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

[Tinksx]

It sounded like Arthur rarely left the house, apart from the time he was brought to her hair appointment. Oh I really hope TH takes the stand, we need to hear what he has to say.

Part of me thinks, his team might encourage him not to with the way things are going with ET. Her behaviour and demeanour on the stand, along with his parents testimony that he was easily led and had no backbone, might serve him better to keep quiet and hope less focus goes towards him.

Part of me thinks he might, only because he was so forthcoming in his police interviews. This was obviously before he had legal counsel though…

I’m leaning towards he won’t take the stand at the minute.

 

[ChloLo]

Its the “Arthur disturbed everything” for me….

That’s what kids do. If you want peace and quiet don’t have children.

 

[Mellowmelly]

.

I suspect Arthur was not taken out in public to hide the abuse he was suffering. They couldn’t even be bothered to get him dressed, it was noted earlier on that he was wearing the same onesie from the Friday until his death. You can’t risk a child screaming “no one will feed me” in the middle of Asda now can you…. The pair of them sicken me!

Me too, he treats ET children like they are his own but his own child is left behind with the wicked step mother, to face god knows what. I'm so sorry nobody helped poor Arthur.

 

[Carroll520]

Part of me thinks, his team might encourage him not to with the way things are going with ET. Her behaviour and demeanour on the stand, along with his parents testimony that he was easily led and had no backbone, might serve him better to keep quiet and hope less focus goes towards him.

Part of me thinks he might, only because he was so forthcoming in his police interviews. This was obviously before he had legal counsel though…

I’m leaning towards he won’t take the stand at the minute.

Yeah that makes sense, if i was his legal team ( not that i would ever represent a monster like him) i would be advising him to stay put. The only thing i can think that might make him want to take the stand is if ET has been lying about his involvement

 

[Tortoise]

14:48CARL JACKSON
Court shown footage of Tustin during her police interview

The trial resumes.

The court is shown footage of Tustin during her police interview.

It captures her telling officers the first 'crack' she heard was a noise of 'ten'. Tustin claimed she ran to Arthur, tried to pick him up but he flung his arms back and hit her.

She states she put him down and he hit his head another two to three times. In the footage she describes the noise on those occasions as a 'five'.

Tustin now tells the court that the last crack was the loudest, as opposed to the first.

Describing her state of mind at the time of the interview she adds: "I was tired and stressed. I just don't know what else to say."

Woman 'doing her eyebrows' at time she's accused of poisoning boy - updates

 

[Tortoise]

14:51KEY EVENT
"I did not kill Arthur. I did not cause those injuries" - Tustin

Tustin states when she took the picture of Arthur lying down in the hallway he was still conscious.

She tells the court after the crack she heard a 'bang or a crash' which sounded 'as if someone had fallen down one step'.

Tustin says she walked out to the hallway. She says she did not 'run' to the hallway as she told officers in her interview.

The CCTV footage shows Tustin walking from the living room to the kitchen holding her phone, and then back to the hallway.

Mr Hankin asks when she heard the 'sickening' crack and at what point during the footage did she react to it.

Tustin: "It had already happened by then."

Mr Hankin: "Are you going to tell the jury the truth about what you did?"

Tustin: "I did not kill Arthur. I did not cause those injuries."

Woman 'doing her eyebrows' at time she's accused of poisoning boy - updates

 

[Tinksx]

Yeah that makes sense, if i was his legal team ( not that i would ever represent a monster like him) i would be advising him to stay put. The only thing i can think that might make him want to take the stand is if ET has been lying about his involvement

I think by his own admission while in custody, he cannot dispute his involvement. He was involved in all this, maybe not the driving force or the manipulative mastermind behind it all. But he was privy to the cruelty, neglect and all the aspects of abuse. He will get off with salt poisoning, I don’t think he’ll be found guilty on that count. I am unsure about the murder. But every other charge he will be found guilty of. He can only argue that he was coerced into them actions, via ETs false narrative of Arthur’s behaviour or the emotional blackmail she dished out regularly.

If I was him, I’d keep quiet, let ET take centre stage and let my defence point out the coercive aspect and hope for the best.

I don’t like thinking like that, let alone typing it. But from a logical and detached standpoint, that would probably be his best option.

In my opinion, both will be found guilty, one more so than the other.

 

[Dotta]

I think by his own admission while in custody, he cannot dispute his involvement. He was involved in all this, maybe not the driving force or the manipulative mastermind behind it all. But he was privy to the cruelty, neglect and all the aspects of abuse. He will get off with salt poisoning, I don’t think he’ll be found guilty on that count. I am unsure about the murder. But every other charge he will be found guilty of. He can only argue that he was coerced into them actions, via ETs false narrative of Arthur’s behaviour or the emotional blackmail she dished out regularly.

If I was him, I’d keep quiet, let ET take centre stage and let my defence point out the coercive aspect and hope for the best.

I don’t like thinking like that, let alone typing it. But from a logical and detached standpoint, that would probably be his best option.

In my opinion, both will be found guilty, one more so than the other.

It seems the only child-raising methods he knows are based on violence.
Was his childhood like this?

 

[Tortoise]

15:15KEY EVENT
Tustin: "I didn't kill Arthur"

Mr Hankin asks how in the space of 14 seconds Arthur could have moved from his prone position shown in the photograph taken by Tustin, to a position where he could have got up and fallen from the stairs.

Tustin: "I don't know. I didn't know I was going to have to account for every second."

She adds: "He definitely moved because I heard a bang and a crack and wasn't there. He definitely moved somehow."

Mr Hankin: "When are you going to tell the jury what you did, when are you going to admit killing Arthur?"

Tustin: "I didn't kill Arthur."

Mr Hankin says even if Arthur had somehow got to the top of the stairs and jumped down, it would not have caused his fatal head injuries.

Tustin: "I was not near Arthur. I didn't kill him."

Mr Hankin: "How do you account for his injuries and death?"

Tustin: "I can't account for it. I was not there. I didn't see it. I just heard it."

Mr Hankin: "You have nothing else you can say?"

Tustin: "No I do not."


15:16CARL JACKSON
Court shown body-worn camera footage of Tustin speaking to police

The court is shown the body-worn camera footage of Tustin speaking to police outside her home on June 16 after Arthur had collapsed.

Mr Hankin asks why Tustin told officers at that time that Arthur had banged his head and knocked himself unconscious while she was in the hallway trying to hold him.

Tustin explains she was in shock at what had just happened.

Mr Hankin: "You lost your temper with Arthur didn't you, you bashed his head against the concrete floor and then waited for 12 minutes or more before phoning the emergency services."

Tustin denies the first two parts of the statement but accepts she waited 12 minutes because Arthur was breathing and had a pulse.

Woman 'doing her eyebrows' at time she's accused of poisoning boy - updates

 

[Tortoise]

15:18JAYNE THOMSON
Mr Hankin concludes his cross-examination

Mr Hankin asks why Tustin carried Arthur back to the hallway after initially placing him on the living room floor.

Tustin: "I tried to put him back on the step and check his pulse, get him to react. But he did not."

Mr Hankin: "Were you trying to position his body to dress the scene, were you trying to make it look like it was an accident?"

Tustin: "No. It was an accident."

Mr Hankin: "The day before you said you were going to knock him out. You told the jury you wanted him out of sight and out of mind. This is the culmination of those feelings isn't it?"

Tustin: "No you don't just kill a child because you think he's annoying. Arthur wasn't killed. I didn't kill him."

Mr Hankin concludes his cross-examination.

Woman 'doing her eyebrows' at time she's accused of poisoning boy - updates

 

[Tinksx]

It seems the only child-rising metod he knows is based on violence.
Was his childhood like this?

No, apparently it wasn’t. According to himself and his family, he had a good and stable childhood. And according to himself and his family again, he himself was a good father, until he met her.

 

[ChloLo]

“You don’t just kill a child because you think he’s annoying”…. I think that is exactly what she did do.

 

[Dotta]

No, apparently it wasn’t. According to himself and his family, he had a good and stable childhood. And according to himself and his family again, he himself was a good father, until he met her.

Hmm... Who knows???

Good and stable childhood creates a good and stable person - not a monster.

 

[Carroll520]

I think by his own admission while in custody, he cannot dispute his involvement. He was involved in all this, maybe not the driving force or the manipulative mastermind behind it all. But he was privy to the cruelty, neglect and all the aspects of abuse. He will get off with salt poisoning, I don’t think he’ll be found guilty on that count. I am unsure about the murder. But every other charge he will be found guilty of. He can only argue that he was coerced into them actions, via ETs false narrative of Arthur’s behaviour or the emotional blackmail she dished out regularly.

If I was him, I’d keep quiet, let ET take centre stage and let my defence point out the coercive aspect and hope for the best.

I don’t like thinking like that, let alone typing it. But from a logical and detached standpoint, that would probably be his best option.

In my opinion, both will be found guilty, one more so than the other.

Yes he would be mad to take the stand, but I really hope he does. How long would they be looking at if both found guilty

No, apparently it wasn’t. According to himself and his family, he had a good and stable childhood. And according to himself and his family again, he himself was a good father, until he met her.

God that is just so insane, that he was a normal father until he met ET. I always thought in the back of my mind, he must have been violent with Arthur before. What was he trying to do, impress ET with his violence towards the little guy.
How utterly confusing and heartbreaking for Arthur for his Dad to turn on him like that

 

[Tinksx]

Is ET counsel going to stand up and try and do some damage limitation now? Or is the next phase waiting to hear whether TH is taking the stand?

 

[Kitkat28]

Hmm... Who knows???

Good and stable childhood creates a good and stable person - not a monster.

This isn’t fair or necessarily true. You can be the best parents in the world and still end up with an adult child who is a criminal.

 

[Tinksx]

Yes he would be mad to take the stand, but I really hope he does. How long would they be looking at if both found guilty


God that is just so insane, that he was a normal father until he met ET. I always thought in the back of my mind, he must have been violent with Arthur before. What was he trying to do, impress ET with his violence towards the little guy.
How utterly confusing and heartbreaking for Arthur for his Dad to turn on him like that

I think TH is likely to be the more truthful of the two, purely basing this off his police interviews. I would be interested to see his remorse (or lack of), his sincerity, any sign of emotion. It’s hard to work him out as we have got no instances of court reporting of him becoming emotional.

I always find it hard to estimate how long a sentence, mainly because of the mitigating and aggravating factors. Some cases I’ve been sure would be a 30 year minimum and it hasn’t, sometimes I’ve expected a pitiful sentence and I’ve been surprised. I’ll attach sentencing guidelines for you to have a look at.

Sentencing Act 2020

 

[Tinksx]

Hmm... Who knows???

Good and stable childhood creates a good and stable person - not a monster.

That’s a nature vs nurture argument that will be around until the end of time.
Bad parents do produce good kids.
Good parents do produce bad kids.

 

[ChloLo]

Do we know when Arthur went into TH care? I’m wondering how long TH had full time parenting responsibility before ET was on the scene.

 

[Dotta]

This isn’t fair or necessarily true. You can be the best parents in the world and still end up with an adult child who is a criminal.

Well, we have to agree to...
disagree.