- 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 don’t think it would be in her best interests, but surely she must be for the trial to be running as long as it is?
You make a good point.
I agree - also they don’t actually appear to have any concrete evidence on FS. Not saying she is innocent either, but IMO there would be no benefit in FS taking the stand. Her defence can defend her without her adding to it, whereas SB Is screwed either way.
They have footage of her dragging her when she had a limp, not taking her to the doctors, admitting that she held her head underwater, and saying she ‘levelled’ her, and someone said she bit Star’s finger… I think they have a fair bit, just not as much as on SB.
You're fearful of being charged with murder, and you're worried about dogs and diesel? 
Someone called this earlier !!
Someone called this earlier !!
Fearful of being charged with murder but worried about stealing diesel amd having dogs at work.
she was right to be scared of what they found on her phone
she was right to be scared of what they found on her phone
Plus Ali’s point could be to show the jury just how vulnerable Frankie is, as she’ll probably come across that way on the stand especially compared to how bolshy and arrogant Savanna is being.
I get what you mean - and agree that it shows her as appalling - but mums get stressed and can pull their children out of frustration while they are refusing to walk ( dont agree with it - but it happens and can easily be down played ).
Biting again, it’s an old school parenting view if your child bites you should bite them back. I never would !! But not Lying when I say an elder in my family gave me that advice once when my daughter bit me
. The doctors again, there are times she has taken her and times she didn’t and she did seek advice from family members we heard. She could of stopped taking star to the doctors because of genuine worry about her being removed after SS involvement. It’s not right but she isn’t that smart is she.
I can’t see a way out of the dunking situation at all. I don’t think she is innocent not by a long shot, but I think her defence can talk it around but only if she doesn’t take the stand.
Which is why I don’t think she will. I hope am wrong though and she does and gets ripped apart. Just don’t see the logic in it at the moment.
Last edited:
Look after her but not protect her?
Notwithstanding all of the evidence of F’s neglect and physical mistreatment, I still find it hard to believe that she ever would have punched S or witnessed her being punched.
I think S might have convinced her that she needed to be hit to be toughened up.
Obviously I could be entirely wrong.
I think S might have convinced her that she needed to be hit to be toughened up.
Obviously I could be entirely wrong.
I agree that you can get frustrated at your toddlers, there’s times when I’ve been in a rush and my little boy is just refusing point blank to move and I’ve had to make him (obviously I didn’t rag him around sobbing) but weren’t she going to the doctors over it and told SB about her mum encouraging the doctors? I think she was going to take Star and SB was worried about all the damage she’s caused to her.I get what you mean - and agree that it shows her as appalling - but mums get stressed and can pull their children out of frustration while they are refusing to walk ( dont agree with it - but it happens and can easily be down played ).
Biting again, it’s an old school parenting view if your child bites you should bite them back. I never would !! But not Lying when I say an elder in my family gave me that advice once when my daughter bit me
The doctors again, there are times she has taken her and times she didn’t and she did seek advice from family members we heard. She could of stopped taking star to the doctors because of genuine worry about her being removed after SS involvement. It’s not right but she isn’t that smart is she.
I can’t see a way out of the dunking situation at all. I don’t think she is innocent not by a long shot, but I think her defence can talk it around but only if she doesn’t take the stand.
Which is why I don’t think she will. I hope am wrong though and she does and gets ripped apart. Just don’t see the logic in it at the moment.
There is no doubt FS is culpable in neglect, and potentially abuse -which i'm going to call 'low-to-mid' level for sake of the argument. I have never laid a hand on my children, nor can I imagine ever doing so - but people do. People do use force and time out steps and all sorts of things that I wouldn't agree with and you wouldn't agree with - .....but then when a holier than thou SB comes into the picture and shines all her influence (and it's very clear to us it's bullshit, but to a very naive and vulnerable 18 year old - she's probably like this all shining, all dancing, new exciting sexually, DemiGod - who calls all the shots, makes al the decisions and takes all the control).....
then FS naturally becomes more and more aggressive - she's now been shown the ropes in fighting, anger outbursts, 'childdiscipline(abuse)' from Mary Poppins herself (who has raised loads of kids you know, and dogs, and cared for people, and bla bla bleeping bla).....
..and so she's been imitating what she's learned to a degree. SB knew best - no family intervention, no contact with friends, no texting, no drinking (oh wait you can drink, when I can have your baby for a punchbag)..
The waterboarding by FS (Don't get me wrong, this makes me PHYSICALLY sick to my stomach - as does bending fingers, as does even the time out in a corner)...... HOWEVER .... I can see really clearly how it's all happened and unfolded...... 100%.... so FS yes, she is guilty of abuse for sure.
Fatally killing - brutal force, punches, head traumas..... I really doubt it. I really really really doubt it.
I think SB is the biggest psychopath of our century. She's gleefully sitting there like she's the absolute dogs bollox after killing a baby. SHE'S LITERALLY IN COURT FOR KILLING A BABY AND IS LAUGHING!!!! Answering allllll of the questions with such disdain and arrogance....
I just literally would love to choke her. (colloquialism....NOT) .....
then FS naturally becomes more and more aggressive - she's now been shown the ropes in fighting, anger outbursts, 'child
..and so she's been imitating what she's learned to a degree. SB knew best - no family intervention, no contact with friends, no texting, no drinking (oh wait you can drink, when I can have your baby for a punchbag)..
The waterboarding by FS (Don't get me wrong, this makes me PHYSICALLY sick to my stomach - as does bending fingers, as does even the time out in a corner)...... HOWEVER .... I can see really clearly how it's all happened and unfolded...... 100%.... so FS yes, she is guilty of abuse for sure.
Fatally killing - brutal force, punches, head traumas..... I really doubt it. I really really really doubt it.
I think SB is the biggest psychopath of our century. She's gleefully sitting there like she's the absolute dogs bollox after killing a baby. SHE'S LITERALLY IN COURT FOR KILLING A BABY AND IS LAUGHING!!!! Answering allllll of the questions with such disdain and arrogance....
I just literally would love to choke her. (colloquialism....
Imagine having the audacity to be smiling in that stand. What an utter bleep
I absolutely agree with you.
Sometimes I smile in frustration when I’m accused of something I haven’t done but there’s no way you would during a murder trial. You would be desperate to prove your innocence.
100% to everything here.
I also wondered if 'holding her under the water' meant the shower? Perhaps I'm wishful thinking as the thought that a poor little tot would be held under an actual body of water is too frightening to try and conjure up.
I think as a narcissist with an anti-social personality type she is enjoying the verbal sparring with Mr Ali.
I agree with others - nothing about this hearing should make anyone smile but I do enjoy watching top barristers in action. These QC's are so brilliant because they can detach from the human suffering and focus on proving the facts that suit their client. KG is focussed on creating reasonable doubt SB intended to harm Star, ZA is focussed on that same reasonable doubt for FS but is also planting the seed for diminished responsibility and the Crown needs to show there is no doubt, to get a conviction.
Imagine having a husband or wife as a barrister and arguing with them 
- Status