"When asked if Cole had been violent to Logan before she said July 29 was the worse it had ever been. "
Unfortunately, we don't have any information on JC's prior criminal record other than Logan was initially on the register because of JC's relationship with AC.So someone mentioned an IPP sentence in relation to Cole. I may have missed it, but is that something he was sentenced to in the past, and do we know anything about the case? Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?
It is unreal to hear the way she is acting in jail----introducing herself to everyone/anyone as 'the mum whose 5 yr old was dead in the river'---announcing she was arrested for murder, and craving the attention it brings. I will be surprised if she isn't assaulted at some point by someone she really rubs the wrong way.For someone who spent as much time on her phone as AW did, it never once occurred to her to Google the SAS and who founded it? That’s literally one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard.
There’s nothing that isn’t about her, is there. She manages to centre herself in every single thing that comes out of her mouth. If she’s not the victim she’s the hero or the perfect mother. This whole tragedy is just the AW show.
AW said in one of her police interviews JC had an IPP sentence.So someone mentioned an IPP sentence in relation to Cole. I may have missed it, but is that something he was sentenced to in the past, and do we know anything about the case? Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?
There are a few options available for the youth, a secure childrens home (age 10-14), secure training centre (up to age 17) or YOI ( age 15-21).JC and AW were remanded into custody but do we know where the youth is being housed? I recall he was released into the care of the local authority but where is this? A local authority foster parent?
Where would the youth be committed for a sentence?
Sentencing - Mandatory life sentences in Murder cases | The Crown Prosecution Service
Offenders under 18 years old
For an offender who is a youth when they committed the offence the appropriate starting point is 12 years detention at Her Majesty's pleasure.
Aggravating and Mitigating Factors
Having set a starting point the court must take into account any aggravating or mitigating factors, to the extent that it has not allowed for them in its choice of starting point (paragraph 8, Schedule 21).
Under paragraph 9, detailed consideration of aggravating or mitigating factors may result in a minimum term of any length (whatever the starting point) or in the making of a whole life order.
Aggravating factors that may be relevant include:
a) a significant degree of planning or premeditation;
b) the victim was vulnerable because of age or disability;
c) mental or physical suffering inflicted on the victim before death;
d) the abuse of a position of trust;
e) the use of duress or threats against another person to facilitate the commission of the offence;
f) the victim was providing a public service or performing a public duty; and
g) concealment, destruction or dismemberment of the body.
Mitigating factors include:
a) an intention to cause serious bodily harm rather than kill;
b) lack of premeditation;
c) the offender suffers from a mental disorder or disability (not falling within section 2(1) of the Homicide Act 1957) which lowered their degree of culpability;
d) the offender was provoked in a way not amounting to a defence of provocation;
e) the offender acted to any extent in self-defence;
f) a belief by the offender that the murder was an act of mercy;
g) the age of the offender.
The court should also consider any previous convictions, whether the offence was committed on bail and if the offender pleaded guilty.
The court should take into account any period the offender has spent on remand in connection with the offence or a related offence. The offender will get no credit for time served on remand unless it is taken into account when setting the minimum term. The court should normally subtract the time for which the offender was remanded from the punitive period it would otherwise impose in order to reach the minimum term.
Why though? they could have just referred to him as 'the baby' like they did with the youthI believe any mention of the baby will have been edited out by reporters.
Definitely, it sounds like JC is a fantasist and AW didn't question his claims. Regarding the phone, I am a survivor of domestic violence, I escaped and moveda long way away. It was some years ago, before mobile phones were a thing. I can't understand why she didn't call the police when she was stopped from leaving the house by the youth. I understand the fear of being caught by JC when calling for help but instead of being on you tube surely she could have texted a friend and asked them to call the police?For someone who spent as much time on her phone as AW did, it never once occurred to her to Google the SAS and who founded it? That’s literally one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard.
There’s nothing that isn’t about her, is there. She manages to centre herself in every single thing that comes out of her mouth. If she’s not the victim she’s the hero or the perfect mother. This whole tragedy is just the AW show.
Why though? they could have just referred to him as 'the baby' like they did with the youth
I agree, but the poor baby must have been woken up by what was going on. I hope he is placed in a loving home and is able to have a good lifeThe baby isn't really relevant to Logans murder in any way so, no need to be mentioned and the least mentioned, the better for the child sake.
Why though? they could have just referred to him as 'the baby' like they did with the youth