UK - Logan Mwangi, 5, found dead in Wales River, Bridgend, 31 July 2021 *arrests, inc. minor* #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
ChloLo said:
I had the horrifying thought earlier, after reading somewhere that the prosecution think Logan was assaulted on the 30th and AW said the 29th, what if it was 2 attacks, one started the damage then the other turned it deadly. If that makes sense. MOO
Click to expand...
Maybe they planned to kill him all along? Premeditated?
 
Simouk said:
Maybe they planned to kill him all along? Premeditated?
Click to expand...
I’m not convinced of that, I am convinced they all showed a complete disregard for Logan’s welfare. My thoughts were more, if he was hurt on the 29th and put to bed, seeming to somewhat improve and then assaulted again on the 30th it could have been naively assumed he would be ok again. However, the second assault could have furthered the damage to the unsurvivable point. I don’t know, just thinking out loud. We still haven’t heard from the pathologist, I don’t think, that should make things a bit clearer. MOO
 
katydid23 said:
Ok, I appreciate the attempt to clarify. But I am still very confused because of this testimony:


Boy's bedroom light 'switched on and off' before body removed, jury told
15:25PHILIP DEWEY
Videos
Mr Hipkins said: “There’s an issue about whether it’s Angharad Williamson (using the phone). Can you just confirm you were sent a schedule by the defence (for the youth) to check to see what pattern of YouTube activity there was in the past?”

Ms Claxton said: “Yes.”

Mr Hipkins continued: “The data you were given was between June 2 and August 1, 2021.”

He said that during this time, Dr Pimple Popper videos had been viewed 27 times.

The “Large black head extraction” video had been viewed 140 times between 2019 and 2021.

The court was also told toenail videos had been viewed three times between June and August 2021.




Is this^^^ summary correct when it says that the schedule sent by the defence was for the youth?
Click to expand...
Yes the defence will have a witness to look at AW phone activity, because they want to prove it was her using the phone and not ‘somebody else’ IMO
 
I never understood how and why the 3 defendants didn't blame each other (yet). Five people in the house, one a toddler and another a young child, so who would be to blame? So there becomes a need to fabricate an outsider who'd be able to sneak in the small house in the dark and stuffed with people in every room. How would've the outsider gotten in and known the floor plan to sneak up to Logan's room and kidnap him? What a cockamamie story. There's not one operating brain between the 3 of them.
 
Another thing that bothers me is, if Logan's social servicers consider JC's relationship with AW a potential hazard for Logan because of JC's criminal history. How can the same social services (I assume the same agency at least) find that JC is a fit care worker for a very disturbed teenager? He's potentially dangerous for a 5 yr old, but at the same time he's a proper full time carer for a teenager. Does this make any sense?
 
IIRC Logan’s social worker tried to make contact with the youths social worker but never heard back.

I think it’s possible that JC only became the youths primary career after he was returned from foster care. Why else would the social worker for the youth be talking to him about benefits?
 
Bluedaisy100 said:
Another thing that bothers me is, if Logan's social servicers consider JC's relationship with AW a potential hazard for Logan because of JC's criminal history. How can the same social services (I assume the same agency at least) find that JC is a fit care worker for a very disturbed teenager? He's potentially dangerous for a 5 yr old, but at the same time he's a proper full time carer for a teenager. Does this make any sense?
Click to expand...
I agree, no doubt when the case is concluded, we will get the usual statement from social services 'lessons will be learned'
 
Bluedaisy100 said:
Another thing that bothers me is, if Logan's social servicers consider JC's relationship with AW a potential hazard for Logan because of JC's criminal history. How can the same social services (I assume the same agency at least) find that JC is a fit care worker for a very disturbed teenager? He's potentially dangerous for a 5 yr old, but at the same time he's a proper full time carer for a teenager. Does this make any sense?
Click to expand...

There were three already established hazards to Logan:

1) Birth mother and sole care giver already known to have a pattern of being chaotic and getting in destructive relationships with violent men;
2) JC already been identified and notified as a direct threat to her / Logan's lives;
3) The Youth already identified and known to be a threat to children and animals, therefore implicitly to Logan;

<modsnip>

So... Logan didn't stand a chance did he?

Social services failed to honour Logan's human right to a safe existence. Not one person in that household had capacity or willingness to keep Logan safe.

Yet again, I lay this one right at the feet of the so called PROFESSIONALS INVOLVED. They abjectly failed. Yes, lessons need to be learned.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
altyg said:
I agree, no doubt when the case is concluded, we will get the usual statement from social services 'lessons will be learned'
Click to expand...
I have read that S Service is understaffed.
1 person does the workload of 3.
They write constant reports, attend Court proceedings, have meetings with Police, check children in violent households and foster families, constantly deal with aggressive people, etc, etc.

Not that I justify them, but it is a hard way to "earn bread".
 
Dotta said:
A neighbour said they lived separately.
They only stayed together in AW's house b/c of covid quarantine.
Well, that is what I read.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why they were all in quarantine in AW's home even if everyone had covid, which they seemingly didn't. Makes no sense at all. Why would JC and the Youth wish to be in a cramped two bed with a baby and a 5 yr old all day every day when they have their perfectly good own home ?
 
Jay_Tec said:
They have upstairs neighbours?
Click to expand...
AWs is a ground floor flat.
Jay_Tec said:
I don't understand why they were all in quarantine in AW's home even if everyone had covid, which they seemingly didn't. Makes no sense at all. Why would JC and the Youth wish to be in a cramped two bed with a baby and a 5 yr old all day every day when they have their perfectly good own home ?
Click to expand...
We don’t know that they were. Plus the witness to the FaceTime on the 27th said Logan was on the stairs. AWs doesn’t have stairs, JCs does.
 
ChloLo said:
AWs is a ground floor flat.

We don’t know that they were. Plus the witness to the FaceTime on the 27th said Logan was on the stairs. AWs doesn’t have stairs, JCs does.
Click to expand...

Ah right, thanks, I see. Yes it was the evidence about Logan sitting on the stairs colouring in that confused me. Also I knew he had gone down some stairs. I mistakenly thought it was the other way around. I suppose Logan could have been sitting on a step, like some ground floor flats have a couple of internal steps.

But hang on... when Logan had the dislocated shoulder, AW gave her statement about how she was cooking in the kitchen, she had Logan in his bedroom on the monitor, heard him jump of his bed and cross the landing, then he was laid screaming injured at the bottom of the stairs... she was speaking as to being at JC's home? Or living in a different previous home? I'm confused, what landing, what stairs? Why would she be cooking Logan's dinner in JC's flat and have a monitor for Logan in JC's flat? How big is JC's home?
 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 129 more.
Total: 2,497 (members: 130, guests: 2,367)

Online statistics

Members online
130
Guests online
2,367
Total visitors
2,497
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,485
Messages
18,141,057
Members
231,408
Latest member
curiosities
Back
Top