I would love to know what Varley’s family think of him. He’s got siblings who have kids and apparently a brother who’s a police officer. JMF is an only child, so these actions will only affect his parents. Whereas JV was around his nieces and nephews I’m assuming. I hope his mum isn’t in denial.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I have followed all the threads on here of Preston and I don’t think I have ever been so heartbroken over a stranger passing away. I hope he’s resting in paradise
I don't see any updates today?
It’s bank holiday
Oh thanks! I'm not in the UK so didn't know
I think JV will be found guilty on all charges(except maybe murder) and I think JMF will only be found guilty on allowing harm. That's based on what we've heard so far. I hope JV gets a WLO.
I’m so sorry that your daughter suffered like that and you have a very salient point.
Basic statistics show us that men are responsible for 97% of sexual crimes and the vast majority of violent ones.
That doesn’t change whether those men stick on a dress or are gay. Men are men on an offending population level
It’s just safeguarding 101 and authorities have shown shocking judgement and practices due to not adhering to this.
Safeguarding isn’t ’personal’. It’s applied framework using knowledge of risk.
We’re not allowed to, for example, help out in a children’s group unless we have a DBS. That doesn’t mean little Jimmy’s dad in Y2 is a pon but he has to be checked as it’s a basic safeguarding policy.
My son would never hurt a fly or be disrespectful to girls and women and is a beautiful teenager but I wouldn’t allow him to help his disabled female relative in a ladies’ single sex space etc.
People shouldn’t get offended by these kind of things that are set up to protect vulnerable groups. Risk of populations are just that, men cannot ‘identify’ out of those groups.
‘Be kind’ has resulted in shocking outcomes in ignoring safeguarding over the past decade or so by people in authority who should have been protecting
I also wonder if the fact that JV said he enjoyed the adoption process (attention on him), and seemed to be constantly looking for attention could indicate an element of munchaushens by proxy. It seems he shared every sneeze, rash and sleepless night with other people so would play into both the 'poor me new parent' but also the constantly sickly child stories too.
I think he will take his own life in prison if given a WLO as he must know that every day will be hell given what he is alleged to have done.
Unless someone gets to him first…
The overall system for both health visitors and social workers is very outdated across the UK as a whole.
Slightly unrelated but my HV was entirely useless, gave unsafe sleep and weaning advice and I ended up opting out of visits. I was then sent quite a threatening letter that they would refer us to SW. They did. They visited. They had no concerns. No further issues.
Years later my then 3 year old tripped over her feet and fell onto a wooden chair. She knocked out her front teeth and cut her lip open. I rushed her to A&E covered in blood (I think I was in a worse state than her) and we were immediately separated. I was questioned by several health care workers about what had happened. My husband had gone to the house from work to collect some things for her (I had literally grabbed her and got into the car) and he took photos showing the chair etc still where she had fallen. Reports were sent to SW. They visited us at home. They interviewed our 3 year old who told them she fell onto the chair. Finally we were cleared and it was all fine in the end. But how can it be that in some cases parents are heavily questioned and investigated, but in others its a brief chat and thats the end of it. Especially in cases where the child has been placed, is non verbal and suddenly required trips to A&E where he previously had not.
Surely it at least warranted further investigation?
The system isnt fit for purpose. And it isnt acceptable to say "lessons will be learned". Because they never seem to be.
Sweet boy my heart breaks every time I see his face. He was such a bonny wee thing and I feel sick for his foster mother. No matter whether she knew it was a temporary arrangement or not giving care to a newborn is a bond that will never leave her. I truly hope they never see daylight again either of them.
Slightly unrelated but my HV was entirely useless, gave unsafe sleep and weaning advice and I ended up opting out of visits. I was then sent quite a threatening letter that they would refer us to SW. They did. They visited. They had no concerns. No further issues.
Years later my then 3 year old tripped over her feet and fell onto a wooden chair. She knocked out her front teeth and cut her lip open. I rushed her to A&E covered in blood (I think I was in a worse state than her) and we were immediately separated. I was questioned by several health care workers about what had happened. My husband had gone to the house from work to collect some things for her (I had literally grabbed her and got into the car) and he took photos showing the chair etc still where she had fallen. Reports were sent to SW. They visited us at home. They interviewed our 3 year old who told them she fell onto the chair. Finally we were cleared and it was all fine in the end. But how can it be that in some cases parents are heavily questioned and investigated, but in others its a brief chat and thats the end of it. Especially in cases where the child has been placed, is non verbal and suddenly required trips to A&E where he previously had not.
Surely it at least warranted further investigation?
The system isnt fit for purpose. And it isnt acceptable to say "lessons will be learned". Because they never seem to be.
Sweet boy my heart breaks every time I see his face. He was such a bonny wee thing and I feel sick for his foster mother. No matter whether she knew it was a temporary arrangement or not giving care to a newborn is a bond that will never leave her. I truly hope they never see daylight again either of them.
Do we know how much longer the trial will go on for? I don’t know if that’s something that is indicated at the start or not
I think I read that it's due to end on 2nd June but it could be extended to 12th June.
Gosh, it could end next week so, it doesn't feel that long since it started.
Thankyou Dotty, that's an interesting insight. I can absolutely see overstretched doctors not being in optimum position to assess all the possibilities of abuse while doing their jobs. Which is why automatic flags to social services are in place I guess - they are supposed to act as the second set of eyes.
I clocked that JV had safeguarding training, which will have proved useful. I wouldn't say these two are 'very clever' though, like most psychopathic offenders aren't especially clever, it's just that they do things outside the parameters of most human behaviour, which isn't where normal minds go for explanations. That's why safeguarders should be trained to go there. But, as you say, resources are inadequate, which tends to defeat safeguarding.
Hi @Marcolf 
if you type @ (no space) then start typing the name of who you're replying to, you can select their name and it sends them an alert. You can also hold on their text, quote appears and you can move the markers to select a section of their text to reply to.
I'll mind my own business now!
if you type @ (no space) then start typing the name of who you're replying to, you can select their name and it sends them an alert. You can also hold on their text, quote appears and you can move the markers to select a section of their text to reply to.I'll mind my own business now!
Last edited:
Re listening to the podcast episode...how is JV expecting to get out of it when even the defence pathologist agrees that it was likely SA that caused Prestons injuries. And unless a random individual just popped in on the same day JV filmed Preston dying.
Unless its JMF pathologist who is agreeing and JV has a different one.
Unless its JMF pathologist who is agreeing and JV has a different one.
I don’t know why these people at least do the decent thing and plead guilty in these cases. Is it not bad enough to commit this sort of atrocity against a baby?
The sick guys probably enjoy hearing it all spelled out in excruciating detail.
But that’s exactly why they won’t plead guilty. They know that what they’ve done is so abhorrent that admitting it will mean in all likelihood no one ever speaks to them again. So they might as well take a chance. At least then they might get a parental prison visit now and again. And yes, with a trial they also get to relive it. Plus Varley is an attention seeking little curd. You could tell just from the court reports that he enjoyed standing there yakking about his pointless bleeping life to a captive audience.
It's probably just as simple as if they plead guilty they are going down for a very long time and they have to admit what they are. It's worth pleading NG just to see if you can somehow get away with it. I think most people would chance it.
- Status