Preston Davey Trial

[nothinonyou]

My impression of McGowan-Fazakerley is that he is an absolute wet wipe who knew what was going on and did absolutely nothing about it.

I'm guessing more will come out about him though and it seems there may be some evidence he contributed to the sexual abuse?

Hope he gets convicted of something and there's no way he didn't know.

I don't think he's an angel by any means but it sounds like he's a very meek, mild -mannered man living with a narcissistic lunatic

 

[Emsie]

If she bathed him on that day as has been reported she would have seen some of the 30 external bruises on that poor boy. She must have noticed them…

How many baths did this child have a day!! I don't really want to know but it's like he was always in the bath!!

 

[AladdinSane]

I am finding this all really hard to read but I want to see justice served for baby Preston.

Just to clear up one point - to be a head of year and safeguarding lead he would need some training and a DBS check, that's it. Having a DBS check only shows that the person doesn't have a criminal record, as far as I'm aware. He could still have been a monster.

Yep! A dbs check is not really worth the paper it's written on as its only valid up until the point it is published. After that some places dont want one until 3 years after.

I keep seeing all these videos being released. Is this normal during a trial? I thought it was after the verdict they released everything?

 

[Bagpuss20]

Wonder what defence argument will be- if they havnt caused the injuries or taken the pictures found on their devices how will they alledge they occurred and by who?
I cant see how they can have a defence- should think theres dna evidence too.

 

[IGiveUp22]

Yes, and I think the defence is going to argue that Preston had seizures, due to being exposed to drugs and alcohol in utero.
Maybe they will try and say he died from a seizure in the bath?
And any DNA found on Preston and on the cot is from sharing towels.

This is where I can see them currently going from the bits I’ve managed to catch however as someone else has pointed out, there is far more evidence to point towards sexual assault and effectively murder.
Im assuming this is how they will try explain away the photos though - they were taken for ‘medical purposes’ or to show the other one to see if they needed to take him to drs/hospital.

I find it interesting that they were taking him so much… Now I may have missed bits due to the paper I was initially following but like the runny eye he had they were straight onto the social worker asking if he needed to go to the drs etc. I do agree with whoever said ‘jay’ wanted/liked the attention of it all.

 

[Bobbi the builder]

When is court back on?

Manchester news says court to resume on Tuesday 12th at 10:30.

 

[codered]

Other than the obvious issue with the language in his text, this is the second or third time (that I’ve seen) where JV refers to Preston as “your son” when talking to JF. He comes across as a totally manipulative psychopath (obviously in hindsight - but I think there were more than enough red flags before). Also gives me the impression the desire to adopt may have been more from JF?

 

[Emsie]

Sorry I'm posting so much in here but this case is taking over my mind, it honestly has me tormented. But I've a possible theory, perhaps its tinfoil hat but I've read all the details and spent an unhealthy amount of time thinking about it all.

JV made a lot, and I mean a lot of comments to people about how he was struggling. I want to put him in the field of cows, he's dead, he's spoilt, the foster parents spoiled him, I'm struggling with dark thoughts blabla. It doesn't really couple well with someone trying to hide the abuse that theyre committing. So it made me think there must be a reason why he was saying all that so openly, he is a tactical psychopath by all accounts so I think everything he said was for a reason..

I think maybe they planned to get a baby to abuse when it was small and non verbal, but not keep. I think he was setting up the backstory for the adoption to fail, so he could discard that poor child before he became too dangerous to abuse. A year off work to fulfill his sick desires and then return to sympathy and back pats. Loads of photos as a memory until he took it so far he killed him. Thoughts?

I don't think this is tinfoil at all. I think it could be the truth.

 

[SamPam]

The repeated mentioning of the bath seat in the sink is odd, plus him telling his friend he threw the nappy out of the window, and the police stating they hadn't found one. Weird he'd claim he had.

 

[nothinonyou]

thanks for clarifying. For some reason I thought that pre-meditated murder of a child = WHO

I hope he does get one. 18 years would be a travesty. And I hope he is tortured in prison.

I think it's a murder that's sexual OR sadistic in nature so he will definitely get one

 

[Nelly's mum]

Yes, according to the Lancs Live reporting of the trial, he was still a "looked after child", and a social worker was visiting weekly.
According to The Trial podcast, the name that Varley and McGowan used, Elijah, was Preston's middle name.

Laura Castle, who adopted and killed Leiland-James Corkhill, didn't like his name, her and her family called him James. They'd been told they couldn't do this, as this is important to who he is and his identity, and to use his proper name. They said they were now doing this but their biological child showed this wasn't the truth as he still referred to him James

 

[Jayneh2020]

Ya know what i dont get is the level of abuse he done to him knowing hes causing seizures, bruises etc hes still under social care and likely they would question him about bruises and stuff. How did he think he was getting away with it. Why would he film him and have photos knowing the likelihood of him being caught is very high.... I mean I dont undertsand a mind like his but if I was adopting a child purely to do these things why would I film him knowing I would be caught.... I cant belive I have just wrote that but did part of him want to be caught ? Did he think he was smart enough to get away with it... would the outcome of him being arrested have been any different if he didnt film this stuff and I question if john was deleting stuff on his phone outside the hospital aswell. Pair of scumbags !

 

[Jayneh2020]

Am I correct in thinking there was a video taken of Preston on the day he died, showing him struggling for breath with blue tinged lips? They arrived with him to hospital at about 6:25pm, what time was the video taken? I've tried to flick back through but can't find it. Surely that would also show their lack of urgency to get him seen at hospital and show their version of events is bullshit.

Yes i am pretty sure it was 4 or 5 ish the video of him struggling to breathe and then I am sure he said at some point he bathes him around 5 aswell so all the times dont seem to be adding up.

 

[Square Peg]

I think I can see which way Varley's defence is going and it will be interesting if he is questioned as a witness to see if this holds up. Witnesses are already agreeing that he was very dramatic, when questioned by his barrister. I suspect they're going to say "see how he jokes about killing John etc, it's just his dramatic sense of humour. Doesn't mean he killed this baby".

I read it as a man who wants to be the centre of everyone's attention. Taking the baby to a hotel to meet his colleagues (because I suspect the initial placement didn't allow him to have a load of visitors). The drama about overspending on the prom. I've had two maternity leaves and I visited my office once to show off my baby who was 8 weeks at that point. I then gave not one shiny shit about what was happening.

The text that's made me the most angry is that he refers to baby Preston as not being independent. FFS! How independent are 10 month old babies? Never mind ones born a month early with trauma and attachment issues and possible effects of alcohol and drug abuse in pregnancy. The baby was just another prop of the Jamie Varley show by the sound of it

Nail on the head, couldn’t agree more, the Jamie Varley show.

 

[Tofino]

Even without the photos - how on earth do they explain a baby being asleep in an empty bath??

They also haven’t started on JMF’s police interviews yet.

 

[Lyla001]

I'd be interested to see who gets called as witnesses for the defence. Who the hell would want to take the stand and defend the indefensible!

Also, I wonder if a second Post mortem took place (sometimes known as a defence PM). These are featured in homicide cases as an independent PM and not a Home Office (prosecution) one. It can be useful where the cause of death is challenged by the defence.

 

[Ray_of_Sunshine]

For hook ups, sure. But men who are in long term committed relationships as a way of communicating with one another? It’s odd

Perhaps Snapchat is a paedophiles paradise. I had no idea I’ve heard it’s a great place for people to communicate when hiding affairs/seedy hookups from their significant other. The disappearing messages must attract the onces too.

 

[TheMiceInTheShed]

There’s 2 stories come out during the trial of why Varley “supposedly “ left the bathroom. One was to fetch towels and the other to change his pyjamas. Not that I believe a word but why would anyone choose to leave a baby in the bath to change your own pyjamas

Exactly.

You never leave a small child alone in the bath, even for a few moments. Babies and toddlers can wriggle out, they can try to climb out of the bath to follow you and slip and fall, they can slide under the water in a heartbeat.

 

[Lynn’ssnazzycardigan]

For those following the live updates. I have been reading MEN and their website is terrible for continually reloading because of all the adverts, I think that’s why tattle doesn’t allow links. I’ve found that loading it on safari then switching to reader mode lets you read it without that happening. I had to navigate the jumpy bit to reload older entries before switching to reader but then I was able to read the whole thing with previous days.

 

[JCMSadie]

Im trying to think if I had any photos of my babies in the bath? I dont think so, because I would have been too focused on washing them, playing with them or making sure they didnt slip and drown! Was it just me that heard the horror stories about babies drowning in 2 inches of water, in garden ponds etc?

yes there are innocent photos of children, which may or may not show them naked. But surely someone who is a safeguarding lead, would know that it is not 'ideal' to take or share photos of naked children showing their genitals. Especially if they are meant to be on 'best behaviour; for the adoption agency/process.

I'm not defending them. I am concerned that, especially in a climate where people are desensitised to the exploitation of kids online, the photos alone (unless the ones the police suggest are inappropriate are extreme enough) may not be compelling enough to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt.

I do think that the overall picture being built is becoming more compelling and less doubtful. But the pathology evidence will be pivotal in eradicating the element of doubt, I think.