GUILTY UK - Brianna Ghey, 16, murdered in Culcheth Linear Park, Feb 2023 *2 teenagers charged*

[mrjitty]

So they can see what he's typing, while he's typing. I wonder what will happen if he starts typing something, but then deletes it then types something else instead (something I do all the time!). Will they be able to consider that as evidence?

It says when his answer is written then it is read in to the record.

 

[mrjitty]

It's an anxiety disorder. I've had bouts of it (I also am an autistic/adhder and have a trauma disorder and GAD.) The words literally won't come out. You can't choose. It's terrifying and frustrating and getting stressed and anxious about not being able to communicate just makes it less likely for the words to come out.

Selective mutism

Find out about selective mutism, an anxiety disorder that prevents people from speaking in certain social situations.

www.nhs.uk

I for one am pleased they're giving an accessible option for Boy Y to speak. I wouldn't be comfortable if Girl X got her chance on the stand and Boy Y didn't because his verbal speech wouldn't co operate.

MOO

Without in any way apologising for his alleged conduct, I would not be at all surprised to learn that Boy Y is extremely messed up by what has happened.

 

[iamshadow21]

Without in any way apologising for his alleged conduct, I would not be at all surprised to learn that Boy Y is extremely messed up by what has happened.

Imprisonment itself is a trauma. He was fifteen. He's autistic, which means he's probably more inclined to difficulty in adjusting when there's a major upheaval in his life, when everything he knows as solid and stable changes. Regardless of the question of guilt or innocence, this counts as something I could easily see triggering a period of selective mutism. I think it very possibly would in me, and I have far less difficulty with generating reliable speech than many on the spectrum.

That aside, I am happy to see the accommodation for him to type. He deserves to participate in his own case to the same degree as Girl X, and if the typing enables that, that's good.

MOO

 

[Alyce]

So they can see what he's typing, while he's typing. I wonder what will happen if he starts typing something, but then deletes it then types something else instead (something I do all the time!). Will they be able to consider that as evidence?

snap, was just thinking the same.

 

[Dotta]

snap, was just thinking the same.

But I guess the Judge must have clarified this issue.
To avoid confusion.
I'm sure all details have been ironed out
He is not the first surely, and will not be the last in the history of trials.

We, at school, deal with such students (special needs) during final exams.
Some write instead of speaking - according to psychologists' recommendations.
Time limit is also extended.

Anything to help them.

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

The Judge stated this below. It's clear enough I think. What she reads out, is what goes into the record. What he types, but changes, would not be part of the record. I am guessing she does not read it, until he indicates he is finished.

The judge continues: “Once he has typed his response, Mrs Williams (Boy Y’s intermediary) will read it out. She will be the person who speaks the evidence on to the court record.

 

[bobbymkii]

The Judge stated this below. It's clear enough I think. What she reads out, is what goes into the record. What he types, but changes, would not be part of the record. I am guessing she does not read it, until he indicates he is finished.

The part in bold is what I'm referring to:

Justice Yip tells the jury: “You will appreciate that that makes it difficult for Boy Y to give evidence in the usual way. I have to give consideration how he can give his evidence at court. He can’t give it in oral form. That has required careful thought. We have come up with a solution. He is going to give his evidence over a link. He will be at court, he will just be nearby but not in the witness box. He is then going to give his evidence in writing by typing his answers. We have a transcriber in court who is going to type the questions put to him. He will be able to type the answer. You will see the answers being typed on your screen. That allows Boy Y to give evidence to you. It’s important every defendant has an opportunity to give evidence. That’s the solution that we have come up with.”

Apologies if I'm being really anal about this! But that suggests to me that they will be able to see words of his that will not officially be recorded in court.

 

[Mammaalli]

 

[Kasmeer]

I suppose if the jury do see initial words that's no different to someone who is speaking normally saying a few words, interrupting themselves and rephrasing? So not really any different in the end result.

I just wonder if his selective mutism is like my (I'm autistic) stress-induced poor communication; I'm worse when speaking but even in writing, I will mess up my wording and only realise later (when I've had time to relax and recover a bit) how I probably gave a wrong impression, or misunderstood the question. Not much that can really be done about it if that's the case, he'll just have to do the best he can but I know even if given the opportunity to write my answers, I'd still mess a few things up.

But it's good that he has the adaptations allowed to give him a fair trial and the same opportunities as X (especially given they're both blaming each other; they must be given equal opprtunity to refute the other to be fair) - whatever we may think of his guilt or otherwise, it cannot be assumed and so a fair chance to defend himself is a must; any disabled person who could be innocent should be allowed that opportunity.

We, at school, deal with such students (special needs) during final exams.
Some write instead of speaking - according to psychologists' recommendations.

Snipped for focus - how I am jealous of children of today (while in a different country to you I'd hope it's more as you describe here too now); I have no grade in one subject because the powers that be flatly refused to give me even the lowest possible grade on the spoken section (which I couldn't do at all due to severe anxiety), meaning even though I passed all other (written) sections with good marks, rules say "no" and I wasn't allowed a grade. No exceptions allowed. I did ask what they did for deaf people, no response was given to that.

 

[Mammaalli]

View attachment 467630

Do we know who or what captured girl x wiping blood from her face using her saliva ?
So she did Have blood on her that has vanished. Hense the wrong clothes being tested !

 

[mrjitty]

Do we know who or what captured girl x wiping blood from her face using her saliva ?

This stuff will be summed up in closing.

 

[Detective_Popcorn]

I for one am pleased they're giving an accessible option for Boy Y to speak. I wouldn't be comfortable if Girl X got her chance on the stand and Boy Y didn't because his verbal speech wouldn't co operate.

MOO

Not making any comment regarding the two accused in this case, but I wonder if, in a general sense, being allowed to type answers is inherently advantageous in giving testimony? When asked questions orally, if you are truthful in your answers it is easy to speak naturally and quickly, but lying requires you to be far more careful and considered to ensure you don't trip yourself up especially under cross. It is right that accommodation is being make to allow Boy Y to testify in this case, but all things being equal, given the choice I think I'd prefer to type answers too.

 

[Honeybirdette]

J

Not making any comment regarding the two accused in this case, but I wonder if, in a general sense, being allowed to type answers is inherently advantageous in giving testimony? When asked questions orally, if you are truthful in your answers it is easy to speak naturally and quickly, but lying requires you to be far more careful and considered to ensure you don't trip yourself up especially under cross. It is right that accommodation is being make to allow Boy Y to testify in this case, but all things being equal, given the choice I think I'd prefer to type answers too.

absolutely. It is a huge advantage and gives him longer to think about his answers. I wouldn’t consider this “fair” but I suppose it’s necessary in order for him to give his evidence.
The trial had been wild so far, looking forward to the verdicts so we can discuss properly.

 

[Detective_Popcorn]

J

absolutely. It is a huge advantage and gives him longer to think about his answers. I wouldn’t consider this “fair” but I suppose it’s necessary in order for him to give his evidence.
The trial had been wild so far, looking forward to the verdicts so we can discuss properly.

Indeed.

It is a fascinating case, and so tragic too. Yes there will be an awful lot to say, for sure.

 

[katydid23]

I think X would have tried to find someone else to commit murder with, if Y had proved unwilling or seemed untrustworthy.

That said I think they are both guilty as sin. The lack of forensic evidence on her clothing/shoes does nothing to sway me from that opinion.

I don't really care which one of them did the actual stabbing---they both planned it out TOGETHER and lured her to the crime scene, and took part in her brutal death. It doesn't matter who stabbed her , IMO.

 

[katydid23]

J

absolutely. It is a huge advantage and gives him longer to think about his answers. I wouldn’t consider this “fair” but I suppose it’s necessary in order for him to give his evidence.
The trial had been wild so far, looking forward to the verdicts so we can discuss properly.

I agree that there is an advantage to be given extra time with each answer, to think a bit before blurting something out.

But there is also an advantage to be able to SAY the words to the jury in one's own voice, so that tone and emotion may come through. However that is probably a double edged-sword---IMO

 

[Dotta]

I started reading more about Brianna as I have only followed the trial sporadically so far.

What a tragic figure she was

On one hand, her Mum described her as "confident and outgoing".
But as the details leak out during the trial, it turns out she was struggling enormously.

Afraid of going out (the trip by bus to the park was a challenge), being bullied, self harm, seeking solace in drugs (the aim of going to park was to get "high").

It all paints depressing picture.
And then, her terrible death

Her alleged murderers also dealing with severe mental problems.
Plotting torture, plotting murder, watching "dark web", buying knives.
And being only 15 year old at that time.

Terrible, depressing picture of today's society.

JMO

‘It just filled me with love’: Brianna Ghey’s mother on reaction to the killing and her cold water ‘therapy’ | UK news | The Guardian

amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[Honeybirdette]

RL: “What did you think Girl X was going to do with the knife?”

Y: “I hadn’t thought about it.”

RL: “Did you think Girl X might hurt Brianna with the knife?”

Y: “No.”

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/live-court-updates-two-teenagers-28180964?utm_source=whatsapp&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=communities

Looks like he’s sticking with the “it was all just a fantasy” and “it was girl x, …I had no idea she was going to stab Brianna”

So frustrating. Guess we’ll never know what truly happened now

 

[katydid23]

Boy Y describes moment he said Brianna was killed​

The jury are brought back in, and Mr Littler’s questioning resumes.
RL: “Did you see or something while you were having a wee?”
Y: “Yes. I heard rustling, like with clothes. And a thud. As well as a sound I would describe as a puncturing sound.”
RL: “When you heard this, what did you do?”
Y: “I assumed something had been dropped on the floor after someone was moving about, and I just thought the puncture was like a different sound to the decompression of a fizzy drink.”
RL: “Did you look to see what the sound might be?”
Y: “After I had finished going to the toilet.”
RL: “What did you see?”
Y: “I saw Girl X stabbing BG.”

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/live-court-updates-two-teenagers-28180964?utm_source=whatsapp&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=communities

 

[Honeybirdette]

At 5.25pm X sent a message to Y, which said: “My brother just told me not to [go to] linear park coz a woman got stabbed.” Y replied: “Jesus really”. When X then relayed information that police officers were in the park because a woman had been “murdered”, Y replied: “Holy crap”.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/live-court-updates-two-teenagers-28180964?utm_source=whatsapp&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=communities

These responses here, do not sound they come from the same person in the witness box today. He knows what he’s doing here, he’s deliberately feigning ignorance to a murder that he now admits he witnessed, despite insisting he had no knowledge it was going to happen and played no part in it. So why the overly enthusiastic shock reactions?
It comes across truly devious, but in court he portrays himself as someone who is unable or incapable of acting like that due to his autism. It’s bizarre to me.