Preston Davey Trial

[owen2110]

I think, based on these agreed facts, and unless nothing else nailed on re DNA is mentioned, the pathologists findings/evidence is going to be key to a guilty verdict

I think so too. I feel awful saying this but I thought the forensic/DNA findings would be a lot more conclusive and certain. I’m now thinking that a lot of the abuse took place in the bath/bathroom where DNA is washed away easily would also tie into the indecent images they found of Preston while laid in the bath etc. Such as the time JV had taken something like 30 photos in 40 minutes of Preston in the bath.

 

[Itchy of Itchington]

I read somewhere that he was actually only a teacher for two years, but progressed quickly to head of year. Not sure if that’s true, and don’t know what job he did before that. He was a secondary school teacher and maybe that age group weren’t attractive to him? (Can’t believe I wrote that )
I think his sister had children, so if I was her I would be very concerned about what he might have done when they were babies

I posted that. He was a design technician at the school and then did teacher training in 2019 and qualified in 2021. He was head of year by the time he went on adoption leave. This is screenshot from the Mirror

y

 

[JCMSadie]

The DNA wasn't as bad as I thought. It really does hinge on the postmortem, because a lot of things can be explained away right now. Apart from the photos, but we don't really know what about them is deemed inappropriate. I have naked pictures of my kids as babies, and if their genitals are in them I didn't really care as they were innocent, not for sharing outside the family and not the focus of the picture. He could easily claim he was trying to do one of those baby photoshoots and using the bath as a white backdrop, a lot of those have the baby naked in them. I'm not saying he/they are innocent, but unless the pictures are explicit then is it really enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt at this stage the horrific things they're accused of?

 

[nothinonyou]

The CPS do an amazing job in these cases, so thorough with testing and swabbing etc. it makes me wonder how many people years back got away with these crimes because we didn't have the knowledge or expertise we have now

 

[SamPam]

I don’t know. Their DNA stains on the cot bars is absolutely grim. I have children and I’d bet my life on there being zero “sexual DNA” being found on the bars of their cot at any stage, likewise their clothing. They said the findings are neutral so they can’t say either way if they were involved in an assault or not. Also the trousers he brought in to the station, was the vomit in the same spot as the mixed DNA but could be argued he’d vomited on that same spot?

 

[2ofeach]

I'm not saying he/they are innocent, but unless the pictures are explicit then is it really enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt at this stage the horrific things they're accused of?

Putting the photos aside, Preston did not inflict the physical injuries himself.
I'm not going to list them all but those injuries were caused by either or both of these 2.
The mother bathing him will have seen some of those injuries & she SHOULD have raised the alarm.
Either of the 2 accused parties IF INNOCENT should have raised an alarm.
The SW SHOULD have been more vigilant & professional....FAILED.

 

[Tofino]

Ah yes, the baby you were looking after is dead and the police are being ridiculous

 

[IGiveUp22]

The police interviews seem to be suggesting they’re not confident those were the trousers Preston was wearing on the day. I mean, I dunno about you guys but I don’t think in all my 30 odd years of living that my laundry has ever gone mouldy???

 

[AladdinSane]

I imagine the forensic experts are agreeing to this because, if argued by the prosecution, it could be enough to insert reasonable doubt. So i am hoping that any further DNA evidence is clear cut

 

[Tofino]

The DNA wasn't as bad as I thought. It really does hinge on the postmortem, because a lot of things can be explained away right now. Apart from the photos, but we don't really know what about them is deemed inappropriate. I have naked pictures of my kids as babies, and if their genitals are in them I didn't really care as they were innocent, not for sharing outside the family and not the focus of the picture. He could easily claim he was trying to do one of those baby photoshoots and using the bath as a white backdrop, a lot of those have the baby naked in them. I'm not saying he/they are innocent, but unless the pictures are explicit then is it really enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt at this stage the horrific things they're accused of?

How do you explain away the poo video? Or the large number of closes ups of genitals / bottom? The asleep in an empty bath video with the towel pushed up to show his genitals?? The video of a naked Preston playing with himself? And that’s before you even consider the 40+ bruises across his tiny body.

 

[IGiveUp22]

How do you explain away the poo video? Or the large number of closes ups of genitals / bottom? The asleep in an empty bath video with the towel pushed up to show his genitals?? The video of a naked Preston playing with himself? And that’s before you even consider the 40+ bruises across his tiny body.

I think all of this, with the addition of the pathologists evidence/findings and also the complete mess of his account (always changing, answering some stuff but not others) will be enough to eliminate any reasonable doubt.
I guess, similar to LL’s trial, where some of the evidence could be seen as ‘circumstantial’, especially when looked at in isolation, but when you put it all together it’s very damning indeed

 

[Tofino]

I think all of this, with the addition of the pathologists evidence/findings and also the complete mess of his account (always changing, answering some stuff but not others) will be enough to eliminate any reasonable doubt.
I guess, similar to LL’s trial, where some of the evidence could be seen as ‘circumstantial’, especially when looked at in isolation, but when you put it all together it’s very damning indeed

I also think when the jury see the photos/videos (my god, I would not want to be them) it will be quite clear to them if the videos are normal or not. I expect they will find they react quite instinctively to them.

 

[SamPam]

I imagine the forensic experts are agreeing to this because, if argued by the prosecution, it could be enough to insert reasonable doubt. So i am hoping that any further DNA evidence is clear cut

This was said by the judge in the summing up yesterday in a murder trial so I imagine it's the same in this one. When you add everything together it's awful.

 

[Upintheair83]

Just the photos of Preston in the bath surely show that there seems to be a fascination/ obsession with his genitals which surely indicate that this guy is a full blown pdf....if he doesn't go to jail then there's no hope or justice in this world. My little boy is 4 and iv done the majority of the baths in his short little life and I can honestly say iv got very few pictures of him naked in the bath. Of course you get the odd one with bubbles on their head, and iv got a gorgeous one of him smiling with his big blue eyes! But NEVER have the genitals been the main focus of the photo....this guy is absolutely sickening and a full blown pdf. That poor little boy, I'm absolutely heartbroken for him. How did society ever get to this point? If I had my way all pdfs should have their genitals cut off, seems its the only way. Vile, vile monster. My heart goes out to all of Prestons family and everyone who loved him.

 

[Rubyroo160]

Can I ask, will the prosecution detail exactly when/how they believe the 2 counts of assault by penetration and 1 count of sexual assault occurred? Or are the jury supposed to just conclude something happened without going into specifics? I must admit the DNA evidence is not as strong as I thought it may be.

 

[Lolly505]

So the dna found in prestons pants
Both dna found on them... anyone know what they mean by this comment ?

"not unexpected given the domestic nature of the case"

As others have said, it'll be referring to the fact they were living together and they were his carers. So all their clothes will been gathered up, washed and put away by the suspects, where they might have even been using the same laundry basket, etc. Plus they were the ones dressing him, etc, so it's not impossible that it could have been transferred in an innocuous way (like changing him after putting dirty laundry in the machine).

Technically even if Preston's DNA being present on the 'DNA mix' on the sex toys, that wouldn't be conclusive proof of sexual abuse happening either. For instance, I'm friends with a couple whose young child (at a similar age) managed to get hold of a, uh, personal item that they'd accidentally left out and apparently was very upset that his horrified parents managed to wrangle it off him before he could proudly show Grandma what he'd found

Now I do think the pair in this case are highly suspect from other details that have come out so far. But the forensic experts can only state what DNA has been found, not explain exactly how it got there.

 

[Tofino]

Can I ask, will the prosecution detail exactly when/how they believe the 2 counts of assault by penetration and 1 count of sexual assault occurred? Or are the jury supposed to just conclude something happened without going into specifics? I must admit the DNA evidence is not as strong as I thought it may be.

Yes they will go into more detail. I expect they will have medical experts such as a forensic pathologist to testify. They may not be able to pinpoint exactly when down to the day/hour but if it relates to an injury, the age of the injury can give a window.

they also only delivered the DNA evidence that were agreed facts this morning. If I understood earlier reporting correctly, it sounds like the saliva DNA evidence found on the cot may not be an agreed fact so if that’s the case then I expect to hear more around this too. (And potentially other DNA evidence if they have any that’s not agreed).

 

[Rubyroo160]

Ahh I see this is a good point that the DNA evidence this morning was only the agreed facts. Perhaps there is more to come which they don’t agree upon.

 

[JCMSadie]

How do you explain away the poo video? Or the large number of closes ups of genitals / bottom? The asleep in an empty bath video with the towel pushed up to show his genitals?? The video of a naked Preston playing with himself? And that’s before you even consider the 40+ bruises across his tiny body.

The bruises are damning for sure, it's crazy they weren't flagged up at the time. And from the description of the poo video I can't understand on what planet that could be seen as normal. But we've seen what family vloggers get away with in terms of what people think is weird but seemingly doesn't have legal or social work repercussions. I'm just concerned, if they are guilty, that without something more concrete, less open to interpretation or whatever, they could get off lighter than they deserve.

 

[frankiejoehoe]

This case is breaking my heart. That poor poor baby. My youngest son was born only 4 days after little Preston on 20th June 2022 and I just keep looking at him and how happy and innocent he is, growing up and going off to nursery and I can't help thinking little Preston should be doing the same everyday. Those monsters stole that little boys life and I really hope they rot in hell!