All of what they did is horrific but reading about the towel in the 2nd spoiler made me feel sick.
All of what they did is horrific but reading about the towel in the 2nd spoiler made me feel sick.I’ve just listened to the latest episode of the podcast and the poo video is even worse than I thought
Not only did JV film Preston having a poo in the bath, he was also in the bath at the same time and lifted Preston’s legs whilst he continued filming him having his poo. This is just too grimthey have the actual police interview audio from being questioned on this. This is from the transcript , he’s highlighted in orange. his no comment comes with a massive sigh View attachment 3987471
There were additional descriptions of some of the videos and photos in episode 3 too which are just indefensible IMO. 33 naked pictures over a 43 minute period
I think the police are saying they ARE indecent it's if the jury agrees.The pictures are probably worse than I can imagine as they're not being described in the podcast. Is it not very much outside the jury's experience to determine what is an indecent image? Is that not the police's job to categorize images?
Also what is with all the bath stuff? Is it to easily wash away blood and poo? Sorry the whole thing is just so bizarre and weird. A lot of stuff I don't think we'll ever fully find out what happened in that house of horrors
That poor baby. Why was he laid in a bath with no water in it and propped up on a pillowI’ve just listened to the latest episode of the podcast and the poo video is even worse than I thought
Not only did JV film Preston having a poo in the bath, he was also in the bath at the same time and lifted Preston’s legs whilst he continued filming him having his poo. This is just too grimthey have the actual police interview audio from being questioned on this. This is from the transcript , he’s highlighted in orange. his no comment comes with a massive sigh View attachment 3987471
There were additional descriptions of some of the videos and photos in episode 3 too which are just indefensible IMO. 33 naked pictures over a 43 minute period
He gets really riled at one point during the interview. He tries to hold it back but you can tell he is pissed off that the copper won't just accept his answer.All of what they did is horrific but reading about the towel in the 2nd spoiler made me feel sick.
I imagine so, yes. Not to mention other bodily fluids.Also what is with all the bath stuff? Is it to easily wash away blood and poo? Sorry the whole thing is just so bizarre and weird. A lot of stuff I don't think we'll ever fully find out what happened in that house of horrors
I wondered about Snapchat too as some of the pictures and videos sent to JMF were via Snapchat I think.Just listened to the latest Trial podcast and a couple of things struck me.
Why on earth did JV film Preston dying on Snapchat? The ONLY reason I can think that makes sense is he was sending them to other abusers due to disappearing messages. There is nothing else that makes sense. You simply wouldn't go to record an innocent video of your child especially if as he said it was to show professionals on Snapchat.
It sounds like the staff were saying JMF had a far more natural reaction to Preston dying and afterwards behaved like a genuinely bereaved parent.
Hearing those interviews JV comes across awfully. Unlikeable and unreliable.
God this is even more hideous. I was prepared to accept heart emojis if it was their social worker - you know you've worked together for a long time, really delved into their personalities and histories and I can see how the lines might get a bit blurred and the professionalism drops.Hearts emoji was Preston's SW employed by Oldham Council. You have to wonder what on earth she was thinking and I suspect more will come out in the case review. My perception is that although he was a Looked After Child she didn't think that his adoptive parents could possibly harm him so paid less/no attention to the red flags if he has been with his birth family and on a child protection or child on need plan. My worry is that she was thinking about JV and JF and having a nice relationship with them rather than putting Preston's needs first and thinking about all the little bits of information she should have been putting together. Anyone who does child safeguarding training is trained that it's all the little bits of information that you need to put together and consider. Refusing to have a sensible time to do the meetings with the foster carers, repeat visits to hospital plus all the other bits of info she will have had *should* have made her think. She knew he was a well baby when he went to them and then he's having repeated health issues. It's absolutely drilled into you that bruises and broken bones in non walking baby are huge red flags. Certain areas for bruising and injuries too as they are not normal places for bruising.
A colleague of mine years ago told me that he and his wife had been referred to social services when their baby had a broken arm at about 8 months old. She'd been on the bed and then crawled or rolled to the edge and fell. Either Mike or his wife grabbed the baby as she fell but it resulted in a twisting break which is almost always a non accidental injury. They went to hospital etc and it was flagged up and social services opened a case.
The case was soon closed as their stories matched up and they were able to explain what had happened and there were no other factors for concern, no other bruising or old injuries. But nobody was like "ah yeah Mike is a good fella who works for the council and he's saying the right things so it's probably gonna be fine".
We haven't heard any evidence against JMF yet have we? I'm wondering if there will be more to this I that JV was sending him messages over Snapchat knowing they'd disappear and he might have been encouraging it without doing any of it.I don’t know anyone older than their early 20s who uses snapchat. It’s an odd thing for a couple in their late 30s to use to communicate
gay men tend to use snapchat a lotI don’t know anyone older than their early 20s who uses snapchat. It’s an odd thing for a couple in their late 30s to use to communicate
For hook ups, sure. But men who are in long term committed relationships as a way of communicating with one another? It’s oddgay men tend to use snapchat a lot
I really think there was an element of classism, I bet the social worker was thinking that Preston would have a good life with this middle class couple, living in a very nice semi detached house.Regular meetings with the foster parents are in the best interests of the LAC. JV/JF’s complaints and cancellations should have been a massive reg flag, however much the SW liked them. I wonder if there was a bit of classism and/or ageism at play
The evidence against JMF is that he received these videos and pictures and did nothing about it.We haven't heard any evidence against JMF yet have we? I'm wondering if there will be more to this I that JV was sending him messages over Snapchat knowing they'd disappear and he might have been encouraging it without doing any of it.
Perhaps Snapchat is a paedophiles paradise. I had no ideaFor hook ups, sure. But men who are in long term committed relationships as a way of communicating with one another? It’s odd
I have children and potentially there may be a bath pic or 2 somewhere on my phone from over the years but I can guarantee there are no genitals on show.I think the police are saying they ARE indecent it's if the jury agrees.
I have wondered just how many naked pictures this man had of the poor baby. The prosecution argues there are (13?) that cross the line into indecent in that they crossed a line if what would be normal naked pictures of your child.
I mean that alone astounds me. I have children and potentially there may be a bath pic or 2 somewhere on my phone from over the years but I can guarantee there are no genitals on show.
So to me even the "non indecent" photos are heavy evidence of JV interest and guilt. It's so weird.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?