Former teacher guilty of sexually abusing and murdering baby boy he wanted to adopt - CPS

[IwantToRetire]

Distressing content
-----

A former teacher has been found guilty of sexually abusing and murdering a baby boy that he planned to adopt.

Jamie Varley, 37, was convicted at Preston Crown Court of murder, child cruelty, sexual offences and indecent images relating to 13-month-old Preston Davey.

John McGowan-Fazakerley, 32, was convicted of allowing the death of a child, child cruelty and sexual assault.

Varley was in the process of adopting baby Preston (also known as Elijah) with his partner McGowan-Fazakerley. Just four months after being placed with the couple, Preston was taken to Blackpool Victoria Hospital unconscious and in cardiac arrest. Sadly, Preston could not be saved.

Varley tried falsely claiming that Preston had accidentally drowned in a bath, but prosecutors were able to prove that his injuries were consistent with his airways being obstructed.

The evidence presented by the prosecution proved that in the final months of Preston’s life, he was routinely ill-treated, sexually abused and physically assaulted – suffering more than 40 separate injuries.

CPS statement continues at https://www.cps.gov.uk/north-west/news/former-teacher-guilty-sexually-abusing-and-murdering-baby-boy-he-wanted-adopt

More from a BBC report - also distressing:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyp77l79e9o

I thought there was a thread about this, but cant find one. But sorry if a duplicate.

I really only wanted to post out of respect for this poor baby and the horror of his short life.

RIP

Just to clarify: his mother wasn't 14 years old when she had him. She was 14 when she murdered a pensioner. She had the baby later in life.

His family were not all criminals. Maternal grandmother is already the carer for the baby's sister. She was keen to take him as well, but had had a masectomy and cancer treatment, and needed a couple of months to recover strength, before her surgeons would let her lift a baby. The foster mother was eager to just extend the foster period a little, so she could keep him until grandmother was strong enough. Social workers would not allow anything so obviously in the best interests of the baby. Not if it spoiled their aim of ticking a box on gay ideology.

Fingers crossed (although I hope no prison guards get caught in the crossfire)

I've just read this interesting article from a previous adoptee child murder case. From, again, two men.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/aug/23/social-workers-adoption-system-failings
"Typically, adopters whose application is approved will continue to be represented by the social worker who assessed them. This means that their social worker is invested in the adopters having a child placed in their care – it is on the basis of their professional judgment that this recommendation is made. But it is also in the interests of the child’s social worker for them to be placed with an adopter, because otherwise there would be a delay to the child being provided with a long-term placement. "

I think this bias towards the adoptive parents has been again a huge contributing factor towards Prestons death.

Perhaps we need to end the culture of adoption is best for every child in care - especially for infants and children up to age 5. They are going to disproportionately suffer from attachment issues regardless of being with foster parents - so perhaps once a suitable caring foster has been found, it must be funded and supported and expected to be long term? I know there's issues with the amount and quality of suitable foster carers. Could there be reforms to attract more? More children's homes? New job roles created ? Idk

I think too often there is still the dream of an adoptive couple swoop in and raise a baby and have little contact with the birth family. A "fresh start"

Well I dont know if it was about box ticking, but how in any real world would you not want a baby to have the chance to grow up with a sibling and a grandmother.

If it was the question of just a few more months, surely he could have stayed with the foster mother.

This is just totally illogical, and cruel. To not let him be part of his biological family.

+

Fucking hell, if that’s true, that’s shocking & all
involved should be criminally punished for failing in their duties.

Absolutely terrible. So hugely against common sense best practice for childhood psychosocial development.

I agree with this. I think the current system is loaded with problems but it takes a tragedy to draw attention to it. In the case of Leiland-James Corkhill, his mother was not a criminal or guilty of anything other than a propensity for choosing unsuitable partners.

Mum is 41/42 but convicted of murder at 14.

Has committed no crime in this context though.

Here’s hoping!
Animals don’t this but humans do it’s sick and depraved.

I don't think anyone has suggested that?

I agree about the enabling. But I, too, doubt that it's just about 'sacred groups' although it may be a part of it - that'll partly be down to whatever policies the adoption agency have in placement.

I think the issues here are much wider than that, not only in the bias that seems to have been involved (class, as someone said, is a feature, as well as those 'professional markers' like teacher, safeguarding lead blah blah, though I'd have thought knowledge these days would make people more aware rather than less that that does not make someone a fine upstanding citizen necessarily, as several recent cases have demonstrated). Edit: and to add, as others have said, yes bias towards adoption and adopters as the 'ideal' end point is a part of this too.

It's also about the joined up thinking of the agencies involved. The failures of those dots being joined is something that's come up in previous cases and are known risks or issues in such cases. It's not just "hindsight" or individual incidents, and awareness of the particular features and patterns to watch out for in such cases are not new, hence they are meant to be part of guidelines already. But I suspect standards have slipped for one reason or another.

The adoption process does seem to have been remarkably quick, esp for such a young baby, but we don't know how that would compare with, say, a heterosexual couple. I do think the usual "professional curiosity" that is meant to be there at all times (and many people HAVE experienced from their own social workers, so it's not 'everyone' in the system who is failing) doesn't seem to have been in this case.

You don't just accept the adults' explanation without checking. It is something those who are supposed to be monitoring are warned about, especially in cases of looked after children. There are red flags all over this.

I know, just really feel the media have been inappropriate in the extreme in publicising her name.

That case was the one I referred to in my earlier post. Poor Elsie had a number of previous injuries yet the red flags were ignored. Some idiot even wrote about how lovely ‘dad’ was - that’s the ‘dad’ who broke her leg, shook her and eventually killed her. These imbeciles are incapable of correctly assessing ‘sacred castes’ because they’re too busy grinning inanely at how clever and lovely they are, and they automatically assume they’re great and everything is better than fine. They sit there patting themselves on the back for being so ‘open-minded’ while anyone with half a brain would have spotted something was wrong.

In Elsie’s case too, a family member wanted to look after her but she was rejected annd Elsie was placed with these two men instead - and was killed two weeks after she was officially adopted.

On a slightly different point, but also makes me think how were these men thinking / rationalising. Because of their extreme behaviour they have just added to the prejudice some people have that all gay men are perverts.

Their self absorbed entitlement is hard to fathom.

And because of that an innocent baby suffered terrible harm and died.

Couldn't AI or something design a test to weed out people (men) who must have highly disturbed thought patterns and extreme self justification to so easily break all norms.

He was born with an opioid in his system, all be it one I believe given as an alternative to street drugs in pregnancy.

In my experience ( ran women's refuge services, and yes only biological women)

I was involved in trying to fend off care proceedings against “feckless”women who had dangerous men in their lives.

What was stark was that we had women in refuge who were protecting their children from sexual abuse.

what was lamentable was that social workers seemed to struggle with this concept, and the mothers assertions were often received with scepticism.

I had a case of a step dad rape of a 12 year old which the social worker deemed consensual

The worst one was a child with anal warts, he was two.

the Social services day nursery workers phoned me up crying as referrals in to their own council team did nothing,, his behaviour deteriorated every time he had enforced contact.

Mother was young and emotionally paralysed by the situation.

we took it in to family court.

CAFCAS and social care, as did dad’s barrister argued for contact.

Luckily we had a shit hot team of a solicitor and barrister.

I could write a book.

we need independent oversight where children are involved which is not attached to statutory services.

BTW NSPCC are equally shit

I saw the birth mum’s details are all over the place she was a murderer at age 14.

I know and I don’t thibk anything in my post suggested that. I only clarified she isn’t 14.

This is so shocking but thanks for sharing. And not in fact that unusual.

I never understand when the media and politicians talk about domestic violence they never ask women working in refuges to comment or contribute.

Or maybe (although another burden on over worked staff) social workers have to spend some time working in a refuge.

Ah, I see what you're getting at. Yes, I agree.

OMG.

There needs to be a trial into the social workers.

I'm sorry but Mumsnet deleting posts that presumably had people saying two men shouldn't be allowed to adopt is part of the same problem that led to be people being obsessed with not being called bigots as their priority when it came to making sure a baby wasn't murdered.

We MUST be allowed to discuss this.