Savanna Brockhill & Frankie Smith #8

[lastdis]

She will never be off social services radar now but that’s not to say she will never lead a ‘normal’ life or go on to have another child/children in the future if she wanted to. Acquitted or not.
I also think that in time, if that’s what she wanted to do, she should be allowed to. That’s just my opinion. She’s really not ‘monster mum’ by a long shot.

She may have more , ss would support and watch closely. I had my first at 21 and youngest at 40. . she has 20 years to possibly have more and in that time who knows what could happen. She could completely turn this around , she could use this to teach others certain signs of abuse. Because her story would scare any mum into be extra careful even with people they trust

 

[Crystalcup]

I have been thinking all day about what I would decide if I were on the jury. After hearing all the evidence and listening to everyone’s input, I have changed what I stated previously. I know not everyone will agree with me, and some will think I’m mad and that’s fine, but hear me out I have thought long and hard about this.

SB - guilty of murder
FS- I’d find not guilty of all charges.

I do not believe that FS should be held accountable. I know she is her mum, and I felt so strongly on this before, but I really feel that it isn’t her fault. SB manipulated her, abused her and her child. I really don’t think FS had the mentality to stop her. I know I know, but people made reports to SS, she had her family etc etc, however, we have heard her compliance score, it is pretty dam high. Even if she had doubts, and others trying to pull her one way, she was compliant to SB and the women knew it. I believe SB could have convinced FS the sky was green if she tried hard enough. We know from SB’s evidence that she has complete confidence in her abilities to pull the wall over people’s eyes. I mean not many people would confidently try and convince a court of law that a video of them attacking a baby are those people being mistaken! It’s absolutely baffling.

Equally, FS’S IQ, I know people hate the analogy of comparing her to a nine year old or a child, however, I’d say her emotional intelligence and cognitive abilities is of that, the expert said as much, so why would we doubt him? I know children can have empathy, theory of mind, know right from wrong etc etc, however, these things would not occur in the circumstances of abuse so easily. FS went through a lot with SB I won’t list them we have read it, I can see how she wouldn’t of had a clue how to cope rationally. I fully believe even if she knew the extent of SB’s abuse (I don’t think she did) she wouldn’t have had the physical strength or mentality to stop it anyway. Because of her IQ and her compliance and the abuse.

I also know children can kill and be held accountable, I’ll give the example of Mary Bell (look her up if you havnt heard of her), she was found guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and rightly so she was only 10 ( and her upbringing was particularly traumatic). However, there was another little girl with Mary that day one who was 3 years older! Aged 13 and who some say could have and should have stopped Mary. She knew she had already killed one little boy, and was there when Mary killed again. But this child (even though older than Mary), was acquitted, why because her IQ was low, she wasn’t a evil or a cruel child and at the end of the day she didn’t commit the murder and couldn’t have stopped Mary. Some say she should of spoken out, could have discouraged the second boy from playing with them KNOWING what Mary had previously done and wanting to do again. But she didn’t stop any of this because her mentality made her unable, she was sucked in by Mary, most probably scared and just didn’t fully understand and it was only later she spoke out after realising the gravity of the situation. I have never heard anything more of Norma, so I assume the jury were correct in their verdict for her acquittal. I to some extent liken FS to Norma (based on her cognitive abilities). I mean Norma actually KNEW Mary had killed a child previously, but she was still acquitted, it’s a pretty old case though and I’m not sure when ‘allowing a death of a child’ became a chargeable offence. Perhaps, it wasn’t around then and if it had been Norma would have been found guilty of that. Nevertheless, I don’t believe she reoffended or posed a direct threat to society, unlike Mary or SB. (It’s important to add though Mary was rehabilitated as far I know).

I know some will say, but FS was cruel and the evidence shows she was cruel, but with the examples of sleep deprivation and star standing at the wall, I do think she thought she was doing right at the time, as deluded as it is. I think she partly did it to please SB through compliance and partly because she genuinely thought it was the correct way to parent. Also the startling Star awake, whilst so so cruel, just demonstrates her childish mentality. I really don’t think FS is evil at all or knowingly or wanted to hurt her child.

I also know people are going to say, but what about the finger biting, the water dunking, the filming her falling ? However, again, there is a pattern with all of these things SB was around or encouraged it. I also know she didn’t seek medical help for star on numerous occasions. Why because SB told her not to, she thought about it we can see that. But SB did stop her. FS trusted her first aid training, I don’t doubt SB boasted about it on many occasions. We have seen in court how she loves to big her self up!

The only time I can pinpoint FS being cruel to star without SB’S influence was when she was in town with her mother. But this again can be explained away as being a frustrated parent and being unable to cope. It’s awful to think about, Star was in pain and not being difficult for any other reason, but FS didn’t know. I think she believed SB when she said she was ‘petting’ over her leg (why would SB be wrong, she knew all about children and was trained in first aid) . Moreover, each time she questioned it SB told her she was wrong. Yes she should have known her baby was in pain and injured, but her own mother didn’t even notice that day did she.

I won’t go into detail about her going out drinking, and having numerous people baby sit, or her other obvious less than ideal parenting choices. Because to me it doesn’t really amount to much. It Just reflects her inadequacies as a mother ( because of her lack of understanding) and doesn’t make her IMO evil or culpable for murder or for allowing the death of her child.

I fully believe she was incapable of knowing how to act in her dire situation. I believe each time she voiced her doubts she was made to feel even more stupid and inadequate, which just stunted her abilities further. She took SB’s word as gospel most of the time, because she was older , more worldly and intimidating. She convinced FS she had no idea how to parent, she removed her support network and isolated her. Yes she went to SB again after she had suspicions and even asked SB have star on her own again. However, by then I feel she was completely lost. She thought SB knew best and loved them, it’s ridiculous to an outsider with a higher IQ but FS didn’t have our knowledge or strength. She just couldn’t comprehend it. She doubted her self because SB made her doubt her self. Any self worth or confidence FS had by this point I believe was gone. She was starting to take notice but couldn’t quite join the dots. I think she was in denial. SB took everything from her and over such a short space of time. To me that fact alone speaks volumes. If SB had never been on scene Star would be here and that much to me is obvious.

SB is IMO a sadist and is fully guilty for the death of that beautiful baby. I hope she rots in prison for the rest of her life.

Please no one bite my head off, this is just the way I have come to understand the situation, and of course i could be completely wrong ! Equally, even though I don’t think she is guilty I think the jury will still convict FS for allowing the death of her child, I just don’t agree with it.very true, I've had first hand experience of a manipulative per

I have been thinking all day about what I would decide if I were on the jury. After hearing all the evidence and listening to everyone’s input, I have changed what I stated previously. I know not everyone will agree with me, and some will think I’m mad and that’s fine, but hear me out I have thought long and hard about this.

SB - guilty of murder
FS- I’d find not guilty of all charges.

I do not believe that FS should be held accountable. I know she is her mum, and I felt so strongly on this before, but I really feel that it isn’t her fault. SB manipulated her, abused her and her child. I really don’t think FS had the mentality to stop her. I know I know, but people made reports to SS, she had her family etc etc, however, we have heard her compliance score, it is pretty dam high. Even if she had doubts, and others trying to pull her one way, she was compliant to SB and the women knew it. I believe SB could have convinced FS the sky was green if she tried hard enough. We know from SB’s evidence that she has complete confidence in her abilities to pull the wall over people’s eyes. I mean not many people would confidently try and convince a court of law that a video of them attacking a baby are those people being mistaken! It’s absolutely baffling.

Equally, FS’S IQ, I know people hate the analogy of comparing her to a nine year old or a child, however, I’d say her emotional intelligence and cognitive abilities is of that, the expert said as much, so why would we doubt him? I know children can have empathy, theory of mind, know right from wrong etc etc, however, these things would not occur in the circumstances of abuse so easily. FS went through a lot with SB I won’t list them we have read it, I can see how she wouldn’t of had a clue how to cope rationally. I fully believe even if she knew the extent of SB’s abuse (I don’t think she did) she wouldn’t have had the physical strength or mentality to stop it anyway. Because of her IQ and her compliance and the abuse.

I also know children can kill and be held accountable, I’ll give the example of Mary Bell (look her up if you havnt heard of her), she was found guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and rightly so she was only 10 ( and her upbringing was particularly traumatic). However, there was another little girl with Mary that day one who was 3 years older! Aged 13 and who some say could have and should have stopped Mary. She knew she had already killed one little boy, and was there when Mary killed again. But this child (even though older than Mary), was acquitted, why because her IQ was low, she wasn’t a evil or a cruel child and at the end of the day she didn’t commit the murder and couldn’t have stopped Mary. Some say she should of spoken out, could have discouraged the second boy from playing with them KNOWING what Mary had previously done and wanting to do again. But she didn’t stop any of this because her mentality made her unable, she was sucked in by Mary, most probably scared and just didn’t fully understand and it was only later she spoke out after realising the gravity of the situation. I have never heard anything more of Norma, so I assume the jury were correct in their verdict for her acquittal. I to some extent liken FS to Norma (based on her cognitive abilities). I mean Norma actually KNEW Mary had killed a child previously, but she was still acquitted, it’s a pretty old case though and I’m not sure when ‘allowing a death of a child’ became a chargeable offence. Perhaps, it wasn’t around then and if it had been Norma would have been found guilty of that. Nevertheless, I don’t believe she reoffended or posed a direct threat to society, unlike Mary or SB. (It’s important to add though Mary was rehabilitated as far I know).

I know some will say, but FS was cruel and the evidence shows she was cruel, but with the examples of sleep deprivation and star standing at the wall, I do think she thought she was doing right at the time, as deluded as it is. I think she partly did it to please SB through compliance and partly because she genuinely thought it was the correct way to parent. Also the startling Star awake, whilst so so cruel, just demonstrates her childish mentality. I really don’t think FS is evil at all or knowingly or wanted to hurt her child.

I also know people are going to say, but what about the finger biting, the water dunking, the filming her falling ? However, again, there is a pattern with all of these things SB was around or encouraged it. I also know she didn’t seek medical help for star on numerous occasions. Why because SB told her not to, she thought about it we can see that. But SB did stop her. FS trusted her first aid training, I don’t doubt SB boasted about it on many occasions. We have seen in court how she loves to big her self up!

The only time I can pinpoint FS being cruel to star without SB’S influence was when she was in town with her mother. But this again can be explained away as being a frustrated parent and being unable to cope. It’s awful to think about, Star was in pain and not being difficult for any other reason, but FS didn’t know. I think she believed SB when she said she was ‘petting’ over her leg (why would SB be wrong, she knew all about children and was trained in first aid) . Moreover, each time she questioned it SB told her she was wrong. Yes she should have known her baby was in pain and injured, but her own mother didn’t even notice that day did she.

I won’t go into detail about her going out drinking, and having numerous people baby sit, or her other obvious less than ideal parenting choices. Because to me it doesn’t really amount to much. It Just reflects her inadequacies as a mother ( because of her lack of understanding) and doesn’t make her IMO evil or culpable for murder or for allowing the death of her child.

I fully believe she was incapable of knowing how to act in her dire situation. I believe each time she voiced her doubts she was made to feel even more stupid and inadequate, which just stunted her abilities further. She took SB’s word as gospel most of the time, because she was older , more worldly and intimidating. She convinced FS she had no idea how to parent, she removed her support network and isolated her. Yes she went to SB again after she had suspicions and even asked SB have star on her own again. However, by then I feel she was completely lost. She thought SB knew best and loved them, it’s ridiculous to an outsider with a higher IQ but FS didn’t have our knowledge or strength. She just couldn’t comprehend it. She doubted her self because SB made her doubt her self. Any self worth or confidence FS had by this point I believe was gone. She was starting to take notice but couldn’t quite join the dots. I think she was in denial. SB took everything from her and over such a short space of time. To me that fact alone speaks volumes. If SB had never been on scene Star would be here and that much to me is obvious.

SB is IMO a sadist and is fully guilty for the death of that beautiful baby. I hope she rots in prison for the rest of her life.

Please no one bite my head off, this is just the way I have come to understand the situation, and of course i could be completely wrong ! Equally, even though I don’t think she is guilty I think the jury will still convict FS for allowing the death of her child, I just don’t agree with it.

You put that exactly how I see it , and yes the Mary Bell case with Norma Bell ( no relation)
Once in the grip of a violent bully ,the chance of getting away can be very hard . So many good points you have put across and I totally agree with all you have said .

 

[Bekika]

My DIL is the loveliest person and a fantastic Mum, until she has a drink. When she drinks she becomes abusive and at times violent towards my son. My grandchildren age 7 and 8 know this is wrong and tell me every time as they fear for their daddy even though she has told them not to tell.
I won't go into any more detail, only things are in place to get it sorted - urgently.
Make of this what you will...

 

[elikayute]

My DIL is the loveliest person and a fantastic Mum, until she has a drink. When she drinks she becomes abusive and at times violent towards my son. My grandchildren age 7 and 8 know this is wrong and tell me every time as they fear for their daddy even though she has told them not to tell.
I won't go into any more detail, only things are in place to get it sorted - urgently.
Make of this what you will...

I hope by “things in place urgently”, he realises that contact can be stopped immediately. How distressing for you all

 

[mRsKbRoOkS]

You raise a lot of valid points but your key one is undermined by FS herself "she had no clue what she was doing was wrong", she admitted she knew some of it was wrong. She stated she lied to SB numerous times about holding Star on the wall for long times cos she knew it was wrong. She said that when SB told her to hit or get physical with her child, she says she'd refuse/lie about it as she knew it was wrong. FS has demonstrated the ability to tell right from wrong, she still admitted to SB to holding her child's head under water, others testified she bit Star's fingers, she neglected her child despite suspecting something was wrong with her as she said. FS showed an ability to ignore what SB told her if she felt it was wrong as shown by the lies she admits to telling regarding sending pics etc to fool SB to believing she was being firm with Star.

She stated she was more combative with SB towards the end too. Yet she still neglected her child, has admitted to being criminally cruel to her child, and allowed a dangerous individual near her child and was happy to allow her to take her whilst she went out drinking. She may well have diminished responsibility but FS was capable of saving that poor girls life, she had the ability to do so but she failed her massively

Thanks for the reply! - I knew you would have some good points to counteract my argument . I’ll think it over and reply later

Strange but true fact; many years ago in a previous career I served Maxine Carr. This was after her prison release. She looked the same except she had changed her hair.. she was living in a nearby village I believe, but had to leave when her identity was outed.

Out of curiosity, what did you make of her during your brief encounter? - knowing what you know of her did you treat her differently? Or was it after she left that it clicked to you who she was?

 

[one_time_user]

it’s fascinating how in this case and in the Arthur Labinjo-Hughes case video and phone messages have worked to paint a much broader picture or abuse and responsibility.

if we didn’t have all that, I wonder what the jury would conclude from the deaths, if that was the only episode they had to address. In my mind,with Star, you’d see a serious, murderous assault by one of two women who, immediately after it happened and throughout, lied about it. And you’d have a baby with extreme signs of prolonged abuse to her body. I still find it impossible to see FS acquitted, despite truly hearing and agreeing with alot of what is said above.

I guess what I’m saying it, the consequences of FS actions, however justifiable her actions might be and however much empathy you might have for her, her child died from horrific and prolonged child abuse, and ultimately died as a result, while in her care. She is on trial remember, they didn’t determine her not fit for the charges. I know this is a minority view here so please don’t pounce on me! Closing statements may well change perspective again.

 

[dollycurz]

I think the bruising must be really bad if they put a causing or allowing on FS and not a cruelty/neglect.

 

[mRsKbRoOkS]

I think the bruising must be really bad if they put a causing or allowing on FS and not a cruelty/neglect.

I think they have opted for the two charges, because they were confident one of them would be found guilty of murder and therefore, the other would be found guilty of allowing. Just at the time they didn’t know which one. From the trial and evidence IMO it’s clear now that it is SB. Perhaps, now all the evidence has been heard, after trial FS will be charged with that offence?

 

[Pulltheotherone]

I guess what I’m saying it, the consequences of FS actions, however justifiable her actions might be and however much empathy you might have for her, her child died from horrific and prolonged child abuse, and ultimately died as a result, while in her care. She is on trial remember, they didn’t determine her not fit for the charges. I know this is a minority view here so please don’t pounce on me! Closing statements may well change perspective again.

Totally agree FWIW

 

[dollycurz]

I think they have opted for the two charges, because they were confident one of them would be found guilty of murder and therefore, the other would be found guilty of allowing. Just at the time they didn’t know which one. From the trial and evidence IMO it’s clear now that it is SB. Perhaps, now all the evidence has been heard, after trial FS will be charged with that offence?

I mean bad as in it would have been obvious to anyone and FS defence team have had her IQ tested for damage control so at least her sentence won’t be too harsh.

 

[Bekika]

My DIL is the loveliest person and a fantastic Mum, until she has a drink. When she drinks she becomes abusive and at times violent towards my son. My grandchildren age 7 and 8 know this is wrong and tell me every time as they fear for their daddy even though she has told them not to tell.
I won't go into any more detail, only things are in place to get it sorted - urgently.
Make of this what you will...

It was difficult for me to post this but I guess the point I'm trying to get across is, even a 7 year old knows what is right and what is wrong, feels fear for another person and can foresee the consequences if it doesn't stop

 

[mRsKbRoOkS]

Does anyone think the CCTV footage will become an agreed fact? And that after yesterdays evidence proving SB wasn’t on the phone at the time and therefore was lying will help cement it as one ? Perhaps, that is why the agreed facts are taking so long to conclude. I really wonder how clear it is. Though, I don’t believe the prosecution would bring it to court if is wasn’t damming. But then on the flip side, it’s hard to believe a QC such as KG would allow SB to argue against it if it couldn’t be disputed.

 

[Bizzarebbq]

It was difficult for me to post this but I guess the point I'm trying to get across is, even a 7 year old knows what is right and what is wrong, feels fear for another person and can foresee the consequences if it doesn't stop

I really don’t think they do. Some 7 year olds maybe, but not all of them. Thats why age of criminal responsibility is 10

 

[one_time_user]

Does anyone think the CCTV footage will become an agreed fact? And that after yesterdays evidence proving SB wasn’t on the phone at the time and therefore was lying will help cement it as one ? Perhaps, that is why the agreed facts are taking so long to conclude. I really wonder how clear it is. Though, I don’t believe the prosecution would bring it to court if is wasn’t damming. But then on the flip side, it’s hard to believe a QC such as KG would allow SB to argue against it if it couldn’t be disputed.

I wonder if she only first disputed it on the stand? Before that she hadn’t said she was on the phone and it threw everyone? I guess they’re trying to get the fact she wasn’t on the phone as an agreed fact (and by default that she’s lied under oath), they won’t agree an assault on cctv will they?

 

[PinkMariner]

I have been thinking all day about what I would decide if I were on the jury. After hearing all the evidence and listening to everyone’s input, I have changed what I stated previously. I know not everyone will agree with me, and some will think I’m mad and that’s fine, but hear me out I have thought long and hard about this.

SB - guilty of murder
FS- I’d find not guilty of all charges.

I do not believe that FS should be held accountable. I know she is her mum, and I felt so strongly on this before, but I really feel that it isn’t her fault. SB manipulated her, abused her and her child. I really don’t think FS had the mentality to stop her. I know I know, but people made reports to SS, she had her family etc etc, however, we have heard her compliance score, it is pretty dam high. Even if she had doubts, and others trying to pull her one way, she was compliant to SB and the women knew it. I believe SB could have convinced FS the sky was green if she tried hard enough. We know from SB’s evidence that she has complete confidence in her abilities to pull the wall over people’s eyes. I mean not many people would confidently try and convince a court of law that a video of them attacking a baby are those people being mistaken! It’s absolutely baffling.

Equally, FS’S IQ, I know people hate the analogy of comparing her to a nine year old or a child, however, I’d say her emotional intelligence and cognitive abilities is of that, the expert said as much, so why would we doubt him? I know children can have empathy, theory of mind, know right from wrong etc etc, however, these things would not occur in the circumstances of abuse so easily. FS went through a lot with SB I won’t list them we have read it, I can see how she wouldn’t of had a clue how to cope rationally. I fully believe even if she knew the extent of SB’s abuse (I don’t think she did) she wouldn’t have had the physical strength or mentality to stop it anyway. Because of her IQ and her compliance and the abuse.

I also know children can kill and be held accountable, I’ll give the example of Mary Bell (look her up if you havnt heard of her), she was found guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and rightly so she was only 10 ( and her upbringing was particularly traumatic). However, there was another little girl with Mary that day one who was 3 years older! Aged 13 and who some say could have and should have stopped Mary. She knew she had already killed one little boy, and was there when Mary killed again. But this child (even though older than Mary), was acquitted, why because her IQ was low, she wasn’t a evil or a cruel child and at the end of the day she didn’t commit the murder and couldn’t have stopped Mary. Some say she should of spoken out, could have discouraged the second boy from playing with them KNOWING what Mary had previously done and wanting to do again. But she didn’t stop any of this because her mentality made her unable, she was sucked in by Mary, most probably scared and just didn’t fully understand and it was only later she spoke out after realising the gravity of the situation. I have never heard anything more of Norma, so I assume the jury were correct in their verdict for her acquittal. I to some extent liken FS to Norma (based on her cognitive abilities). I mean Norma actually KNEW Mary had killed a child previously, but she was still acquitted, it’s a pretty old case though and I’m not sure when ‘allowing a death of a child’ became a chargeable offence. Perhaps, it wasn’t around then and if it had been Norma would have been found guilty of that. Nevertheless, I don’t believe she reoffended or posed a direct threat to society, unlike Mary or SB. (It’s important to add though Mary was rehabilitated as far I know).

I know some will say, but FS was cruel and the evidence shows she was cruel, but with the examples of sleep deprivation and star standing at the wall, I do think she thought she was doing right at the time, as deluded as it is. I think she partly did it to please SB through compliance and partly because she genuinely thought it was the correct way to parent. Also the startling Star awake, whilst so so cruel, just demonstrates her childish mentality. I really don’t think FS is evil at all or knowingly or wanted to hurt her child.

I also know people are going to say, but what about the finger biting, the water dunking, the filming her falling ? However, again, there is a pattern with all of these things SB was around or encouraged it. I also know she didn’t seek medical help for star on numerous occasions. Why because SB told her not to, she thought about it we can see that. But SB did stop her. FS trusted her first aid training, I don’t doubt SB boasted about it on many occasions. We have seen in court how she loves to big her self up!

The only time I can pinpoint FS being cruel to star without SB’S influence was when she was in town with her mother. But this again can be explained away as being a frustrated parent and being unable to cope. It’s awful to think about, Star was in pain and not being difficult for any other reason, but FS didn’t know. I think she believed SB when she said she was ‘petting’ over her leg (why would SB be wrong, she knew all about children and was trained in first aid) . Moreover, each time she questioned it SB told her she was wrong. Yes she should have known her baby was in pain and injured, but her own mother didn’t even notice that day did she.

I won’t go into detail about her going out drinking, and having numerous people baby sit, or her other obvious less than ideal parenting choices. Because to me it doesn’t really amount to much. It Just reflects her inadequacies as a mother ( because of her lack of understanding) and doesn’t make her IMO evil or culpable for murder or for allowing the death of her child.

I fully believe she was incapable of knowing how to act in her dire situation. I believe each time she voiced her doubts she was made to feel even more stupid and inadequate, which just stunted her abilities further. She took SB’s word as gospel most of the time, because she was older , more worldly and intimidating. She convinced FS she had no idea how to parent, she removed her support network and isolated her. Yes she went to SB again after she had suspicions and even asked SB have star on her own again. However, by then I feel she was completely lost. She thought SB knew best and loved them, it’s ridiculous to an outsider with a higher IQ but FS didn’t have our knowledge or strength. She just couldn’t comprehend it. She doubted her self because SB made her doubt her self. Any self worth or confidence FS had by this point I believe was gone. She was starting to take notice but couldn’t quite join the dots. I think she was in denial. SB took everything from her and over such a short space of time. To me that fact alone speaks volumes. If SB had never been on scene Star would be here and that much to me is obvious.

SB is IMO a sadist and is fully guilty for the death of that beautiful baby. I hope she rots in prison for the rest of her life.

Please no one bite my head off, this is just the way I have come to understand the situation, and of course i could be completely wrong ! Equally, even though I don’t think she is guilty I think the jury will still convict FS for allowing the death of her child, I just don’t agree with it.

This sums up everything I think and feel exactly. I agree 100% with everything you have said. Well written

 

[Bekika]

I really don’t think they do. Some 7 year olds maybe, but not all of them. Thats why age of criminal responsibility is 10

Well I am grateful and fortunate to have such switched on grandchildren who have more empathy than a 20 year old mother with a low IQ.
Don't get me wrong. I do believe FS was abused, manipulated and gaslighted. That is plain enough for anyone to see and I can sympathise with that. I just don't buy her low IQ as an excuse to exonerate her from any blame

 

[Milktray]

She may have more , ss would support and watch closely. I had my first at 21 and youngest at 40. . she has 20 years to possibly have more and in that time who knows what could happen. She could completely turn this around , she could use this to teach others certain signs of abuse. Because her story would scare any mum into be extra careful even with people they trust

She could, with the right support. And I'm interested to see where her life takes her after any sentence is complete.

First and foremost, FS is going to need some serious counselling and then given education to help rehabilitate her back in to every day life.
She'll then have to choose where she settles and start redeeming herself. And that will be the hard bit. She either builds a whole new life outside of Bradford or she sticks with it.

But she will need some support, otherwise she risks falling into a life of being manipulated if she meets the wrong people.

In terms of educating other women...I think she's more likely to do an interview on Lorraine or This Morning than do anything more meaningful.

Personally though, I think she will get found guilty for 'allowing' (purely because she delayed in getting medical help) but there's a lot of mitigating factors that the judge will consider and I believe her sentence could be reduced greatly.

 

[Ktb]

She should be absolutely be held accountable
She had one job, to love and protect her own flesh and blood. Low IQ does not come into play with that IMO
I don’t for one minute think she’ll get the sentence she deserves, not at all.

 

[elikayute]

FS & SB were charged with causing or allowing a death very shortly after Star died. She hadn’t had the IQ test then.
I think when a child dies and there are two suspects (parents and/or partner of parent) it’s standard to charge both with this charge. From what I understand, it’s why this charge came in. Technically, FS could be guilty of murder depending on what the jury decide. It’s not for the police to decide, she has to be tried. And there is a fair amount of evidence that she could be guilty of allowing the death by failing to protect Star. I’m not hopeful that an average jury would have sufficient knowledge of the interplay between trauma, intelligence and compliance to understand just how limited she may have been in her ability to protect Star.

Today will surely be tough with very damning closing arguments from prosecution.

Delaying getting medical help shouldn’t really determine the sentence. It made no difference to whether Star would have died or not.

Well I am grateful and fortunate to have such switched on grandchildren who have more empathy than a 20 year old mother with a low IQ.
Don't get me wrong. I do believe FS was abused, manipulated and gaslighted. That is plain enough for anyone to see and I can sympathise with that. I just don't buy her low IQ as an excuse to exonerate her from any blame

It isn’t an excuse though - it’s an important factor in understanding her capacity. It’s also not just low IQ alone, it’s the combination of that and the high compliance that made her particularly vulnerable to SBs manipulation.

 

[LittleMy]

Trial Day 30:

LIVE: Star Hobson murder trial Day 30 - prosecution closing speech to begin

Live updates from the trial of Frankie Smith and Savannah Brockhill, accused of murdering 16-month-old Star Hobson on September 22, 2020

www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk