Preston Davey Trial

[PoppyKJ]

Even without the DNA evidence, the actions or lack of action are damning IMO.
The photos and videos don’t have a reasonable explanation.
My child had a growth on their genitalia when they were younger, it was seen by a GP & I was advised to take photos to assess the growth. Every time I did, I covered my baby as much as possible. My phone is private, they weren’t shown to anyone but a GP, but I still maintained her dignity. It’s basic! Even more basic for a safeguarding lead in a school

 

[TheMiceInTheShed]

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

As long as something gets the buggers locked up. I don't want this to be one of those "We know damn well they did it, but we can't quite prove it." cases. The photographs, texts, videos, hospital visits, bruises, internal injuries, leaving Preston to choke for ages before taking him the hospital - all of this points to deliberate and prolonged abuse.

 

[watermelonvapes]

I don't actually know how to blur sensitive stuff so my apologies, but trigger warning.

The other evidence they'll find hard to explain away include the screaming boo videos and worst of all that one with him draped over the cot bars featuring some sort of fluid
The screaming boo alone, can't be explained away. His defence will probably be struggling to cope, but that does not lead someone to intentional scare a poor little soul to see them fall apart

 

[Here2BNosey]

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?

The photos are the smoking gun so far to me. No one takes that many pictures of "their" baby naked. He wasn't a newborn he was a year old, so the naked photoshoots aren't really a thing at that age and even then I have never seen one with the babies genitals visible, a bare bum at most. The way the photos are described this far seems so far outside of normal that to me there's no reasonable explanation for them. Even in terms of the sheer amount of pictures where the baby is unclothed, it's just odd. Lifting a towel to show his privates while he's asleep in a bath with no water, when previous photos showed him covered up. It's not an accidental snap, it's posed that way.

 

[Jayneh2020]

Could the pathologist find dna inside the body just thinking based of the dna stuff given the fact they are very specific in saying one count of sexual abuse by penetration and this not really linking up with the dna found on pants and toys is that where the 100% guilty will come into it by saying both there dna was found inside of his mouth or mole ? If that makes sence ?

 

[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.

 

[Tofino]

I don’t understand this at all. Apart from it being cruel and neglectful. Why was he filming him? A 14 minute video is a huge length of time.

He also contradicts himself - wants to see how Preston was in his own company but then says Preston could see him.

 

[GirlWithTheBoomMic]

I don’t understand this at all. Apart from it being cruel and neglectful. Why was he filming him? A 14 minute video is a huge length of time.

He also contradicts himself - wants to see how Preston was in his own company but then says Preston could see him.

View attachment 3988649View attachment 3988650View attachment 3988651View attachment 3988652

I'm not sure "He whimpers every time he sees me" is quite the defence he thinks it is tbh.

(Been following this thread and agree with each of you. I hope there is full justice for Preston).

 

[Shinythings]

I don’t understand this at all. Apart from it being cruel and neglectful. Why was he filming him? A 14 minute video is a huge length of time.

He also contradicts himself - wants to see how Preston was in his own company but then says Preston could see him.

View attachment 3988649View attachment 3988650View attachment 3988651View attachment 3988652

Nah, he's either doing that to be intentionally cruel for his own satisfaction watching the video back or he's filming it to send to others.

You know what you do, Jamie? You put them in their cot or play pen warm and safe and you watch them on the monitor if you need to leave them alone.

bull.

 

[Upintheair83]

I don’t understand this at all. Apart from it being cruel and neglectful. Why was he filming him? A 14 minute video is a huge length of time.

He also contradicts himself - wants to see how Preston was in his own company but then says Preston could see him.

View attachment 3988649View attachment 3988650View attachment 3988651View attachment 3988652

I don't know what to say, just utterly heartbreaking......bring back the death penalty

 

[TheMiceInTheShed]

I don’t understand this at all. Apart from it being cruel and neglectful. Why was he filming him? A 14 minute video is a huge length of time.

He also contradicts himself - wants to see how Preston was in his own company but then says Preston could see him.

View attachment 3988649View attachment 3988650View attachment 3988651View attachment 3988652

The bleeping b!

There could be a reason the poor little thing whimpers when he catches sight of this evil large Kh^nt!

 

[PaddyDomino]

I don’t understand this at all. Apart from it being cruel and neglectful. Why was he filming him? A 14 minute video is a huge length of time.

He also contradicts himself - wants to see how Preston was in his own company but then says Preston could see him.

View attachment 3988649View attachment 3988650View attachment 3988651View attachment 3988652

And yet again, Varley "tells" on himself - he whimpers when he sees me
You can hear the anger in the police officer's voice, when you read this - good!
At last JV is being held accountable for his actions!
Not like those stupid heart emojis from that dimwit social worker

 

[nothinonyou]

There we go, Preston's DNA on their sex toys. Absolute monsters the pair of them

 

[SamPam]

Jfc. Absolute animal

 

[TheMiceInTheShed]

And yet again, Varley "tells" on himself - he whimpers when he sees me
You can hear the anger in the police officer's voice, when you read this - good!
At last JV is being held accountable for his actions!
Not like those stupid heart emojis from that dimwit social worker

Apart from being dangerous leaving ANY child of that age alone in the bath, that bath water will have been freezing after that amount of time. Poor cold, frightened, lonely little Preston. No wonder he was whimpering.

I could tear these men apart with my teeth!

 

[Shinythings]

Urgh he's such an arrogant b. Telling forensic experts they are in the wrong job, telling police they look silly. Utter sadistic, pathetic piece of tit.

 

[PaddyDomino]

The Home Office Pathologist, Dr Armour, gives her evidence tomorrow.
This is from the police interview:

 

[Itchy of Itchington]

And yet again, Varley "tells" on himself - he whimpers when he sees me
You can hear the anger in the police officer's voice, when you read this - good!
At last JV is being held accountable for his actions!
Not like those stupid heart emojis from that dimwit social worker

Could the pathologist find dna inside the body just thinking based of the dna stuff given the fact they are very specific in saying one count of sexual abuse by penetration and this not really linking up with the dna found on pants and toys is that where the 100% guilty will come into it by saying both there dna was found inside of his mouth or mole ? If that makes sence ?

A forensic swab could detect it. In the same way. However I seem to recall that in English law if a pen is used then it is referred to as grape but an object is used sexual assault by penetration.

Varley is a stupid man who thinks he is clever with the "oh the videos are to film him having a seizure". Well even more bleeping reason to not leave a baby that has seizures alone in a bath you large bleeping p. None of his stories make sense and as he tries harder to make excuses they don't stack up. To be a good liar you have to have an excellent memory and be believable

 

[SamPam]

His panic attack and shouting for his mother in the hospital make a lot more sense now, obviously absolutely shitting himself.

 

[Tofino]

His responses in the police interview remind me of Savannah Brockhill. Arrogant twit who thinks he’s smart but really isn’t. I expect he may give evidence as he is the type to think he can win over a jury.