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.

What has happened to the rule of law in England?

30 replies

ByQuaintAzureWasp · 19/01/2026 13:03

I read the article below and was dumbfounded.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/schoolgirl-13-died-after-bed-33247080

A girl has died and the police are not allowed to interview the children?

It's as clear as daylight that this was arson and the girl was killed as a result.

Absolutely bonkers!

Schoolgirl, 13, died after bed was 'set on fire with a lighter'

The fatal incident came just six months after firefighters had been called to the family home to reports of another fire

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/schoolgirl-13-died-after-bed-33247080

OP posts:
ByQuaintAzureWasp · 21/01/2026 10:46

Bagsintheboot · 19/01/2026 14:02

It's tempting but too simplistic to look at it this way.

Firstly you'd have to prove they were negligent - and before you say it, the incident itself is not proof.

Then if the parents are jailed, the state has to fund care for a number of children, some of whom may have additional needs, and we must consider the additional trauma that would inflict on the children.

And then there's the awful possibility that no-one has considered in this thread - was it self-inflicted.

Ultimately what we have here is a family who will already be going through the worst possible hell. They have lost a child. That is worse than any jail time you could mandate.

The pros and cons of trying to criminalise a dead child / a child with additional needs / a child below the age of criminal responsibility and / or the parents of several traumatised children need to be weighed up. I doubt it would be in the public interest.

She was asleep in her bed when the fire was started ... how could it be self inflicted?

OP posts:
ByQuaintAzureWasp · 21/01/2026 10:48

Verytall · 21/01/2026 10:13

@ByQuaintAzureWasp i think you need to re read the article, the reason the children weren't interviewed was a police decision, supported by children's services.
The police won't interview for many reasons, a common one being if there is no chance of prosecution.

With respect, you need to re-read the article. The coroner stated that 'the police were prevented from gathering evidence'.

OP posts:
Bagsintheboot · 21/01/2026 10:53

ByQuaintAzureWasp · 21/01/2026 10:46

She was asleep in her bed when the fire was started ... how could it be self inflicted?

She was thought to be asleep in her bed.

Verytall · 21/01/2026 11:07

@ByQuaintAzureWasp that could be for many reasons though, it doesn't say parents refused?
It also doesn't mean that the evidence they're referring to is statements from the children?

It's clear you have a view and you're finding what you want to fit it.

CloakedInGucci · 21/01/2026 11:13

They have lost a child. That is worse any jail time you could mandate

Im not saying they should be jailed, obviously no one has any idea what has happened in this case.

But in general terms, I hate this argument. It gets said sometimes in threads where someone’s dangerous dog has killed their toddler “oh we can’t punish them, they’ve been through enough”. No. That’s absurd. If someone drove drunk, crashed their car, and killed their child in the back, would we say “poor thing, they’ve suffered enough, a death by dangerous driving charge would be just mean”.

As I said, I’m talking generally, not about this specific case where no one has details (nor do I think we are entitled to those details). But if the details are that they were in the wrong in some way, legally speaking, I would not agree at all with the idea that they shouldn’t be punished because losing a child is punishment enough.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page