I listened to a podcast about Mary Bell due to chat about her in this thread as I didn’t know about her background. There are parallels with how she presented and X. She tried to blame the other girl present for on of the killings as soon as she found out she had told the police the truth, she mirrored her story just made out the other girl was the perpetrator. She was also void of emotion and confident in her police interviews. MB had a terrible home life and there’s nothing we know to suggest X did but I thought the similarities were striking.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
That's absolutely what he has done. Except he got caught up in all this and caught lying at which point he 'didn't understand the question'.
Multiple times he said how he was feeling but the suddenly couldn't when convenient.
That's interesting. What podcast was it? Mary was considerably younger than X; that behaviour sounds very childlike to be honest.
She’ll probably be diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder or/with traits from cluster b personality disorders. Borderlines are known for being impulsive; this wasn’t an impulsive attack, it was a planned depraved murder. So I’m leaning towards her being a sociopath. And that’s not to say those with BPD couldn’t do what X did, just that all her behaviour seems to be much ‘more’ than a BPD diagnosis alone.
Yes I believe Mary was 10. It’s a series called Murder up north and the episode is a couple of years old
Hmm, these 'similarities' sound basic and predictable imo, rather than striking.
It's not unusual that children - or even adults - would blame the other person after denying it all. And in X's case we know that it's possible that Y in fact did the actual killing and she had no part in the practical action of stabbing. (Obviously she was involved in the planning and intent.)
It's also not unusual that children would act oddly in police interviews. And do we know for a fact that X was 'void of emotion' and confident in her police interviews? We know from Y's barrister that X laughed a lot; that's not void of emotion.
Btw something you said on the last thread I meant to respond to but it was finished:
In addition to this I respect the reasonable adjustments for Y, he has a diagnosis, whether people agree with it or not he has it and legally it made sense to support him through the trial. However girl X does not have a diagnosis, she has traits which many people have and will never even be assessed because they simply muddle through life. Girl X, undiagnosed should not have had any adjustments based on ND, just my opinion
I know they have said that Girl X "has traits of autism and ADHD" but I have wondered for a while now if that means she has traits of autism and she also has ADHD (diagnosed). It's ambiguously worded but that interpretation makes the most sense to me, because it's odd to say someone has traits of both with no diagnosis. Diagnosing someone as having ADHD with traits of autism IS something that is frequently done however; it what was said about my daughter until she was eventually properly diagnosed as having autism as well as ADHD from a specialist team after a thorough investigation.
Even if X only has traits of both, I think it's not just acceptable that she had 'reasonable adjustments' during the trial, but imperative. Because she's a child, and because schools for one are supposed to work on the basis that you accommodate the needs regardless of if there is a diagnosis.
ETA: And on the subject of autism and ADHD, we now know that Brianna had both.
Last edited:
Yes I read it as though she has an ADHD diagnosis with traits of autism - a common diagnosis for GIRLS. If she has traits of autism, I feel like she might have it. I’m no professional but being an autistic female myself, knowing how difficult it is for a female to be diagnosed compared to males, due to masking and social expectations of women and how we present different to men. I think I read women will get diagnosed with 7 different mental health disorders before they get the correct diagnosis of autism. Lots of women get put on long sections, drugged up on antipsychotics meds because the stress of autistic burn out causes them psychosis. So when I see a girl with ‘autistic traits’ it really does make me think. It’s a tit system for women, it really is.Hmm, these 'similarities' sound basic and predictable imo, rather than striking.
It's not unusual that children - or even adults - would blame the other person after denying it all. And in X's case we know that it's possible that Y in fact did the actual killing and she had no part in the practical action of stabbing. (Obviously she was involved in the planning and intent.)
It's also not unusual that children would act oddly in police interviews. And do we know for a fact that X was 'void of emotion' and confident in her police interviews? We know from Y's barrister that X laughed a lot; that's not void of emotion.
Btw something you said on the last thread I meant to respond to but it was finished:
In addition to this I respect the reasonable adjustments for Y, he has a diagnosis, whether people agree with it or not he has it and legally it made sense to support him through the trial. However girl X does not have a diagnosis, she has traits which many people have and will never even be assessed because they simply muddle through life. Girl X, undiagnosed should not have had any adjustments based on ND, just my opinion
I know they have said that Girl X "has traits of autism and ADHD" but I have wondered for a while now if that means she has traits of autism and she also has ADHD (diagnosed). It's ambiguously worded but that interpretation makes the most sense to me, because it's odd to say someone has traits of both with no diagnosis. Diagnosing someone as having ADHD with traits of autism IS something that is frequently done however; it what was said about my daughter until she was eventually properly diagnosed as having autism as well as ADHD from a specialist team after a thorough investigation.
Even if X only has traits of both, I think it's not just acceptable that she had 'reasonable adjustments' during the trial, but imperative. Because she's a child, and because schools for one are supposed to work on the basis that you accommodate the needs regardless of if there is a diagnosis.
ETA: And on the subject of autism and ADHD, we now know that Brianna had both.
Yeah I got called autistic as I struggled to engage socially and make friends but I’m actually dyspraxic
they just thought I was weird and wouldn’t play with meThere is actually a neurodiversity thread which might be more relevant as well as individual ones for ADHD/autism, but guess it relates to X and Y’s problems and how they were brought up so on topic
I personally wish I wasn’t yelled at so much for things that weren’t my fault, but I wasn’t diagnosed yet
I used to get called lazy for struggling with motor issues---
Also I think the catch all diagnosis in those days was autism. There’s more understanding these days of other issues
Did she?! I must have missed this….where was this mentioned?
lol no, mine thinks it’s made up or I only have it as someone told me (pretty much the same treatment from her when I struggled with anxiety, self harm and eating problems) 🫠
I did go to the doctors after my teachers at school noticed I was struggling and I had to resit a year at school, who suggested I visit doctors. My doctors did a questionnaire and was like yeah you’re clearly adhd. As it’s become more spoken about on insta, I now realise I have adhd with traits of autism. (Also have a friend who specialises in treating children like this and she said I’m classic adhd with traits of autism)
But I’ve basically had to just like deal with it and come up with my own coping mechanisms.
In the case of X and Y though, there’s SO much more awareness and acceptance of issues as well as information that their parents really should have engaged more. I was so messed up by my parents calling me psychotic with a personality disorder etc when I just struggled sometimes with doing what I was told as my motor skills were bad They thought I had some kind of spiteful demand avoidance or something
They thought I had some kind of spiteful demand avoidance or somethingMy mum wasn’t really around. What didn’t help me was adults telling other adults all of my issues. It really isn’t cool to shout out in a room full of people that I refuse to wear knickers. I think because you’re a child, adults forget you deserve some dignity and privacy. We also were not born wearing knickers, so I don’t see why it’s such a big issue anyway.
It’s always so hyperbolic isn’t it- “she refuses” etc. Just talk to the bloody kid and find out WHY
Mine ignored a lot of it. I have mixed feelings on this. When I was younger it wasn't really a "thing". But she did say she thought if she pandered To me, I'd play on it and make it my whole personality, and I have to say I maybe agree? I am to be fair to her, very very well adjusted. Now I'm diagnosed I think the validation is the most helpful part, permission to be myself and not think there is something wrong with me. I always thought I was strange so it's been helpful to understand why I'm different
hope this helps. I was also confused about the wording for X but I know the autism diagnosis can be much more complex than for ADHD so wasn't sure if they hadn't concluded a diagnosis yet but who knows.
The wording, now people mention it, is really interesting and annoyingly ambiguous. I'd be inclined to say that she probably just has traits of both.
My DS has ADHD and what we thought were traits of autism but upon assessment the pyschologist we saw (I think it was a psychologist) said that actually there is such an overlap in symptoms that what we perceived to be autistic traits was just, in his case ADHD.
My DS has ADHD and what we thought were traits of autism but upon assessment the pyschologist we saw (I think it was a psychologist) said that actually there is such an overlap in symptoms that what we perceived to be autistic traits was just, in his case ADHD.
Another 16 year old had been stabbed. Though this seems more like an altercation rather than pre med. It is all so devastating.
news.sky.com
Boy, 16, killed in Primrose Hill stabbing on New Year's Eve is named by police
The boy was pronounced dead shortly before midnight following the stabbing in Primrose Hill, north London. Another boy, also 16, was arrested at the scene on suspicion of murder and remains in custody.
the wording re X is ambiguous but I have always took it as her having traits of both.Hmm, these 'similarities' sound basic and predictable imo, rather than striking.
It's not unusual that children - or even adults - would blame the other person after denying it all. And in X's case we know that it's possible that Y in fact did the actual killing and she had no part in the practical action of stabbing. (Obviously she was involved in the planning and intent.)
It's also not unusual that children would act oddly in police interviews. And do we know for a fact that X was 'void of emotion' and confident in her police interviews? We know from Y's barrister that X laughed a lot; that's not void of emotion.
Btw something you said on the last thread I meant to respond to but it was finished:
In addition to this I respect the reasonable adjustments for Y, he has a diagnosis, whether people agree with it or not he has it and legally it made sense to support him through the trial. However girl X does not have a diagnosis, she has traits which many people have and will never even be assessed because they simply muddle through life. Girl X, undiagnosed should not have had any adjustments based on ND, just my opinion
I know they have said that Girl X "has traits of autism and ADHD" but I have wondered for a while now if that means she has traits of autism and she also has ADHD (diagnosed). It's ambiguously worded but that interpretation makes the most sense to me, because it's odd to say someone has traits of both with no diagnosis. Diagnosing someone as having ADHD with traits of autism IS something that is frequently done however; it what was said about my daughter until she was eventually properly diagnosed as having autism as well as ADHD from a specialist team after a thorough investigation.
Even if X only has traits of both, I think it's not just acceptable that she had 'reasonable adjustments' during the trial, but imperative. Because she's a child, and because schools for one are supposed to work on the basis that you accommodate the needs regardless of if there is a diagnosis.
ETA: And on the subject of autism and ADHD, we now know that Brianna had both.
I stand by my opinion regarding her reasonable adjustments IF she is not diagnosed with anything. so many adults and children have traits that would never equate to diagnosis, the amount of people requiring adjustments would be overwhelming if we accommodated everyone with traits. I hadn’t seen anything about Brianna having a diagnosis but that’s interesting
No the adjustments wouldn’t be “overwhelming” and she’d have some adjustments for being a child. You do not need a diagnosis to require adjustments, you just meet the requirements per in the Equalities Act 2010.
Reasonable adjustments always seen as a “bonus” or a power play.
- Status