of an abusive man. But I am also devastated to see that even the remaining family members can't seem to understand abuse. What hope does any woman have if that's the case?

John Hunt claims that Clifford wasn't coercively controlling and seems to be offended by the suggestion. And yet, it certainly sounds like he was, as described in this Daily Fail article: "It was certain things, like Louise used to like wearing make-up but then she stopped wearing make-up - and that was down to Kyle."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13625845/amp/crossbow-killer-suspect-kyle-clifford-controlled-his-ex-girlfriend-for-six-months-by-stopping-her-from-wearing-make-up-staying-out-late-and-hanging-out-with-men-friends-reveal-before-shooting-her-dead-along-with-her-mother-and-sister.html

Some quotes below from a BBC article (with my commentary):

The signs were there, for someone who knows about abuse: "Clifford started to belittle her. When looking through the couple's text messages after Louise's death - something John says he found "very difficult to do" as the messages were personal to Louise - they noticed signs, from spring 2024, of "gentle manipulation"."

Myth that abuse always involves hitting and yelling: "Clifford never physically assaulted Louise when they were together. The family also never heard them raise their voices at each other."

It seems like the family are afraid of being blamed - but this would be an opportunity for them to raise awareness rather than deflect: "But I want to put it very bluntly now. Did we have any indication that this man was capable of stabbing my mother, of tying Louise up, of raping Louise, of shooting Louise and shooting Hannah? Absolutely not."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy5wk716pzdo.amp

Poll:
YABU: coercive control is now better understood and there is hope for the future

YANBU: coercive controllers are too good at what they do and abuse myths will win out long term

I didn't see the signs because no one had educated me about the signs.

I assume that the Hunt family also didn't know about coercive control, and they don't appear to understand it now.

Coercive controllers are like hunters. Their prey is kind people who can't conceive of the desire to own, control, and bully. Nice people who don't understand that predators like this exist don't have the tools they need to protect themselves.

PHSE/RSE in schools was supposed to educate about VAWG.

''79. Grooming, sexual exploitation and domestic abuse, including coercive and controlling behaviour, should also be addressed sensitively and clearly''

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62cea352e90e071e789ea9bf/Relationships_Education_RSE_and_Health_Education.pdf

My reaction to this was "yeah she did that's why she left him" she knew he was a wrongun that's why she broke up with him.

I thought exactly the same thing when I heard this. He clearly has no idea what coercive control is.

This man literally murdered these people. Up above I linked to an analysis of this exact murder by Jane Monckton-Smith showing that the signs were there (if only the people involved had the tools to recognise them, which of course they can't have been expected to have).

It is a mistake to dismiss this man as a maniac. His behaviour is in line with that of other dangerous and controlling men, with specific warning signs and recognisable patterns.

There is no insult to the family to say that in hindsight there were signs that Clifford was dangerous, and with better education, similar tragedies can be avoided in the future.

This is it. If there was anything that could make life worse for you after the horrible murders of your family, it would surely be believing that you could have stepped in and stopped it if you'd realised. I can see why John believes there were no signs. Otherwise how would you cope?

Re the poll question, can't answer as it's in the middle. We've made a lot of progress. Still a lot to go though.

"Even" shows how very theoretical- and lacking compassion- your knowledge in this area is.
"Especially", is the correct word.
The people who knew this man, who had him over for dinner, who laughed with him and enjoyed his company, now have to grapple with the fact he brutally murdered and raped their own.
They have to live with lifelong crippling guilt of what if, what if I could have guessed, what if I could have saved them.
It is absolutely normal that they are both shocked he could have done this, and seeking to reassure themselves that they didn't see the signs.
They have not stood up for him or minimised his actions. They live with his actions in a far more real way than you do.
Shame on you for criticising them.

"John needs to believe that he couldn’t have seen this coming. "

He wouldn't have seen this coming because even the most controlling bastards rarely do what that man did.

I find this thread in terrible bad taste. You ARE explicitly criticising John Hunt and his daughter here OP, I don't care how you dress it up.

@OrangeCrusheswhy are you still doubling down and refusing to accept that what you’ve posted is critical and hurtful to a bereaved family?

You also quote media reports as if they’re truthful. You don’t realise they’re often far from accurate?

one thing which struck me about some of the reporting is that some reports say the mother, when she let Clifford into the house, welcomed him kindly but also told him that maybe in future relationships, he could do things differently. We can’t possibly know that this is true. Clifford and the mother were the only ones in the house at that point: he then stabbed her to death, so this report of what she allegedly said must be based presumably on what he told police later. It could well be a complete lie. He could have said that to imply that the family never liked him, or that there was some provocation….

Ultimately, the remaining family members are the ones who lived through this, who interacted with Clifford beforehand. It’s so deeply distasteful to start a thread using their experience second hand. Start a thread based on your own experience if the subject matters enough to you.

He feels horribly guilty. I imagine he’s trying to tell himself it was reasonable for him not to have seen it.

People say all sorts of things after tragedy; it often keeps them going even if others can see it differently

Why has this thread not been deleted yet?

Surely their point was that a monster doesn’t look like a monster.

They were there we were not. Don’t quote sensationalist newspaper version of facts to use as facts against people talking about their own terrible experiences. No amount of caveats and expressing sympathy justifies this.

There was footage from their home security cameras
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g7dvdpl3yo.amp

I voted YABU.
This thread is in extremely bad taste.

Not quite to the same extent but I work in a related field, and I didn’t see the signs. Spoke to them most weeks.

the bank picked it up in the end and it all blew apart. Complete control for many years. Every decision made for them. Who they saw, what they bought, where they bought it. Forced to live incredibly frugally while the abuser took every spare penny.

the interesting thing is many people still believe the abuser. They were only caring for them, helping them out. They were too old to manage their money, they needed someone to do it for them. Even when shown all the money gone directly into the abusers accounts and the enormous sums missing, it’s still well they were doing all the caring, maybe it’s what they wanted.

irony is they didn’t really need care. Fully competent, able to make decisions and get around, look after pets etc.

It’s a huge insult to the family. You are being hugely patronising if you think all of this hasn’t been trawled over by the family, their support network, the police and social workers.

If you want to raise awareness, fill your boots. But don’t use this poor family to make your point. Have a bit of respect.

This.

I heard part of the interview and, whilst having every sympathy with Mr Hunt, I think he maybe slightly naive about what was going on in his daughter's life. He may not have observed any abusive behaviour - fair enough, as maybe the boyfriend was able to control himself when the parents were around. And his daughter may have chosen not to discuss any of this with her parents, if anything, in order that they didn't worry. Even in close families, parents don't know everything about their adult children's lives
But maybe Mr Hunt doesn't want to consider the idea that something was going on, and he didn't spot it - that might just be too much for him to handle, so not blaming him at all.

@OrangeCrushes your situation sounds awful for your poor daughter with her father x

To your question OP…yes I think the signs is subtle coercive control are very difficult to identify. Louise lived with her parents and yet these signs went unnoticed. Did John ever say he and Carol spoke with Louise about Clifford or asked her about the breakup? As in “how did he handle the break up”? One image that haunts me is Carol opening the door to Clifford and allowing him into the house. Clearly he wasn’t recognized as dangerous or did she think…let him get his belongings and get going? I find myself saying….oh she was too controlling with DS. Didn’t want him going out with his friends but the controlling of appearance activities friend group each of of themselves seem “jealous boyfriend” not murderous mentally ill psychopath intent on annihilating the family.

Or….. he tells himself he didn’t see it because he didn’t see it.

I suppose my concern is that DV and coercive control are often swept under the rug or dismissed as flukes, the acts of maniacs, or completely inscrutable. This is harmful to people in coercively controlling relationships who could still escape safely.

Here, there is A LOT of reporting based on interviews with Louise's friends that make it clear that Louise was experiencing controlling behaviour from Clifford, to the extent that she broke it off.

There is then the undisputed fact that Clifford went on to murder Louise and most of her family.

I have great compassion for what John Hunt and his family have been through, and no one but they can know the grief that they feel. I fear that they may blame themselves even though coercive control and abuse is designed to confuse and to be difficult to spot. The only person to blame for these deaths is Kyle Clifford.

In any event, the family have chosen to speak publicly about this topic. It is confusing and concerning that they appear not to believe that there was any abuse prior to the murders, and I think that it is worthwhile to discuss and consider these public statements.

My greatest concern is that other potential victims and their families who are aware of the reports about the coercively controlling behaviour will now see these statements suggesting that there was no abuse and there were no warning signs at all.

To sum up, as this is a matter of public interest, and Clifford's conduct leading to these women's murder does seem to constitute coercive control, I think it is helpful to consider what coercive control is and to highlight the signs that could potentially have been spotted here.

Perhaps have a little think OP about how your horrible thread would read if you printed it out and handed it to the surviving family.
If you wouldn't have the balls to do that maybe think about what you've posted
This is not the context to debate education around DA using these extremely brave and dignified people as canon fodder to prove your argument.

@Hobnobswantshernameback I would hope that they would be inspired to learn more about abuse and how to spot the signs. I do not believe that I have said one thing that was disrespectful to them.