Baby P

[GeraldineMumsnet]

Hi, to make it easier for people who are finding this subject very distressing, we're going to keep all Baby P posts in one thread. If you'd like to discuss this subject, then here is the thread to do so. We'll go on the other threads and link to this one. Thanks very much.

I don't know where that apostrophe in gets came from. Sorry.

#1 I have not named a rape victim, there are no names in any of the Times/BBC reports I linked to. I'm not aware that the name of the rape victim is in the public domain, even on the uncensored internet.

#2 I linked to two news reports without names in.

#3 There's nothing to say there's a link between the two, you can draw your own conclusions.

And FWIW, the identity of 'Baby P' and his mother most certainly was a very widely circulated fact when that first report was published.

The fact is however that Baby P remains legally anonymous, he is legally now 'Baby Peter'. So even if you want to look at those two news reports and draw your own conclusions, the fact remains that Baby P is anonymous, and so is the rape victim in this present case.

There is no reason at all to have deleted this post, so I am re-posting it.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/baby-p/5258093/Baby-P-Rape-of-girl-by-stepfather-puts-child-witnesse s-in-spotlight.html

Bernard Richmond QC, representing Baby P?s mother's boyfriend, was insistent in his questioning.

Initially the girl leant towards the camera and smiled as she insisted she understood what was meant by lying and shook her head when asked if she told ?fibs?.

But when an apparent contradiction in her evidence was highlighted, the girl clammed up and folded her arms.

Mr Richmond asked her about truth and lies before accusing her of dreaming up the story.

?Did someone else tell you to say it?? The little girl shook her head.

?Did you make it up?? he asked. After a long pause, she replied warily: ?I just??

?You don't tell fibs,? he said and she nodded.

?Whose idea was it?? No one,? she replied.

?Did you think it up yourself?? He received no reply.

But Mr Richmond persisted and was met with a wall of silence for the next four minutes: ?He didn't touch you, did he? Did he? I have to ask you one more time. We have to have an answer from you, he didn't touch you did he?

"I have to wait until I get your answer. He didn't touch you, did he?"

All this time, the victim seemed upset, chewing her fingernails and rubbing her arms.

After a short break, Mr Richmond resumed his line of questioning.

?Do you remember that you said to me, that you didn?t tell fibs? Is that true or a fib? What is truth??

By this point, the little girl was wiping her eyes and seemed desperate to leave.

?What does it mean if you shake your head? Yes or no?? There was no response.

That's true. There is no problem with reproducing that article. But I am very unhappy with your message of 17.42.28.

But I am very unhappy with your message of 17.42.28.

My message of 17.42.28 was phrased very carefully. It doesn't reveal anything at all, so don't suggest it does.

It's quite hard keeping track of what's being suppressed and what isn't. The media are not making it clear. Why was the sentencing in the original case not reported, even though it appeared in public court lists online?

Someguy - 'It's quite hard keeping track of what's being suppressed and what isn't'

Why are you troubling to do so then? This situation was a horrible tragedy for the first moment it appeared in the public eye - what is with the obsession some people seem to have with retelling it, and adding to it, and discussing it again. This thread started in NOVEMBER - do you really think there's anything useful to add to it now?

Good grief. The questioning of the child witness sounds horrific. Why on earth did the judge allow that to proceed?

I didn't realise that little tiny children were subjected to cross examination like this

I thought that they talked to a psychiatrist or someone who questioned them, and it was videoed, and they said what had happened through drawings and so on.

What the hell happened here? How can that defence lawyer sleep at night? I'm seriously gobsmacked, that is so cruel.

SomeGuy perhaps your message was deleted because you said that the victim was "'s _" IYKWIM. There was no mention of a family relationship to Baby P in the Guardian article.

And I agree with Edam. Good God, talk about leading questions and bullying. How does Mr Richardson sleep at night?

I am generally a liberal person, I work in the criminal justice system, I am an ex social worker. I have been involved in some horrible cases but this..............

I hope they rot in hell. He is clearly a violent psychopath and the mother beggars belief. Pure evil. One of the most devastating child (lack of) protection cases I know of. This and the Baby Peter case are now landmark cases in child safeguarding and we can only hope something is done to prevent this happening again.

I hope the little girl is in a lovely foster home and is adopted by beautiful and caring parents. She was able to stand up to horrific cross examination as a witness, what a brilliant little girl.

(And to think Sharon Shoesmith tried to claim unfair dismissal. FFS)

That is very disturbing questioning, leading and invasive.

"How can that defence lawyer sleep at night"

because every lawyer I've ever met would knowingly let a child killer walk the streets in order to a) win their case or b) profit financially or usually c) both.

why the heavy sarcasm namebacon?

I think many people are very surprised that our legal system sees fit to question 4 year olds in this way, on top of the rape she has been repeatedly accused by a grown up of being a liar.

It is appalling and I'm sure many people thought, like I did, that this type of evidence was tapen etc. Not that children had to face defence lawyers.

Not the behaviour of a civilised society IMO.

When I heard this yesterday it made me soo angry!

When they said his older sister I assumed she would be a 9YO or something, not that it makes it any better or worse IYKWIM, now I think more than ever that man should be locked up for a long time!

When they announced it on BBC yesterday they kept saying he raped another young girl with no mention of who but I heard them say several times 'the girl's mother who is currently awaiting sentence sat stone faced as the girl gave evidence' I heard this reported on the radio a few times too which has led me to the assumption that it is his older sister. If not I do apologise.

They also said police were furious because the step father had pled not guilty as he appeared to want the girl to be cross examined. Again this is what I heard atleast 3 times yesterday on the radio.

I do not understand how anyone could do what they did to any child never mind your own, to me that proves beyond doubt that they are far worse than evil!!!

I hope they get they have to go through a life of living hell from now on...and by that I don't mean beatings, heckles, or anythig like that I mean their concience if they have any sort of decency in there (which I sadly doubt) I hope they are tormented by their own thoughts and guilt everyday for the rest of tehri lives until they are most likely prematurely snuffed out...

If it does turn out for definate the girl is his sister it horrifies me even more what torture and torment went on in that house when it was supposed to be their safe place with mummy and step dad protecting them but those poor kids never got that, instead they were exposed to the worst evil I can recall.

Also it said yesterday the girl was cross examined via video link this annoyed me soo much ebcause my mum was sexually assaulted a few months back and she was'nt even allowed to be cross examined because it may be too traumatic so she done taped evidence, now how is it right that a 39YO woman can't give evidence due to trauma but a bloody 4YO can? That little girl was most likely terrified and amotional having to recall what happened.

Mamadiva the telegraph said that this has raised questions about how children should be treated when they are in this situation. The whole thing, the cross examination sounds appalling. What I don't understand is why the BBC keep saying it was taped evidence when in fact it wasn't, as if they are trying to keep the little girls second ordeal (ie the questioning) quiet.

This treatment of the child by the courts has been utterly shocking.

BTW i assumed it was the older sister too, I knew that there was an older child who had been taken into care and it makes sense, I mean how would they get access to other children in the care system. Not that it matters who she was really.

wasn't it taped evidence?

As far as i can tell there was the taped evidence initially and then the defence persn cross examined the little girl via videolink, repeatedly accusing her of lying. The room she had to give evidence from was not a friendly family style room, and there was no-one with her to "hold her hand" so to speak.

someguy's link of Fri 01-May-09 17:53:58 has it in.

fucking hell. poor kid.

What I wonder is how a 4 yr old can remember enough details about something that happened when she was only 2 in order to answer questions in court.
The entire saga is despicable. I just hope that some of the kids in that house will now be getting the right care/counselling to be able to recover from what they experienced/witnessed to live normal now.

normal lives I mean.
As for the perpetrators- they leave me cold. If the grandfather is an abuser too, the mother can only be a deeply damaged probably v vulnerable individual. Where does the cycle start? I know some people have lived through abuse and are decent people but sadly this is often not the case. Its so depressing. The stepfather enrages me beyond words.

Both of them disgust me regardless of past situation, to go on and do this too innocent children when you know how much it hurts makes it worse IMO.

Thing is perpetrators of such crimes have no empathy. Trauma in childhood affects the brain and often leads to flaws in personality development. No way am I excusing them but the people involved in this may have experienced poor childhoods too - maybe less so than what they inflicted on the poor children but enough to damage them.

There are other factors too of course. It's impossible for most people to comprehend how someone could commit such acts but that is because we don't think or feel like they do. They are not mentally ill, just extremely damaged probably sociopathic individuals.

If you lack empathy you are likely capable of alot of things unfortunately.

my understanding was that she had 4 kids by her husband. He left for whatever reason, didn't know what was going on re abuse.

Then she met this evil man and he directed his hate on to (at least some of) her four children, because they weren't his, and knocked her up to make one of his own (who was born while she was in prison).

It's fairly common for stepfathers to abuse their stepchildren - there's no biological bond.