UK - 4 children died in house fire, 27YO woman arrested, Sutton, 16 Dec 2021

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
At about 6.30pm on December 16 2021, she left the children unattended at the house in Collingwood Road and went to Sainsbury’s, jurors were told.

[...]

She [Kate Lumsdon KC] told jurors: “A neighbour kicked in the door but the fire had taken hold to the extent that it was impossible to enter.

[...]

“They [firemen] found the four boys under a bed in the upstairs front room. They were limp and unconscious.

“Firemen noted that there was rubbish all over the floor of the house and human excrement. There was a mattress and a door on the stairs.”

[...]

A fire investigation found the blaze was caused by a discarded cigarette or upturned tea light candle near the sofa in the downstairs front room and spread by igniting rubbish on the floor.

 
...Ms Lumsdon said Rose had claimed she left the children with a woman called Jade, which prompted firefighters to go back into the house to search for her.

But the prosecutor told jurors there was no sign of the friend, and extensive inquiries had led to the “firm conclusion” that Jade either did not exist or played no part in events of that evening.

Following her arrest, Rose maintained in a prepared statement that she had left the children in the care of a friend called Jade.

Ms Lumsdon said: “Despite following all the leads provided by Ms Rose and conducting their own investigations, the police could find no trace of Jade.”

 
The fire started from either a discarded cigarette or an upturned tea light which spread to rubbish on the floor and then engulfed the living room sofa, the Old Bailey heard.

[...]

‘As the firefighters were tackling the blaze, Deveca Rose arrived back from Sainsbury’s.

‘She was taken in by neighbours at the request of the fire service. She was later taken to a police van.

[...]

Ms Rose, wearing sunglasses, headphones and a large coat, sobbed and made loud moaning noises in the dock as the jury were sworn this morning.

Her junior barrister sat in the dock beside her as the judge asked her to raise her head so the jury could check if they recognised her.

Asked if she recognised any members of of the jury, she said she could not see anything.

Jurors were told she has issues with her eyes and would observe proceedings for the rest of the day via a link from a room with lower lighting.

 
So this doesn't look like a mere accident, a 'one-off' so to speak. It looks like the end result of prolonged child neglect and a severely hazardous environment for a young family.

I wonder if her defence is going to try and convince the jury of the existence of this "Jade" character who she has tried to pass the blame onto?

MOO
 
Those poor children, they must have been so frightened hiding under the bed together. What an awful home situation to be around too. I'm surprised no professionals picked up on mum clearly struggling with home conditions, ie the boys clothes smelling or dirty.
 
[...]

...Rose rejected offers of help from family and social services, jurors were told.

The prosecutor said: “There was rubbish thickly spread throughout the house. The toilet and the bath were full of rubbish and could not be used. Buckets and pots were used as toilets instead.”

The evidence suggested she was likely depressed and may have suffered from a personality disorder, but Ms Lumsdon said that was not a defence.

[...]

On a visit in July 2021, a social worker found rubbish at the house, a “very strong unpleasant smell” and was worried that Rose had not taken care of herself.

Jurors were told that Rose did not engage in further planned home visits and the case was closed in September 2021.

The children had not attended school for three weeks before the fire on December 16 2021.

more at links

 
Last edited:
[...]

“She either dropped a lit cigarette before she left or left tea lights burning, or both. A fire started on or under the sofa, and due to amount of rubbish in the house it took hold quickly.

“The children were, we suggest, locked in the house and could not escape. They ran upstairs to get away from the fire and shouted to the neighbours. But it was too late for anything to be done.”

Although the defendant ensured the children were well turned out, in reality they lived in “very poor conditions” and Rose rejected offers of help from family and social services, jurors were told.

The prosecutor said: “There was rubbish thickly spread throughout the house. The toilet and the bath were full of rubbish and could not be used. Buckets and pots were used as toilets instead.”

The evidence suggested she was likely depressed and may have suffered from a personality disorder, but Ms Lumsdon said that was not a defence.

[...]

After inappropriate behaviour was raised at school, social services intervened between July and September 2021, jurors heard.

On a visit in July 2021, a social worker found rubbish at the house, a “very strong unpleasant smell” and was worried that Rose had not taken care of herself.

Jurors were told that Rose did not engage in further planned home visits and the case was closed in September 2021.

The children had not attended school for three weeks before the fire on December 16 2021.

more at link
How on earth could social workers not follow this up and just closed the case .
 
How on earth could social workers not follow this up and just closed the case .
Non engagement and home conditions which are bad enough to raise health and safety concerns, there's no way those children should have been allowed to stay with mum. At the very least until home conditions were cleaned up.

There should have been a strategy meeting with all professionals and an initial child protection conference held to discuss the children being placed on a child protection plan and/or applying for an emergency care order. The children might have even had family members who could have stepped in to avoid foster care.
 
Non engagement and home conditions which are bad enough to raise health and safety concerns, there's no way those children should have been allowed to stay with mum. At the very least until home conditions were cleaned up.

There should have been a strategy meeting with all professionals and an initial child protection conference held to discuss the children being placed on a child protection plan and/or applying for an emergency care order. The children might have even had family members who could have stepped in to avoid foster care.
Another tragic case which raises big questions for social services to answer. Clear warning signs and no intervention where it would appear that there was overwhelming evidence of these children being in an environment where they were at significant risk of harm. Otherwise the deaths of 4 small children could have been avoided.

JMO
 
Another tragic case which raises big questions for social services to answer. Clear warning signs and no intervention where it would appear that there was overwhelming evidence of these children being in an environment where they were at significant risk of harm. Otherwise the deaths of 4 small children could have been avoided.

JMO
And teachers! 4 kids off school and nursery for 3 weeks with no explanation should raise suspicions
 
It came after a GP noted there was a "chaotic home environment".

Officials found the garden was full of rubbish and there was a "very strong unpleasant smell", it was said.

One added: "I asked to see the boys and Deveca refused saying they were asleep. I went to leave but asked again as I was going, Deveca then became quite manic and was defensive, walking out the door with me and pulling it closed behind her.

"I am concerned about her mental health and the fact that she refused to let me see the boys."

 
The state of the house makes the idea of anyone being asked to babysit all the more unlikely. 'If you need the loo there's a bucket over there' ???!!
Based on her other actions I daresay Deveca wouldn't have let anyone else look after the boys either, especially in the house itself, it's just another set of eyes and ears to report how horrific the living environment is to authorities. There seems to be a pattern of her not letting people see the boys and the house because she fears losing the boys, either to her ex or the care system.

IMO her mental health made it very difficult to care for infant children (let alone four of them under the same roof!). Unlike a certain other child manslaughter trial which happened at the old bailey earlier this year (I'm sure you all know which one!) I find myself having at least a little bit of sympathy for the defendant at this stage. But ultimately, she has acted selfishly and put the boys in danger in order to protect her own selfish needs, and the results could scarcely have been more catastrophic.

Speaking of that certain other trial. I wonder if the same crowd that turned up to show their support to Connie will take an interest in this trial too?

MOO
 
Last edited:

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
224
Guests online
3,643
Total visitors
3,867

Forum statistics

Threads
604,491
Messages
18,172,947
Members
232,626
Latest member
MB1985
Back
Top