No they went before their name was released officially because everyone around here knew it was them
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
This is awful, stomach churning to hear her descriptions of Leiland.
They passed vetting for fostering, i wonder was there anything in their past that should have thrown a red flag up?
They passed vetting for fostering, i wonder was there anything in their past that should have thrown a red flag up?
I don’t know why but this case has really got to me, I have a baby the same age. What an absolute rat she is I honestly hope she rots, how can anyone hurt a little baby like he was a baby he depended on her for everything and she betrayed him and him as well as for leathering a baby makes me sick
Were they Foster Carers? I haven’t read that.
Yes, they were on a foster to adopt pathway with Leiland apparently and hoped to adopt him permanently.
I know it’s early days here, but sounds like she is not denying she killed him but IS denying any malice in the killing…yet those text messages are it for me. It shows she had hatred for that baby 
He’d be alive now if they had come clean and said they no longer wanted to adopt and handed him over the minute they decided they didn’t want him deep down.
He’d be alive now if they had come clean and said they no longer wanted to adopt and handed him over the minute they decided they didn’t want him deep down.Did they have any other foster children before Leiland? My sister knows of them (she doesn’t know them personally) and has seen them, regularly, with a little girl and then Leiland, in the shop where she works, on the way to the park. She has never seen them with any other children.
She wouldn’t have had to foster Leiland before applying to adopt him.
Yes I think she’s pleased guilty to unlawfully killing him (manslaughter?) but not murder. It’s obviously horrific but for a trial I don’t think it’s going to be that complex? Compared to like Star / Logan / Arthur. Depending on their defence I suppose. I agree the text messages alone are pretty damning for both of them.I know it’s early days here, but sounds like she is not denying she killed him but IS denying any malice in the killing…yet those text messages are it for me. It shows she had hatred for that baby
If a child has been removed from parents and the LA has placed that child with people who aren't family, it is usually a 'foster' placement, rather than kinship etc.
They will have been approved by the LA to have the child placed with them, as the child would be a LAC (Looked After Child).
Foster to adopt exists, and before it goes through the courts to finalise placement it's a foster placement essentially controlled by the LA, by way of an ICO (Interim Care Order).
Last edited:
I know, some of the news reports were describing them as his foster parents so I am just repeating that. They have only just started opening statements at the trial so I imagine the relationship will be explained more as it continues.
Or a full Care Order, isn't always Interim.
I think people get stuck on the phrase foster carer, and simply it is someone who takes on the parent role, for a length of time, usually at the LAs say so.
Last edited:
Leiland was placed with foster carers a couple of days after birth and then placed with the Scott’s for adoption. It will take a while before the adoption order was granted. Poor baby
Social Services, the adoption agency and support workers all highlighted difficulties within the prospective adoptive family and they still left him there.There is a little girl living with them. Whether that child is their own or a child they were “looking after” her life will also be ruined by these monsters. God only knows what she has witnessed
Baby Leiland was removed from his birth family - for whatever reason - and handed to two sadistic monsters by the very people who are paid to protect him. What is going on with Child Protection Services! Another review where”lessons will be learnt” coming up. The trouble is lessons are never learnt and more children will lose their lives. A major overhaul of Childrens Services throughout the UK is needed NOW!
How can you ‘not get on’ with a 1 year old? They can’t talk or walk and just poop, eat, cry and sleep. They literally can’t do anything to ‘not get on’ with people because they act purely by instinct. Abusing an infant isn’t appropriately described as ‘not getting on’ with them.Leiland Corkhill was 13 months old and had been placed for adoption as a baby with the Castles. Very quickly they didn’t get on with Leiland and in January he lost his life.
Laura Castle admits manslaughter but not Murder. Scott Castle denies causing or allowing the death of a child.
Live updates: Woman admits unlawful killing of Leiland Corkill
THE jury in a trial of a couple accused of being involved in the death of a one-year-old has been sworn in. Prosecutors will outline their case this…www.nwemail.co.uk
I can totally understand that they were shocked and blindsided by how difficult they found adjusting to a traumatised, unsettled baby suddenly appearing in their lives. I can imagine that caring for this baby, taken away from the only caregivers he knew, must have been genuinely awful. He would have cried a lot. I can’t imagine that he would have let them comfort him either. And to top it off he wasn’t biologically related to them so they didn’t feel any sort of bond or love for him. I can understand all of that.
But… they should have known that was going to happen. Surely it would have been addressed over and over during their fostering training? To actually allow yourself to be tipped over the edge into violence and abuse is unthinkable. I have no idea what they’re going to say during the trial.
Just adding day 2 link. Much easier when they do separate pages for each day.
www.nwemail.co.uk
Live updates from Leiland Corkill trial: Day Two
Follow our live updates as the trial of Barrow couple Laura and Scott Castle continues into day two. They are facing charges relating to the death…
Wasn’t there a text message mentioned last week too, where she described him as ‘‘Lazy”? Is she for real. He was a baby, one…or not even one by then. I’ve heard the odd parent joke their kid is lazy but in the context here where we’ve got all the rest of the alarming texts, it’s just bizarre to say that. What was she expecting, him to suddenly walk talk and look after himself?
I’ve never babysat anyone else’s baby, but certainly after having had my own I’d know that a baby is very demanding and not to get bloody violent about it when there are tough days and nights. My toddler has been mental lately and through experience it’s pretty obvious not to even bother raising your voice, but to stay calm. As it diffuses them quicker and they don’t detect anything but comfort from you.
If it transpires that they seamlessly went through all the hoops and passed with flying colours to be approved as suitable people for fostering and adopting, then I can’t see how we can ever 100% prevent this. Equally though, if there were in fact red flags but the authorities ignored them then there’s the problem.
I’ve never babysat anyone else’s baby, but certainly after having had my own I’d know that a baby is very demanding and not to get bloody violent about it when there are tough days and nights. My toddler has been mental lately and through experience it’s pretty obvious not to even bother raising your voice, but to stay calm. As it diffuses them quicker and they don’t detect anything but comfort from you.
If it transpires that they seamlessly went through all the hoops and passed with flying colours to be approved as suitable people for fostering and adopting, then I can’t see how we can ever 100% prevent this. Equally though, if there were in fact red flags but the authorities ignored them then there’s the problem.
Yes. Exactly. I don’t think we can stop it.
I read the evidence from the social worker this morning and it seemed pretty clear that they knew the placement might collapse and it was only a matter of time before they would have to intervene. It sounds like it would have made things considerably easier if the couple had said “Come and get him, we can’t do this” but they (or the husband at least) was reluctant because the wider family “loved him”. They were reminded that this wasn’t a good enough reason to proceed with the adoption.
I also loathe it when people talk about “tapping” as a euphemism for smacking. A genuine tap would barely register with a baby as having happened, let alone register as discipline. So when someone says “tapping” they always mean smacking.
From reading very briefly about this I'd assumed they couldn't have their own children. And that -whilst inexcusable- their comments about him being lazy or hard work came from a place of inexperience, having the wrong expectations etc. But to find out they had their own child already?...just terrible.
I can't help thinking of Leilands biological parents. However bad his situation was with them, would it have been worse? Probably not.
I wonder if they were just fostering for the money? Because why else would they not just say it wasn't working out? My mum had a good friend who fostered a few children over the years, she definitely didn't do it for the money but always said there were a fair few foster carers who did
I can't help thinking of Leilands biological parents. However bad his situation was with them, would it have been worse? Probably not.
I wonder if they were just fostering for the money? Because why else would they not just say it wasn't working out? My mum had a good friend who fostered a few children over the years, she definitely didn't do it for the money but always said there were a fair few foster carers who did
thank you for adding the link!Just adding day 2 link. Much easier when they do separate pages for each day.
Live updates from Leiland Corkill trial: Day Two
Follow our live updates as the trial of Barrow couple Laura and Scott Castle continues into day two. They are facing charges relating to the death…
I think at the moment I’m sensing that Leiland was a clingy baby & perhaps her daughter hadn’t been like it and so she wasn’t used to that. That he was a big baby so would have been hard to carry around. That she was struggling to bond and had had the wherewithal to state this and ask for help. The social worker was reluctant to agree to the adoption but her superiors agreed it anyway as it’s normally unusual to refuse an adoption for a baby. I think she was tired and stressed and lost it. I feel it’s different to baby Star and Arthur etc, but it’s still wrong and I just wish she’d said “actually I don’t think we’re the right parents for him, please take him back.” Having said that I remember reading recently about an influencer who had adopted a child and had “returned him” because she felt they couldn’t give him the help he needed and they were slaughtered in the press and on tattle so I can understand why she wouldn’t want to admit that.
overall it’s such a sad situation, I think the husband should have helped more too, he obviously knew from her messages that she didn’t like Leiland and was assaulting him so he should have stepped in and stopped it.
poor Leiland, I’m so sorry he was failed.
Last edited:
Completely agree with all you’ve said!
She, and the husband did not want to “look bad” by giving back a baby. The family loved him. Thus we can’t give him back we’ll look bad to everybody we know. Well, how’s that working out for you now.
So Laura’s mum said in the witness box she did not know that Laura had said to her she didn’t love him. Then they read her statement at the time saying exactly that. You would not forget someone, your daughter too, telling you that you didn’t love the baby she was about to adopt.
how ridiculous Laura asking whether the foster family carried him “too much”. In their care he was 0-8 months.Of course they carried him a lot. I think she had an easy and light baby first time around and was totally unprepared for caring for another baby.