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

[Jay_Tec]

But, mind you, they were still not married.
In fact, they were living separately according to neighbours, astonished that they were engaged since he rarely came to the house.

It was only b/c of covid isolation that they stayed all together.

But I might have misunderstood.

Sounds strange after all we've read it would seem they were in each other's pockets, her being clingy and needy and him being controlling. I assume most weeks, their days separately would be AW mothering Logan and the baby, taking Logan to school and back, and JC elsewhere 'parenting' the Youth - taking him to school or whatever and keeping the home in order.

So this period of covid isolation was the first sustained period of time they'd spent together as all 5 of them in AW's two bed flat? Is that the first time the Youth had stayed at AW's flat? If the Youth and JC lived nearby they would have had no reason to sleep over before, maybe the odd night.

I'm unclear how big JC's flat is but we know that's were Logan sustained injuries after allegedly being thrown down the stairs by the Youth.

If AW & Logan went over to JC's house most of the time they wanted to be together, we know some facts - there were stairs, and there was CCTV rigged up so that when AW was in the kitchen downstairs she could 'keep an eye' on Logan in his room. Why did AW need CCTV to keep an eye on Logan? Did they both already know that the Youth is a serious threat to Logan? Is that why the Youth attacked him on the stairs where there's no CCTV coverage? Maybe he was *always* going to kill Logan and was always trying to?

 

[Jay_Tec]

Did the Youth's social worker flag up issues when they came to visit him at AW's house?

That social worker would have known two very important things - that it is not legal for the Youth to be sleeping on the sofa / floor of an overcrowded home -and- that the Youth is a violence risk to AW, Logan, and the baby.

I imagine she would have wanted to ask 'why are you staying here' and not at your own home JC? and ask the Youth 'how are you feeling about sleeping in the sitting room'? she may have raised serious concerns and if she didn't she should have done.

I think the family were doing a trial run for living together and appealing for a bigger house. They would have wanted a ground floor 3-4 bed house.

 

[starcrossx]

Sounds strange after all we've read it would seem they were in each other's pockets, her being clingy and needy and him being controlling. I assume most weeks, their days separately would be AW mothering Logan and the baby, taking Logan to school and back, and JC elsewhere 'parenting' the Youth - taking him to school or whatever and keeping the home in order.

So this period of covid isolation was the first sustained period of time they'd spent together as all 5 of them in AW's two bed flat? Is that the first time the Youth had stayed at AW's flat? If the Youth and JC lived nearby they would have had no reason to sleep over before, maybe the odd night.

I'm unclear how big JC's flat is but we know that's were Logan sustained injuries after allegedly being thrown down the stairs by the Youth.

If AW & Logan went over to JC's house most of the time they wanted to be together, we know some facts - there were stairs, and there was CCTV rigged up so that when AW was in the kitchen downstairs she could 'keep an eye' on Logan in his room. Why did AW need CCTV to keep an eye on Logan? Did they both already know that the Youth is a serious threat to Logan? Is that why the Youth attacked him on the stairs where there's no CCTV coverage? Maybe he was *always* going to kill Logan and was always trying to?

I think AW claimed that the cctv/baby monitor was to see if Logan was indeed giving JC dirty looks when she wasn't there. Tbh I think the cctv and the baby gate on Logans room were inappropriate unless it was also the baby's room, but that has never been reported. Also no details of where the baby slept while Logan was isolating but it seems very suspicious to me that a baby gate was there unless the baby usually slept there.

 

[Jay_Tec]

In other words they could bring in more money that way, even though it was not true that they needed two homes, since they spent every night together. So it is kind of dishonest, in a way?

It would have been blatant tenancy fraud, tenancy breach, and benefit fraud if it were not for the fact they were claiming it was an exceptional temporary emergency situation caused by covid.

It would have also no doubt been a blatant breach of the terms on which JC is looking after the Youth. If things were done correctly, JC would need to be questioned as to why he has taken a exceptionally vulnerable Youth to someone else's home where he does not have a bed.

 

[Jay_Tec]

I think AW claimed that the cctv/baby monitor was to see if Logan was indeed giving JC dirty looks when she wasn't there. Tbh I think the cctv and the baby gate on Logans room were inappropriate unless it was also the baby's room, but that has never been reported. Also no details of where the baby slept while Logan was isolating but it seems very suspicious to me that a baby gate was there unless the baby usually slept there.

Yup the story of why there was CCTV is to check if Logan gave JC dirty looks. How bizarre. It's literally not sane. Cult-like. Must have been very odd and tense.

Strikes me it's more likely to warn the Youth, back off Logan? Or that the baby was bedding in with Logan and in fact it was baby monitoring CCTV? A situation they can't be honest about as a 5 year old cannot be left to care for a baby. Also that JC said Logan had been a risk to the baby (this could be true - a three year age gap is the perfect storm for infant attacks on a new baby according to a book I once read).

So we possibly have Logan being naughty to the baby. Youth wanting/trying to kill Logan. JC a violent threat in general to everyone. Horror.

 

[Jay_Tec]

It's not an 'idea'.........it's a fact.

Mystery man seen near river in which Logan Williamson, 5, found dead 1hr later

Ms Rees said: “You shaved his head so he looked liked John Cole.” Williamson said: “And his dad, he wanted to look like everybody…. I used to have the underneath of my hair shaved. He looked up to [Cole], he was desperate for a father figure.”

Logan Mwangi murder trial latest as mum admits 'selfish' lies

Hair very close shaved there, brutal short IMO and doesn't suit him at all.
Interesting to see them with the baby there.

I assume the 'mystery man' seen nearby was in fact JC (or the Youth?)

 

[Dotta]

So we possibly have Logan being naughty to the baby. Youth wanting/trying to kill Logan. JC a violent threat in general to everyone. Horror.

Summed up in a nutshell.

Plus, highly strung AW in the mix.
Tragedy in the waiting.

 

[HilaryHormone]

Re the family not living together

Two things - Overcrowding: no-one is now legally allowed to deliberately create an overcrowding situation in a social housing tenancy. The tenant is obliged not to do so. A female tenant having more babies can automatically create overcrowding and is a huge problem in terms of providing adequate social housing -but- that same female tenant cannot legally bring more people into the tenancy, such as JC and the Youth, especially as JC is not the father of Logan.

AW + JC + the baby could sleep in one room and that would *not* be considered overcrowding in terms of current legislation, in fact it would be expected. However, the Youth would be expected to have his own discrete bedroom. The Youth cannot share with Logan, despite being same gender, as they are not related. The Youth cannot sleep in the lounge in a house where he is not related to the main tenant and she has a child he is not related to. So... more reason why Logan is surplus to requirement. Or, rather, the Youth is surplus as he has no room and cannot be fitted in anywhere. Serious problem.

Housing legislation really only lays out terms of allocation, it does not and cannot dictate family dynamics. Over crowding isn’t illegal, sharing a property with unrelated people isn’t illegal. Can you imagine IMO the Housing problem exists because the Gov sold off housing stock and didn’t build more, not because people are having babies , but that’s a whole other argument.
AW would have been allowed to add JC as a joint tenant if they so wished, it would have meant reporting s change of circumstances which may have ‘entitled’ them to apply for a bigger property, but he would have had to give up his own place I imagine.

But these weren't things Angharad had 'searched' for on Google or anywhere, we're they? ... they were (correct me if I'm wrong?) YouTube videos she'd 'watched' (not necessarily searched for) and on YouTube, it just shows you random videos be on what you've already watched or what other people also watched.

For example, if she watched Pimple popper videos, YouTube algorithm says 'here's what other PP watchers also watched' ...

I don’t know whether she searched for them specifically or whether the algorithm suggested them, all I know is they were played on AW’s phone during the night and there are some remarkable similarities between those cases and how the charade played out the following morning.

 

[tedtink]

Personally, I don't have anything unkind to say about people in domestic violence situations, and their difficulties escaping them. I understand it is hard if not nearly impossible. My heart goes out to anyone being abused by their partner.

However, I WILL say unkind things about a parent that watches their child being battered, emotionally and physically, and chooses the relationship over the safety of their child. IN this particular case, AW had many chances to save that sweet little boy. But she wanted to save her fairytale perfect family scenario, with her new baby and her SAS Hero---even though it meant sacrificing g poor Logan. JMO

So yes, I will say unkind things about mothers who allow their boyfriends to punch and kick 5 yr olds and make them eat cold cereal on the floor while everyone else eats a hot takeout meal. She threw that baby to the wolves, IMO.


ETA: IMO, if someone stays with someone who is beating them or mistreating them, it is not my business if they choose to stay and try to work it out. I will gladly help them if they ask but it is up to them.

But it does become my business and everyone's business, if a child is being mistreated by the abuser as well. At that point the mother or father NEEDS to leave the relationship for the sake of the child. JMO

I agree with you, I would add, that children are still effectively being mistreated, if they are having to witness attacks on a parent, even if they are not being physically attacked themselves.
Children who witness domestic abuse, in whatever form, is child abuse.

Any type of violence should be reported, thankfully now, Police must attend domestic situations, whoever reports it.

 

[Jay_Tec]

Housing legislation really only lays out terms of allocation, it does not and cannot dictate family dynamics. Over crowding isn’t illegal, sharing a property with unrelated people isn’t illegal. Can you imagine IMO the Housing problem exists because the Gov sold off housing stock and didn’t build more, not because people are having babies , but that’s a whole other argument.
AW would have been allowed to add JC as a joint tenant if they so wished, it would have meant reporting s change of circumstances which may have ‘entitled’ them to apply for a bigger property, but he would have had to give up his own place I imagine.



I don’t know whether she searched for them specifically or whether the algorithm suggested them, all I know is they were played on AW’s phone during the night and there are some remarkable similarities between those cases and how the charade played out the following morning.

Some of your information is incorrect.

In UK Housing legislation, overcrowding definitions are written into law. When it comes to social housing, the definitions are always adhered to. What people do in their own private homes is a different matter.

For a council or Social housing landlord to house people into overcrowding is unlawful, it cannot and does not happen.

As a social housing tenant, it is written into one's tenancy, one is not allowed to create overcrowding by bringing people to live in one's home. It is breach of tenancy. Most social housing landlords would take an understanding view to situations that are extreme, urgent, desperate, and unavoidable.

They certainly wouldn't in this case. If AW moved JC and the Youth into her home it would have breached her tenancy agreement.

 

[Jay_Tec]

Housing legislation really only lays out terms of allocation, it does not and cannot dictate family dynamics. Over crowding isn’t illegal, sharing a property with unrelated people isn’t illegal. Can you imagine IMO the Housing problem exists because the Gov sold off housing stock and didn’t build more, not because people are having babies , but that’s a whole other argument.
AW would have been allowed to add JC as a joint tenant if they so wished, it would have meant reporting s change of circumstances which may have ‘entitled’ them to apply for a bigger property, but he would have had to give up his own place I imagine.



I don’t know whether she searched for them specifically or whether the algorithm suggested them, all I know is they were played on AW’s phone during the night and there are some remarkable similarities between those cases and how the charade played out the following morning.

<modsnip>

A female tenant, or couple, can create an overcrowding situation that is *not* a deliberate wilful overcrowding breach of tenancy by having babies. For example, a single young person lives in a one room bedsit over time has two or three babies. For example, a young couple in a 1 bed have two or three children. Overcrowding.

However, the legislation has been amended to reflect desperate times. Front rooms with a closing door are to be turned into bedrooms. The number and ages and sex of children who are legislated to share one room have been changed. The age in which a child is considered to be sharing in a parents room has been raised. It's tricky stuff.

 

[tedtink]

If they were not technically living together, overcrowding or GOV legislation isn't even an issue in this case.

It's not against the law to have someone stay over.

Moving on.............

 

[Jay_Tec]

Housing legislation really only lays out terms of allocation, it does not and cannot dictate family dynamics. Over crowding isn’t illegal, sharing a property with unrelated people isn’t illegal. Can you imagine IMO the Housing problem exists because the Gov sold off housing stock and didn’t build more, not because people are having babies , but that’s a whole other argument.
AW would have been allowed to add JC as a joint tenant if they so wished, it would have meant reporting s change of circumstances which may have ‘entitled’ them to apply for a bigger property, but he would have had to give up his own place I imagine.



I don’t know whether she searched for them specifically or whether the algorithm suggested them, all I know is they were played on AW’s phone during the night and there are some remarkable similarities between those cases and how the charade played out the following morning.

She may or may not have been allowed to add JC to her tenancy depending on scrutiny by the Housing Association and also if it is in line with housing legislation.

There are various problems with that though:

1) First and foremost - the Youth - AW absolutely would not have been allowed to add JC and the Youth to her home. Full stop. On the grounds that she was knowingly creating overcrowding.

2) Bearing in mind AW's housing was given on the grounds of fleeing domestic violence, possibly by an HA that has very specific criteria, then she may not have been allowed to add JC to her tenancy.

3) Had Logan continued to be known as a vulnerable child / child at risk or however it's described, then possibly AW may not have been granted permission to add JC (without Youth) to her tenancy even though he is her partner and father of child.

4) If JC has perpetrated particular crimes in the local area - or breached a social housing tenancy within the borough in the past - he may be lifelong precluded from any form of social housing within the borough.

Edit: 5) Another point - the Youth's social workers (and we don't know if he was in the criminal justice system also) may absolutely not have allowed him to go live with AW and the family, considering it high risk and volatile for him. At which point JC would have to consider 'what to do' with the Youth.

 

[Jay_Tec]

If they were not technically living together, overcrowding or GOV legislation isn't even an issue in this case.

It's not against the law to have someone stay over.

That's not what I said. In social housing and when on benefits, it can indeed be against several laws to have people staying in your home for a while.

Edit, we were discussing that they were getting married, ie planning to merge into one household, maybe at AW's? And the effect that would have on their benefits and housing - which in my opinion would have been a dramatic and extreme effect.

 

[katydid23]

You just proved my point. Thanks

So, is your point that you think I am being unfair and judgmental when I criticise mothers who allow their children to be domestic violence victims?

 

[Cherwell]

I agree we haven't seen too many photos of Logan with shaved hair but there is at least one where it looks like having just grown a bit from being shaved. Also that the court are using the word 'shaved' and so is AW and nobody has contested the use of that word, I think we best assume that his hair was shaved to the head at some point, not just cut very short, and probably using an electric shaver.

Cut short, shaved - what does it matter?

 

[Dotta]

One of the posters wrote that:

- Allowing/causing death of a child sentence is up to14 years

- Perverting C of Justice is up to life.

Shouldn't it be the other way round?

 

[tedtink]

That's not what I said. In social housing and when on benefits, it can indeed be against several laws to have people staying in your home for a while.

For a while? , we only have a snapshot of that week, they'd just been on holiday, we know they were at JC's on 27th, back at AW's on 28th.
Nothing to say all of JC's and the youths belonging's were at AW's, nothing to suggest the house at Maeglas was empty, nothing to suggest they were actually 'living together'.

Why does Gov legislation and Law even matter?
Do you want a separate case brought against them?

 

[Jay_Tec]

Cut short, shaved - what does it matter?

Someone here, dunno who, said that his hair had not really been shaved so much as it was a short haircut. The evidence is that it was shaved very close to the head.

It's interesting to me personally, as in the case of little Star, her step mother also instructed her hair to be shaved close.

 

[Skigh]

I think shaven is seen to be an aggressive style of haircut. It is forbidden in all primary schools I know.