UK - Logan Mwangi, 5, found dead in Wales River, Bridgend, 31 July 2021 *arrests, inc. minor* #4

[Moll]

My son had blood tests once and came back with something along the lines of "not enough blood" after half a day waiting for results. It had congealed before making it go the lab apparently.

Maybe this is what happened with JC and the police felt by that point they had enough evidence? Speculating entirely.

I think that sounds reasonable. It mattered to find out what AW had ingested, because of her story, and what Logan had ingested, because he was dead, but if there was no evidence of alcohol and drug abuse by JC or the youth otherwise, it was not so vital for them. I don't believe it would alter the case against them if they were under the influence, anyway. (But have now seen the post above and will read...)
EDIT Well maybe not, it's rather long!

 

[Cherwell]

I'm sure the court will be blessed with a seizure when she's under cross examination

Would they be able to tell if it was faked?

I think that sounds reasonable. It mattered to find out what AW had ingested, because of her story, and what Logan had ingested, because he was dead, but if there was no evidence of alcohol and drug abuse by JC or the youth otherwise, it was not so vital for them. I don't believe it would alter the case against them if they were under the influence, anyway. (But have now seen the post above and will read...)
EDIT Well maybe not, it's rather long!

Is there a TL/DR?

 

[Airhead93]

I don’t believe the doctors would prescribe any sleepers to AW as she had two children 5 & under..does anyone know if the youth will give evidence or is he exempt due to his age?

You will be surprised I was prescribed zopiclone as a 20year single mum to too children looking back bad choice on the doctor

 

[Airhead93]

I don’t believe the doctors would prescribe any sleepers to AW as she had two children 5 & under..does anyone know if the youth will give evidence or is he exempt due to his age?

You will be surprised I was prescribed zopiclone as a 20year single mum to too children looking back bad choice on the doctor

 

[LucyRocket]

You are spot on. There's a lot of ignorance around domestic abuse, not particularly here but in society in general, and especially when the abuse is psychological not physical and the perception is that the victim "could easily have left". There's some evidence that it takes around seven attempts before women successfully leave an abuser, leaving aside the fact that the process of coming to see yourself as abuse victim also takes time and is slowed by completely normal feelings of denial and resistance, and in AW's case perhaps also the shame of admitting that she'd made the same mistake again. For many women, but not all, the abuse of a child is a galvanising factor. I don't think it's controversial to say that no one who hasn't been in that position has the first idea how they would really behave if they were.

All of this has a very real bearing on the trajectory of this trial. Personally, I believe that this was an abusive relationship, and that the coercive nature of JC's influence in the household is a valid factor for the jury to consider. That's not to say that AW is not also guilty of being abusive to LM, nor that she didn't play her part in his murder or the disposal of his body. But I think the verdict and sentence AW gets will reflect the fact that she was a victim as well as an aggressor.

Why It's So Difficult to Leave | Women Against Abuse
Why don't women leave? - Womens Aid
Barriers to leaving - Refuge Charity - Domestic Violence Help

JMO

I’ve seen situations where mother has taken her child with her in a murder-suicide and they are always, understandably, the most hated women. But I considered doing it, in the crazy state that months of psychological abuse put you into, and with the ultimate love for my baby. I couldn’t see any way of escape for us, and wouldn’t have been able to take my own life knowing I was leaving my baby with our abuser. You couldn’t love a child more than I love mine, but I almost did that, out of love. So I know how easy it is to judge, even when the situation seems so cut and dry evil.

 

[LucyRocket]

I think you can tell that JC has had more experience of the justice system than AW. He was very composed when he was being cross-examined - only giving one-word answers a lot of the time - but under AW's cross-examination she's getting really angry, saying "I hate the way you’re making it out… I really don’t appreciate it... that's a stupid question" etc. It's hard to imagine what the jury will make of that but I doubt it'll get them on her side.

Yes and already, she’s come out with several inconsistencies. Whereas he stuck rigidly to ‘I wasn’t thinking clearly’ or ‘It wasn’t like that but yeah’ or ‘we both did’, she’s all over the place

 

[Dotta]

Did he own or have access to a vehicle? Sorry for the probably stupid questions, I'm having really bad memory problems lately (age) and have no idea if we heard evidence to that or not.

No info about a car so don't blame your memory
He was broke, mind you.
He sponged off the woman who was living on benefits!

 

[mrazda71]

Yes and already, she’s come out with several inconsistencies. Whereas he stuck rigidly to ‘I wasn’t thinking clearly’ or ‘It wasn’t like that but yeah’ or ‘we both did’, she’s all over the place

That's more indicative of him lying ... IMO

 

[LucyRocket]

Exactly, and if she thought he wasn't hurt why was she shouting and 'running' outside and hoping someone in the neighborhood would come and save them, or running back in to get her phone to call her Mum or R?

And I THINK if my son had died, any shame about being afraid of my partner wouldn’t feature. I’d feel dead and like nothing could harm me more. Let him find me and kill me, cos it’d be relief from the most painful grief imaginable.

 

[LucyRocket]

It has also crossed my mind about a unknown person in the flat

Me too. But surely the CCTV would have picked them up. There was apparently CCTV front and back

 

[LucyRocket]

‘The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth’. Puhleeeeeeease??? At your son’s murder trial, an actress??

 

[LucyRocket]

Ah perfect, that puts that to bed then! Thanks Moll. I'm intrigued to see where she goes with the light thing.

I think the only thing she can say is I was asleep I have no idea

 

[LucyRocket]

I'm not sure any of those are considered antipsychotic. First three are anticonvulsant. I wouldn't know about their ability to induce sleep though.

They don’t. I know seriously disabled people who are on the maximum dose of all 3, and they don’t.

 

[Sherlockhames]

I think the only thing she can say is I was asleep I have no idea

I think this is right. I am inclined to believe in most of her “innocence”. But I just don’t think I buy her being asleep all night.

But from everything else I have heard from the reported evidence I am slightly less inclined to believe in a level of systematic abuse and am slightly falling on the side of perhaps a heightened covid scenario where they (he, JC?) used the covid isolation to quite literally isolate Logan for a period of time which led to a build up of aggression/abuse/frustration that spilled over into a terrible series of events that led to Logan’s abuse on those few fateful days.

I suppose what I am saying is that do I think were it not for covid/paranoid isolation of Logan would this have happened. I’m not sure. But to give AW the benefit of the doubt maybe this did all come to a head v quickly. Which maybe explains why, even if she had and inkling or more so that Logan was quite unwell on this day, that because this was due to immediate circumstances she is playing down how injured she thought he might be because it really was unusual. And when I say playing it down - that because she thought it wasn’t all that serious she thought if she could “nurse” Logan through for a short period, that once covid isolation was over they could get back to normal. I am not trying to minimise or mitigate what happened.

I just think her perceived inconsistency in blaming JC - he was strict/he was a good dad etc could all be kind of genuine. And that this situation really was a kind of one off. Now, obviously with horrible hindsight this was not the case. But I don’t get the impression there was some awful inevitability in all this. I think what happened may well have been a serious of horrific events that all compounded each other (like I don’t believe there was some sort of pre-determined murderous intent in anyone involved).

But the key question for me is still how much AW suspected the seriousness or otherwise of Logan’s injuries and therefore how culpable she is in terms of murder. The plans for his body etc all seem rather hastily construed, and all this talk of hours spent concocting a story don’t really sit with me. I don’t think there was much thought etc. i think everything all of them did is quite reactive (stupidly so, clearly). But i also think that explains why stories kept changing in police custody. That none of them really thought they could have been responsible for his actual death and only the slow dawning of realisation later on made them face up to their actions. But even in doing so they are all trying to minimise their potential responsibility because even though they might all be terrible people they maybe do all, on a deep level, recognise their guilt.

I seriously do not envy the jury’s job in all this. And I do think they are all guilty of murder to some degree. But more from and absence of appreciation of their action rather than a deep seated maliciousness in actually wanting Logan dead. Maybe I’m just too kind and always try to see the good in people!

 

[Bluedaisy100]

Speaking of the mother, she's overly emotional and self serving. Even on the stand she easily is ticked off and takes offense with comments like "you think I'm stupid". Very unwise behavior while testifying if you want to show that you're a mature rational adult. Always looking out for #1 and highly reactive. Not seeing a lot of rational behavior from her. This can't look good to a jury.

 

[Mammaalli]

I never touched my son’s dead body apart from when I saw him in hospital'
Angharad Williamson is still being cross-examined by John Cole's barrister David Elias QC. The topic changes to Logan’s pyjamas.

Mr Elias said: “What pyjamas was he wearing when you took him to bed on Friday night?”

Williamson said: “I don’t know….. I don’t remember…. I don’t remember what pyjamas I was wearing that night.”

Mr Elias said: “You put him to bed and took him to the toilet. Think what he was wearing.” Williamson said: “I don’t know.”

Mr Elias said: “Was he wearing dinosaur pyjamas?” Williamson said: “I don’t know.”

Mr Elias said: “Do you not want to remember?” Williamson said: “I don’t know.”

The defendant asked if she was lying but she denied this.

The barrister turns to Williamson’s police interviews. She told the officers he had a black Spiderman top on.

She said: “When I went to identify my son’s dead body he had a black Spiderman top on so I assumed that was the clothes he wore. He liked that top because it was velvety. It was one of his favourites.”

Mr Elias said: “You knew full well what he was wearing because you had seen him that night.”

Williamson said: “No. I was asleep, I did not know what went on.”

Mr Elias said: “You played a part in putting that Spiderman top on him.”

Williamson said: “I never touched my son’s dead body apart from when I saw him in hospital. What you are implying is sick and disgusting.”

Mr Elias said: “You ripped that pyjama top because you were in a temper.”

Williamson said: “No I wasn’t, I loved my baby and protected him from the world. I would never harm him.”

Mr Elias added: “What was he wearing when you say he was assaulted on the Thursday?”

Williamson said: “I don’t know.”

Mr Elias said: “Did it make you think about the assault when you were asked these things?”

Williamson said: “No."

The defendant said the pyjama top was not damaged when she saw it last when she put it in the pyjama drawer.

Mr Elias said: “You didn’t want to tell police you knew he was wearing a dinosaur pyjama top.”

Williamson said: “You’re implying something that is not exactly true.”

Mr Elias said: “You knew there was a change of top because you were up in the night.”

Williamson said: “No it’s not, what you are implying is false.”

The barrister refers to a passage in Williamson’s police interview

She said: “I wasn’t focusing on the pyjama top. I was more focused on finding out why my son was dead."

Mr Elias said: “You didn’t want the police to ask about the pyjama top because you knew what happened to it and asked for it to be thrown away.”

Williamson said: “No that’s not correct.”

The trial adjourns for a 15-minute break.

Logan Mwangi murder trial latest as mum gives evidence

I remember what she said SHE was wearing, so how come she doesn't. She was wearing Coles shorts !!

 

[Jay_Tec]

I think that sounds reasonable. It mattered to find out what AW had ingested, because of her story, and what Logan had ingested, because he was dead, but if there was no evidence of alcohol and drug abuse by JC or the youth otherwise, it was not so vital for them. I don't believe it would alter the case against them if they were under the influence, anyway. (But have now seen the post above and will read...)
EDIT Well maybe not, it's rather long!

My thought is that alcohol and drug use would make a more compelling case that whilst under the influence they became dis-inhibited (sp?) and outrageously violent with no off switch as opposed to just regular thugs and bullies. Also, substances would lower empathy and lower the ability to reason 'cause and effect' and comprehend a situation.

So, it would go someway to explain instead of thinking 'my god what have we done' or 'how do we effectively cover this up', it seems the violent crew just spent a whole nother day manhandling, pushing, shoving, and frequently dropping Logan around the house - from the naughty corner to the bath to the toilet to the bedroom perceiving him as uncooperative when in fact he was near dead. It is shown in court that the youth and JC are quick witted and not mentally lacking to the degree I had previously imagined. So unless they were literally behaving like predatory animals who toy with their catch like a cat bats around a long dead mouse, what on earth can have happened to them all that they spent a whole day so departed from reality ??

 

[SausageDog]

Quick question - It has been mentioned on here a few times that the youth was attacked by his mother and that’s why he was taken into care. Has anyone got the source for this? Reason I’m asking is that people have quoted this has happened but can’t find where it was originally referenced anywhere?

 

[RusselSprout]

Im really struggling with AW not admitting she was awake. I mean, the cat is firmly out the bag, what with the lights going on and off, and the curtains twitching and noone being in the house besides her. I know we don't know exactly what went on, but I hope we are all in agreement here, that she was awake. I dont understand how she can keep up this denial when there is hard evidence which proves she was awake, what sort of person could do that, is what I'm wondering, as it makes zero sense to me.

 

[neteditor]

Im really struggling with AW not admitting she was awake. I mean, the cat is firmly out the bag, what with the lights going on and off, and the curtains twitching and noone being in the house besides her. I know we don't know exactly what went on, but I hope we are all in agreement here, that she was awake. I dont understand how she can keep up this denial when there is hard evidence which proves she was awake, what sort of person could do that, is what I'm wondering, as it makes zero sense to me.

This has got to be brought in to cross-examination, hasn't it? I presume her counsel didn't bring it up because she literally only has the defence of being asleep, and that doesn't make any sense at all. She's only going to continue to say it wasn't here, and the jury will have to make what has to be an obvious decision, I think. She has shot herself in the foot with this defence IMO.