Isabelle Rose Welsh

New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
This trial seems to be really quick compared to others of the same magnitude.
Is it because HS hasn’t given any evidence?
I’m nervous that AW could get away with it, based on what I’ve read. Is there enough evidence to convict her?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7
I think they will both at least get convicted of causing and allowing the death due to the extent of the injuries even before the final attack, as neither of them did anything about it and both were living at the house with Isabelle.

I'm less sure of murder because it's not clear to me when exactly it was meant to have happened or who inflicted the blow and if the other was present at the time. I expect it was HS who did it, and it might be much clearer to the jury having seen the CCTV and sequence of events from that day in more detail.

I'm not concerned HS has any grounds to appeal for having no defence. It's his choice to give evidence to defend himself or not, and most of these types of cases there are no other witnesses. If you have no defence for what you are being accused of, then you have no defence. It's as simple as that. It doesn't mean his representation that's been poor. This is an argument you see with Lucy Letby's defenders, that because her KC didn't call any witnesses other than a plumber then her defence was poor. But the defendant is allowed to choose their "strategy" and if your strategy fails, it doesn't mean you get to appeal and have another go with a different strategy. If HS KC instructed their own expert to review the medical evidence and they agree with the prosecution then you are not going to call them to give evidence!
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 8
This trial seems to be really quick compared to others of the same magnitude.
Is it because HS hasn’t given any evidence?
I’m nervous that AW could get away with it, based on what I’ve read. Is there enough evidence to convict her?

When people don’t give evidence & when they go no comment in police interview , you immediately think ‘ guilty ‘
There's always a chance you’ll get off if you don’t admit something but once you admit it thats it .
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5
I think they will both at least get convicted of causing and allowing the death due to the extent of the injuries even before the final attack, as neither of them did anything about it and both were living at the house with Isabelle.

I'm less sure of murder because it's not clear to me when exactly it was meant to have happened or who inflicted the blow and if the other was present at the time. I expect it was HS who did it, and it might be much clearer to the jury having seen the CCTV and sequence of events from that day in more detail.
Logan Mwangi’s case springs to mind. His mother was convicted of murder, even though the prosecution case was that the fatal assault itself was more likely carried out by the stepfather and Craig. The jury still found she was criminally responsible for the murder, not just for causing or allowing his death - so hopefully that’s the same in this case and they throw the book at them both. I know Logan’s mother is currently appealing her conviction though.
 
  • Like
  • Sick
Reactions: 13
When people don’t give evidence & when they go no comment in police interview , you immediately think ‘ guilty ‘
There's always a chance you’ll get off if you don’t admit something but once you admit it thats it .
Nearly every solicitor will advise you to give a no comment police interview even if innocent, it's up the person whether they want to speak or not. I mean, he's guilty as sin in this instance but I'm just saying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9
Hope these people rot. AW definitely knew she must have knew I have a child of a similar age daily routines of nappy changes baths she must have saw clearly brusing. I actually think she might have been apart of it the whole thing. I pray these 2 beasts rot such evil to an innocence wee child.
Sorry but how the duck the Gran and Stepdad didn't notice broken bones is bleeping beyond me too and Significant brusing. Was this we baby just failed by everyone around her?? And I tell u this if I am a gran one day anyone bathing my grandchild staying in the Same house etc WOULD be meeting me anxiety or not bull.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 15
It would be interesting to know how AW treated Isabelle before HS came along. You’d think they would delve into that a bit deeper. It was only 3 months that he was around, surely he doesn’t corrupt a young mother to start abusing her child in such a short space of time, which makes me think she must have been doing it before he came along.

The mainstream media doesn’t seem to be reporting much of the case, perhaps once they’re convicted, the full circumstances will be printed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 13
Just a recap again today…

A mum and her boyfriend blame each other for sexually and physically abusing a toddler ‘murdered’ in her own home, a court had been told.

Alexandra Walker and Harrison Simpson were charged with murder and serious sexual offences after Isabelle Welsh endured weeks of alleged abuse.

The two-year-old suffered 21 fractured bones and about 100 bruises or cuts on her body before she suffered a catastrophic bleed on the brain.

Teesside Crown Court heard how the youngster suffered horrendous abuse at the hands of both defendants before he died in September last year.

The prosecution maintain that both were responsible for inflicting the multitude of injuries within weeks of them becoming a couple.

In his closing speech at Teesside Crown Court today (Wednesday, July 22), Nicholas Lumley KC, representing Simpson, said his client had no motive to hurt Isabelle or any history of violence.

He said that there is a ‘stark’ lack of evidence against his client in relation to the sexual assault charge.

“There is nothing at all to connect him to the sexual assaults,” he said.

Mr Lumley said Walker had more than enough opportunities to inflict the injuries on her daughter and had shown that she was "capable of violence" through her messages and calls.

"The contrast between Harrison Simpson and Alexandra Walker in terms of motive and capacity, never mind the opportunity, could not be greater," the barrister said.

Dealing with his client declining the chance to give evidence during his trial, the barrister said he did not want to "throw himself to the lions" and urged the jury to find him not guilty of all charges.

Mark McKone KC, representing Walker, told the jury that the 26-year-old "had never and would never" hurt her daughter.

He said she did not turn a blind eye to her daughter’s abuse but accepts that she could have acted differently on occasion in the weeks leading up to her death.

The court heard how medical experts said Isabelle suffered her fatal head injury and showed signs of significant sexual trauma on September 13.

“We submit, these events happened at the same time between 8am and 11am when Simpson was in sole charge of Isabelle,” he said.

“We submit that Simpson then put Isabelle’s fatally injured body back into her cot.”

The barrister added: “It would be very strange indeed if she looked after Isabelle well for over two years but then started regularly breaking Isabelle's bones or encouraging someone else to do that.”

Earlier, jurors had looked at computer-generated images cataloguing the bruising and scratching covering the toddler’s entire body.

Dr Sam Hoggard, a Home Office pathologist, said that the vast majority of the injuries would have been clearly visible to the naked eye during weeks of abuse.

Simpson, 22, of Greenham Close in Thorntree, Middlesbrough, and 26-year-old Walker, of Hartington Close in Thornaby, both deny murder.

The pair also deny four other charges involving Isabelle, including: causing or allowing the death of a child on September 14; two counts of assault by penetration between September 10 and September 14 last year; and cruelty to a person under 16.

The trial continues.
 
  • Sad
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 13
Obviously we don't have every piece of evidence here. BUT something just tells me more to this even the fact AW mum and stepfather state she was a good mum??? After hearing what they have heard? These 2 must have seen bruising on this wee girl they must have seen differences in her posture with broken bones especially her vertebrae she could not have been playing Typically makes me wonder was there a full history of abuse going on here? I mean a stranger would notice this never mind your grandparents WTF. Their is a picture on AW facebook cuddling issabelle that wee girls eyes alone tell me a story. Did no one give a duck or where they all in this together?
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 13
Billy big balls now but where was he when isabelle needed him
I get what u are saying I totally do. BUT she had an order on him not to come near them maybe he was starting the process of family court for access to his daughter we do not know. Yes he probably was one of them not paying maintaince aswell. BUT she had him charged for Donestic Abuse which left him in a sitution not to approach the property if he had of he would have been arrested she did not allow him to see Issabelle. So I guess he was tied too.
I agree doesn't look up to much BUT he did not kill his daughter
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8
This trial seems to be really quick compared to others of the same magnitude.
Is it because HS hasn’t given any evidence?
I’m nervous that AW could get away with it, based on what I’ve read. Is there enough evidence to convict her?
I really don’t think so. I think the prosecution have done a very good job not just of demonstrating that there’s no way that she didn’t know Isabelle was being abused, but of showing there is good reason to think she was actively involved in abuse even when HS was not there, including the loud bang the neighbours heard which seemed to happen around the same time Isabelle’s final decline started.

She’s come across as so manipulative I actually feel like her googling HS as sex offender and playing up to her CCTV as worried Mum were done precisely because she knew Isabelle would die pretty soon and she was building her defence before Isabelle even died.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 13
I really don’t think so. I think the prosecution have done a very good job not just of demonstrating that there’s no way that she didn’t know Isabelle was being abused, but of showing there is good reason to think she was actively involved in abuse even when HS was not there, including the loud bang the neighbours heard which seemed to happen around the same time Isabelle’s final decline started.

She’s come across as so manipulative I actually feel like her googling HS as sex offender and playing up to her CCTV as worried Mum were done precisely because she knew Isabelle would die pretty soon and she was building her defence before Isabelle even died.
Incidentally, given what we now know about AW making false allegations, it seems distinctly possible that he never committed any DV in the first place. We don’t know that he wasn’t paying maintenance either. Probably he was doing what he was advised to do, staying away and keeping his nose clean because he thought it was his best chance of seeing the child in the long term.

If any man in his situation had started (on the basis of no evidence because he hadn’t seen Isabelle) that he was going to march down to AW’s house and grab his child and take her away, anyone with the slightest grain of sanity would have told him it was a terrible idea, he shouldn’t even think about doing it and it was the best way for him to be cut out of Isabelle’s life completely.

It must be a pretty scary situation if your alcoholic baby Mama makes false allegations against you and manipulates the situation so you are suddenly the bad guy and the one with no access to your child, He doesn’t seem like the brightest bulb, and if there is one thing this trial seems to have proven, it’s that AW is a manipulative liar and schemer. I don’t think he was any match for her games, sadly for Isabelle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9
Billy big balls now but where was he when isabelle needed him
i find the whole bio dads family seem to have their troubles

his sister had 7 of her 7 kids taken by SS 1 sadly died of leukemia i think then the mother of the daughter is on fb saying the SS are wrong and shouldnt of taken the kids as her daughter has done nothing wrong

also josh does not get many replies/support on his posts unless we can only see a small part of his fb but he is deffo ramping up the tragedy of this little girl
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 10
so josh is implying simpsons dad killed himself,i think he had done time for drug offences
all the families sound awful tbh
 
  • Like
Reactions: 13
Incidentally, given what we now know about AW making false allegations, it seems distinctly possible that he never committed any DV in the first place. We don’t know that he wasn’t paying maintenance either. Probably he was doing what he was advised to do, staying away and keeping his nose clean because he thought it was his best chance of seeing the child in the long term.

If any man in his situation had started (on the basis of no evidence because he hadn’t seen Isabelle) that he was going to march down to AW’s house and grab his child and take her away, anyone with the slightest grain of sanity would have told him it was a terrible idea, he shouldn’t even think about doing it and it was the best way for him to be cut out of Isabelle’s life completely.

It must be a pretty scary situation if your alcoholic baby Mama makes false allegations against you and manipulates the situation so you are suddenly the bad guy and the one with no access to your child, He doesn’t seem like the brightest bulb, and if there is one thing this trial seems to have proven, it’s that AW is a manipulative liar and schemer. I don’t think he was any match for her games, sadly for Isabelle.
No one is suggesting that he does any of that. What he could have done is arrange a contact centre, see his daughter on a regular basis and notice her broken back, bleeding genitals and bruised and battered body.
He is allowed to grieve in his own way and he's a kid himself, who comes across as very immature, but he is also a dad, who also failed Isabelle.
I'm quite confident in saying that he wasn't maintaining Isabelle. It would be on Facebook if he was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12
I get what u are saying I totally do. BUT she had an order on him not to come near them maybe he was starting the process of family court for access to his daughter we do not know. Yes he probably was one of them not paying maintaince aswell. BUT she had him charged for Donestic Abuse which left him in a sitution not to approach the property if he had of he would have been arrested she did not allow him to see Issabelle. So I guess he was tied too.
I agree doesn't look up to much BUT he did not kill his daughter
He didn’t kill her no.. he didn’t actually do anything for her .

His post on 13th July on f/b .. interesting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1
i find the whole bio dads family seem to have their troubles

his sister had 7 of her 7 kids taken by SS 1 sadly died of leukemia i think then the mother of the daughter is on fb saying the SS are wrong and shouldnt of taken the kids as her daughter has done nothing wrong

also josh does not get many replies/support on his posts unless we can only see a small part of his fb but he is deffo ramping up the tragedy of this little girl
Poor poor baby had little hope with family like that .
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 9
Incidentally, given what we now know about AW making false allegations, it seems distinctly possible that he never committed any DV in the first place. We don’t know that he wasn’t paying maintenance either. Probably he was doing what he was advised to do, staying away and keeping his nose clean because he thought it was his best chance of seeing the child in the long term.

If any man in his situation had started (on the basis of no evidence because he hadn’t seen Isabelle) that he was going to march down to AW’s house and grab his child and take her away, anyone with the slightest grain of sanity would have told him it was a terrible idea, he shouldn’t even think about doing it and it was the best way for him to be cut out of Isabelle’s life completely.

It must be a pretty scary situation if your alcoholic baby Mama makes false allegations against you and manipulates the situation so you are suddenly the bad guy and the one with no access to your child, He doesn’t seem like the brightest bulb, and if there is one thing this trial seems to have proven, it’s that AW is a manipulative liar and schemer. I don’t think he was any match for her games, sadly for Isabelle.
he must be an unlucky guy getting accused of things he’s not done ..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1