UK - Arthur Labinjo Hughes, 6, killed, dad & friend arrested, June 2020

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
This case, with all the torture, reminds me of the horrific torture of 3 children & murder of Liam Fee in Scotland. His mother and her partner received 23 & 24 year sentences.
Just offering a kind of benchmark in case of disappointment, not saying that will be the sentence here, if found guilty*, obvs.

* yeah I know but sub judice & all that


Liam Fee trial: Gateshead couple subjected two-year-old to catalogue of torture, court hears (warning re horror in this report)

Two women accused of killing toddler Liam Fee have been found guilty of murder
 
Last edited:
Do you think Thomas Hughes was fully aware of the abuse that his partner was inflicting on his boy? Or do you think he did not realize she was abusing him and starving him? In his interviews he talks about how she did the best for him and that she refused to hit him or touch him. I just wonder if he really believed this, like was in such great denial about the situation. Or maybe he did know and is playing “dumb”. I’m just so puzzled by this guy.
 
Chessgirl said:
Do you think Thomas Hughes was fully aware of the abuse that his partner was inflicting on his boy? Or do you think he did not realize she was abusing him and starving him? In his interviews he talks about how she did the best for him and that she refused to hit him or touch him. I just wonder if he really believed this, like was in such great denial about the situation. Or maybe he did know and is playing “dumb”. I’m just so puzzled by this guy.
Click to expand...
I read they exchanged sms about the abuse.
 
Police told the grandmother of a boy allegedly murdered by his parents she would be arrested if she returned to the house for breaking Covid rules, a court has heard.

An officer told Thomas Hughes' mother and brother Daniel not to see Arthur Labinjo-Hughes, six, at the house in Solihull, West Midlands, the jury was told.

The West Midlands Police worker was said to be reluctant to accept pictures highlighting the alleged abuse Arthur had suffered, Coventry Crown Court heard.

Daniel told jurors he never heard back from the force despite the images showing bruises on the boy's back. [...]

'A police officer identified himself, who said he had been around to the address and spoke with Miss Tustin and Tom. We were advised if we were to return to the address we would be arrested.

[...]

In his first interview with police officers, just hours after Arthur had died, Hughes told how he had struck his son for 'lashing out'.

He said: 'I almost felt the more I clipped him the more he would try and push the boundaries and get more aggressive.

'It became almost a tale of two egos. Like his dad's ego that Arthur should be showing respect to the adults in the house.

'And Arthur's ego of ''what boundaries can I push because I've never had these boundaries before''.

'It comes across as two egos that have clashed. And unfortunately this is the outcome.'

Tragic Arthur's 'grandmother was threatened with ARREST for trying to help' | Daily Mail Online
 
Tortoise said:
Police told the grandmother of a boy allegedly murdered by his parents she would be arrested if she returned to the house for breaking Covid rules, a court has heard.

An officer told Thomas Hughes' mother and brother Daniel not to see Arthur Labinjo-Hughes, six, at the house in Solihull, West Midlands, the jury was told.

The West Midlands Police worker was said to be reluctant to accept pictures highlighting the alleged abuse Arthur had suffered, Coventry Crown Court heard.

Daniel told jurors he never heard back from the force despite the images showing bruises on the boy's back. [...]

'A police officer identified himself, who said he had been around to the address and spoke with Miss Tustin and Tom. We were advised if we were to return to the address we would be arrested.

[...]

In his first interview with police officers, just hours after Arthur had died, Hughes told how he had struck his son for 'lashing out'.

He said: 'I almost felt the more I clipped him the more he would try and push the boundaries and get more aggressive.

'It became almost a tale of two egos. Like his dad's ego that Arthur should be showing respect to the adults in the house.

'And Arthur's ego of ''what boundaries can I push because I've never had these boundaries before''.

'It comes across as two egos that have clashed. And unfortunately this is the outcome.'

Tragic Arthur's 'grandmother was threatened with ARREST for trying to help' | Daily Mail Online
Click to expand...
This is insane!!! :(
 
Chessgirl said:
You are right. He was obviously aware, but I wonder if he believed those things the step mum accused Arthur of. He sounds like he might be delusional about the whole thing.
Click to expand...

I wondered that myself, the quotes posted today ( Family sent photos of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes' injuries to police, court told continues to give excellent detail every day) do sound like it's certainly possible that he's just blindly taken her word for it about Arthur's behaviour. It'll be interesting if he gives evidence later, to see what he thinks about it all now, especially as to whether he's still all in on Tustin's side or turns on her, now questioning how true her accusations actually were.

I guess I'm a person who always wants to not believe the worst in people, so I think he might at least have something of a defence case when it's combined with his mother saying he's easily led - no excuse for the abuse, but it might get him off the murder charge. Although those texts... sheesh, that'll take some explaining, and makes me rather less inclined to give the benefit of the doubt than I might be otherwise.
 
Kasmeer said:
I wondered that myself, the quotes posted today ( Family sent photos of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes' injuries to police, court told continues to give excellent detail every day) do sound like it's certainly possible that he's just blindly taken her word for it about Arthur's behaviour. It'll be interesting if he gives evidence later, to see what he thinks about it all now, especially as to whether he's still all in on Tustin's side or turns on her, now questioning how true her accusations actually were.

I guess I'm a person who always wants to not believe the worst in people, so I think he might at least have something of a defence case when it's combined with his mother saying he's easily led - no excuse for the abuse, but it might get him off the murder charge. Although those texts... sheesh, that'll take some explaining, and makes me rather less inclined to give the benefit of the doubt than I might be otherwise.
Click to expand...

Yes! Those texts were terrible, but for some reason a part of me wonders if this woman brainwashed him or something. Still, no excuse but perhaps he won’t get the murder charge. I’m waiting for him to turn on Tustin and admit that she’s a monster. Can’t believe he hasn’t done that yet.
 
Thomas Hughes told police how he 'cut up' son Arthur's beloved Birmingham FC shirt in front of him | Daily Mail Online


During police interviews, Hughes revealed how Arthur had spent much of his waking hours during lockdown in 'isolation' and admitted to police: 'I'll be honest. Now, I've had a taste of it, it was the same as prison. It wasn't nice and it was wrong.'

In transcripts read out to jurors at Coventry Crown Court, Hughes said: 'From lockdown up until his death. He spent more of his time in isolation.

'I can't remember the time he was treated like a normal child by myself. I can't remember the last time he was allowed to sit in and watch TV.'

Without the presence of a solicitor, Hughes revealed how he slapped Arthur for interrupting his fish and chips and slashed his favourite football shirt.

He told how he sent text messages telling Tustin to 'bounce' Arthur's head and 'kill him', and said he put in 'punishment' rules that would see his son confined to the hallway from 'nearly the time he would get up, to bed time'.
 
i can't tell if he's so stupid he keeps incriminating himself by blatantly listing all the times he abused Arthur, or if he's doing it to protect Tustin. Either way he's a self-absorbed prick with zero remorse. He's speaking about Arthur as if it were a pet that died
 
Tortoise said:
The details of this case are simply heart-wrenching. The pair of them are monsters, I don't see any difference between them in culpability. On second thoughts I think he is more culpable being as he was his father.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think society judges cruel women/mothers more harshly than men and tries to forgive, or at least understand, men who discipline their children physically or with anger, but what the court is hearing about the father paints a far worse picture than that imo.

If the abuse had only come from Tustin, I might accept that Hughes had read the vast number of texts about Arthur's supposed transgressions and dismissed them as her "going on" without realising exactly how shockingly his child was being mistreated day in day out. But actually, the abuse and cruelty was also coming from him, and much of it was cold and calculated rather than delivered in anger, such as cutting up the favourite football shirt.

I think Hughes is hoping to hide behind the revulsion everyone feels for Tustin and look like he was oblivious or doing his best, when in fact he is just as bad as her and additionally more than failed in his duty to protect his child from an abuser, instead serving him up on a plate to her.

All the evidence is that Arthur's grandparents were keen to give him a home, so imo the insistence on having him live with them was a conscious choice to have a convenient punchbag at home for both of them - they didn't just hate him, they enjoyed every minute of hating him, poor child.

And yes, an utter fail on the part of the officer who told Arthur's grandparents and uncle to stay away. Mindblowingly incompetent and I hope that individual faces disciplinary action or at least compulsory retraining.

JMO
 
This pathetic man-baby had no business raising any child, much less a child traumatised by his mother's imprisonment. Of course Arthur lashed out. You can't expect a six-year-old to know how to manage his emotions. His dad was the one with power and responsibility, and yet he thinks HE'S the victim? This case is triggering in all sorts of ways.
 
JuicyLucy said:
I agree. I think society judges cruel women/mothers more harshly than men and tries to forgive, or at least understand, men who discipline their children physically or with anger, but what the court is hearing about the father paints a far worse picture than that imo.

If the abuse had only come from Tustin, I might accept that Hughes had read the vast number of texts about Arthur's supposed transgressions and dismissed them as her "going on" without realising exactly how shockingly his child was being mistreated day in day out. But actually, the abuse and cruelty was also coming from him, and much of it was cold and calculated rather than delivered in anger, such as cutting up the favourite football shirt.

I think Hughes is hoping to hide behind the revulsion everyone feels for Tustin and look like he was oblivious or doing his best, when in fact he is just as bad as her and additionally more than failed in his duty to protect his child from an abuser, instead serving him up on a plate to her.

All the evidence is that Arthur's grandparents were keen to give him a home, so imo the insistence on having him live with them was a conscious choice to have a convenient punchbag at home for both of them - they didn't just hate him, they enjoyed every minute of hating him, poor child.

And yes, an utter fail on the part of the officer who told Arthur's grandparents and uncle to stay away. Mindblowingly incompetent and I hope that individual faces disciplinary action or at least compulsory retraining.

JMO
Click to expand...
Re: the officer and other social services -
" lessons will be learnt".
This is what the public will hear.
The same old story.
As I wrote in anoter thread:
Society which doesn't protect its youngsters is doomed.
Without hearts, without souls - just skeletons.
 
Even if with the benefit of hindsight he know thinks he was manipulated and deceived by Tustin how can he plead not guilty on all counts when his behaviour by his own admission was horrifically cruel and under no circumstances justified. I think they both normalised and encouraged each others sadistic behaviour that I think in his case at least had previously been surpressed imo
 
Perodicticus potto said:
This pathetic man-baby had no business raising any child, much less a child traumatised by his mother's imprisonment. Of course Arthur lashed out. You can't expect a six-year-old to know how to manage his emotions. His dad was the one with power and responsibility, and yet he thinks HE'S the victim? This case is triggering in all sorts of ways.
Click to expand...
What amazes me is their entire attitude towards him. Wanting a proper apology - he was bloody six years old for gods sake.
 
Dotta said:
I wonder what the Defence will say.
Click to expand...

I would imagine -

He was coercively controlled - it does sound like he was but at the end of the day he could have and should taken Arthur away from that house.

She was a single mum with mental health issues (history of suicide threats and going missing) and lockdown really got to her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 86 more.
Total: 308 (members: 87, guests: 221)

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
221
Total visitors
308
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,353
Messages
18,238,126
Members
234,351
Latest member
nh_lopez
Back
Top