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

[Grouse]

The Judge said:

"Defendants have vulnerabilities beyond their youth'".

How come these vulnerabilities were NOT addressed before this heinous crime???

In fact, they were diagnosed only AFTER the murder of an innocent victim.


JMO

One had slight traits of autism and ADHD, and one was on the spectrum. Without the gift of hindsight it's hard to see what could have been addressed in this case before the crime, most autistic people don't go on to become murderers.

 

[Dotta]

One had slight traits of autism and ADHD, and one was on the spectrum. Without the gift of hindsight it's hard to see what could have been addressed in this case before the crime, most autistic people don't go on to become murderers.

So I don't understand why the Judge said what she said.
What exactly was meant by these vulnerabilities?

And, of course, pupils who have special needs are helped at school.
There are psychologists' recommendations.
There is help by school counsellor.

Both suffered from anxiety, girl X even self harmed.
I think a lot should have been done.
And at 15, it was high time to start help.
Usually it starts at 11 in my school.

JMO

 

[Grouse]

So I don't understand why the Judge said what she said.
What exactly was meant by these vulnerabilities?

I don't know (beyond what I said above), and will await further information before passing judgement.

 

[Dotta]

I don't know, and will await further information before passing judgement.

I can only speak as a teacher, who knows the reality of school life and help given to kids with special needs.

And both ADHD and autism are included into such special needs.
And there are many warning signs observed by teachers, who then ask Pedagogical/Psychological Counselling Centre (which cooperates with a school) for diagnosis - usually at the age of 10/11.

JMO

 

[Grouse]

I can only speak as a teacher, who knows the reality of school life and help given to kids with special needs.

And both ADHD and autism are included into such special needs.
And there are many warning signs observed by teachers, who then ask Pedagogical/Psychological Office for diagnosis - usually at the age of 10/11.

JMO

I don't think anyone could have prepared for this scenario, it is so unusual. With all due respect I don't think it is fair for you to criticise in the way you are doing.

 

[Dotta]

I don't think anyone could have prepared for this scenario, it is so unusual. With all due respect I don't think it is fair for you to criticise in the way you are doing.

I simply express my opinion.
If somebody thinks it is criticism, it is this person's view.

These perps seemed to be neglected IMO.
Frustrated, full of anxiety, full of anger/hatred.

JMO

 

[Grouse]

I simply express my opinion.
If somebody thinks it is criticism, it is this person's view.

These perps were neglected IMO.
Frustrated, full of anxiety, full of anger/hatred.

JMO

And all I have said above is JMO also.

 

[Lucy6226]

So I don't understand why the Judge said what she said.
What exactly was meant by these vulnerabilities?

And, of course, pupils who have special needs are helped at school.
There are psychologists' recommendations.
There is help by school counsellor.

Both suffered from anxiety, girl X even self harmed.
I think a lot should have been done.
And at 15, it was high time to start help.
Usually it starts at 11 in my school.

JMO

Unfortunately a lot of these kids don't get all the help they need. Our local CAMHS has a 2yr waiting list currently. Anxiety is particularly high after COVID lockdown, lots of young people are struggling to get back into school life fully and maintain positive peer relationships. Unless diagnosed at primary school age, a lot of teenagers go through high school undiagnosed or diagnosed but without a Educational Health Care Plan, so receive basic support due to funding. I will say most pastrol staff in schools are amazing. All this is my own opinion and experience as a social worker.

 

[Grouse]

<RSBM>
I also think that the diagnoses they have now been given probably don't have all that much connection to the crimes they've been convicted of.

I am inclined to agree.

 

[mrjitty]

I am inclined to agree.

+1

We have to remember this is all in the context of a trial, and those diagnoses were relevant to the conduct and trial procedure - not as evidence to the offending. For all we know they have major personality disorders - i would not be surprised - and would likely not be admissible. There's a risk people now start equating autism with criminal conduct which is obviously unfair.

Ditto the current and past reporting as to context. The tabloids have reported wildly inconsistent content from varied sources - all of which was not relevant to the offending, or not admissible. Personally I am waiting for reliable reporting from better sources, than simply accepting single source reporting.

For example, the head teacher is hardly likely to say her school is full of transphobia - and it probably isn't - but also the question is somewhat irrelevant to this offending when the principal killer did not even know the victim yet used transphobic and dehumanising language which was surely relevant at least in part to his murderous intent.

For Girl X it appears different - conflicted emotions, jealousy etc - but personally I doubt her texts to Boy Y tell the full story

Now we are seeing the next iteration of the story where everything can be blamed on the "dark web" - these moral panics really are unhelpful. A couple of posts back I posted a very similar case where a youth man stabbed to death another man in the park for no apparent reason. I guess the dark web is also to blame?

Personally I suspect trying to explain any of this via wider societal trends is likely to be mistaken.

 

[HongKongPhooey]

I simply express my opinion.
If somebody thinks it is criticism, it is this person's view.

These perps seemed to be neglected IMO.
Frustrated, full of anxiety, full of anger/hatred.

JMO

Whether this is true or not (and what I have read of their upbringings in msms, not - IMO), the law will not allow it as an excuse for murdering in cold blood. Quite rightly, I think. It would have course be taken into account during sentencing and assessed as whether relevant or not.

As for the schools, surely there is only so much they can tolerate and support? For instance, how could they allow a pupil to remain if they have been giving other pupils an illegal drug which has made them ill?

All JMO whilst we await sentencing.

 

[Skigh]

Whether this is true or not (and what I have read of their upbringings in msms, not - IMO), the law will not allow it as an excuse for murdering in cold blood. Quite rightly, I think. It would have course be taken into account during sentencing and assessed as whether relevant or not.

As for the schools, surely there is only so much they can tolerate and support? For instance, how could they allow a pupil to remain if they have been giving other pupils an illegal drug which has made them ill?

All JMO whilst we await sentencing.

I totally agree with you. From what I have read both of them came from hard working stable backgrounds. Schools are at breaking point and the majority of teachers report behaviour has deteriorated in their schools and the system cannot cope with the ever increasing number of children with individual needs.

 

[iamshadow21]

+1

We have to remember this is all in the context of a trial, and those diagnoses were relevant to the conduct and trial procedure - not as evidence to the offending. For all we know they have major personality disorders - i would not be surprised - and would likely not be admissible. There's a risk people now start equating autism with criminal conduct which is obviously unfair.

Ditto the current and past reporting as to context. The tabloids have reported wildly inconsistent content from varied sources - all of which was not relevant to the offending, or not admissible. Personally I am waiting for reliable reporting from better sources, than simply accepting single source reporting.

For example, the head teacher is hardly likely to say her school is full of transphobia - and it probably isn't - but also the question is somewhat irrelevant to this offending when the principal killer did not even know the victim yet used transphobic and dehumanising language which was surely relevant at least in part to his murderous intent.

For Girl X it appears different - conflicted emotions, jealousy etc - but personally I doubt her texts to Boy Y tell the full story

Now we are seeing the next iteration of the story where everything can be blamed on the "dark web" - these moral panics really are unhelpful. A couple of posts back I posted a very similar case where a youth man stabbed to death another man in the park for no apparent reason. I guess the dark web is also to blame?

Personally I suspect trying to explain any of this via wider societal trends is likely to be mistaken.

^^^^^THIS. Excellent post, summed up some of my feelings on this case far more succinctly than I could.

 

[Pinkestpanther]

+1

We have to remember this is all in the context of a trial, and those diagnoses were relevant to the conduct and trial procedure - not as evidence to the offending. For all we know they have major personality disorders - i would not be surprised - and would likely not be admissible. There's a risk people now start equating autism with criminal conduct which is obviously unfair.

Ditto the current and past reporting as to context. The tabloids have reported wildly inconsistent content from varied sources - all of which was not relevant to the offending, or not admissible. Personally I am waiting for reliable reporting from better sources, than simply accepting single source reporting.

For example, the head teacher is hardly likely to say her school is full of transphobia - and it probably isn't - but also the question is somewhat irrelevant to this offending when the principal killer did not even know the victim yet used transphobic and dehumanising language which was surely relevant at least in part to his murderous intent.

For Girl X it appears different - conflicted emotions, jealousy etc - but personally I doubt her texts to Boy Y tell the full story

Now we are seeing the next iteration of the story where everything can be blamed on the "dark web" - these moral panics really are unhelpful. A couple of posts back I posted a very similar case where a youth man stabbed to death another man in the park for no apparent reason. I guess the dark web is also to blame?

Personally I suspect trying to explain any of this via wider societal trends is likely to be mistaken.

We don't know who the principal killer was as far as I'm aware. It hasn't been proven.

 

[Parker Knoll]

No it hasn’t. A detail I don’t think we will ever know.

 

[Dotta]

"Following his arrest, Boy Y was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, which affected his communication skills.

His speech during five interviews with police, after he was held on suspicion of murder, was barely audible in court and was indecipherable without the assistance of a transcript.

In pre-trial hearings, there were questions over whether Boy Y was fit to stand trial, given his difficulties.

But ultimately he was deemed to be fit, and the court employed extraordinary techniques to allow him to give evidence.

In court, both defendants were assigned an intermediary, who sat with them through the whole four week trial.
Intermediaries are communication specialists who help people give evidence at court.

Sometimes, they would interject to inform the judge that there was an issue with one of the defendants -
if they felt tired and if they believed a break was needed or whether an early finish to court proceedings was necessary.

Both defendants were allowed to follow some of the proceedings via video link from the secure units where they were being held.

When on video link, both defendants could be seen playing with toys which were said to assist with anxiety.

Boy Y was even seen with a crossword puzzle on one occasion.

Perhaps controversially,
he was allowed to remain outside of court while Girl X and Brianna’s loved ones listened to gruesome evidence from a pathologist about the catalogue of injuries which caused her death.

Throughout the trial, Boy Y's lawyers raised concerns that he hadn’t been eating or drinking properly.

And at one stage, given the extraordinary allowances made for Girl X and Boy Y throughout the trial,
the judge, Mrs Justice Yip, reassured Brianna’s loved ones listening on in court that their interests were at the forefront of her mind.

On the first day of the trial,
Girl X was said to be 'visibly shaking'.
'I don't find that highly unusual', the judge said in court in the absence of the jury.

'That's something people do when they are nervous'.

When she gave evidence in court from behind a curtain in the witness box,
Girl X was seen to have a visible facial twitch as she fidgeted with a multi-coloured toy."

How two teenagers went from GCSE students to cold-blooded killers

Girl X and Boy Y will be sentenced on February 2

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

 

[CocktailQueen]

Can the jury see the defendants giving evidence?

 

[Amonet]

+1

We have to remember this is all in the context of a trial, and those diagnoses were relevant to the conduct and trial procedure - not as evidence to the offending. For all we know they have major personality disorders - i would not be surprised - and would likely not be admissible. There's a risk people now start equating autism with criminal conduct which is obviously unfair.

Ditto the current and past reporting as to context. The tabloids have reported wildly inconsistent content from varied sources - all of which was not relevant to the offending, or not admissible. Personally I am waiting for reliable reporting from better sources, than simply accepting single source reporting.

For example, the head teacher is hardly likely to say her school is full of transphobia - and it probably isn't - but also the question is somewhat irrelevant to this offending when the principal killer did not even know the victim yet used transphobic and dehumanising language which was surely relevant at least in part to his murderous intent.

For Girl X it appears different - conflicted emotions, jealousy etc - but personally I doubt her texts to Boy Y tell the full story

Now we are seeing the next iteration of the story where everything can be blamed on the "dark web" - these moral panics really are unhelpful. A couple of posts back I posted a very similar case where a youth man stabbed to death another man in the park for no apparent reason. I guess the dark web is also to blame?

Personally I suspect trying to explain any of this via wider societal trends is likely to be mistaken.

I agree with this.

My own thoughts are also that the high intelligence combined with social and mixing issues, autism spectrum, and stuff like that can mean a young person or adult maybe reads more than peers, maybe uses the internet in a deeper way than others might. Some will use it to get into niche subject, planes, ornithology or anything. But everyone has different tastes, interests, and curiosities.

I think it's quite common for teens of this age to get interested in darker or morbid themes. They're likely to be introduced to horror movies and books at this age. Some will boast about the most disturbing horror movies they've seen. This is all normal. An interest in witchcraft and satanism is normal. And stuff like Wicca doesn't have satanism in it, but the interests can intersect. I don't know if anyone has heard of author Denis Wheatley (The Haunting of Toby Jugg and The Devil Rides Out). The Devil Rides Out was made into an excellent film, I think it was Vincent Price. I was into things like these when I was about their age. There's no harm in that.

There's no harm in curiosity about death. Searching for snuff films on the dark web is taking it a bit far, but it is where such stuff can be found, and such stuff shouldn't exist, is disgusting, appalling, criminal, evil, etc.A curiosity in death that leads to wanting to view some of these things as part of a phase of growing up is not necessarily going to hurt a person long term, they will satisfy their curiosity and grow out of it and mature.

From what we've heard in the trial, these kids have immersed themselves deeply into the darkest of dark stuff. It's gone deeper than curiosity. They've had impulses that are not normal. The two things have combined together. It's possible one or both could end up diagnosed with personality disorders, but to my knowledge it's rare to give those diagnoses before the age of 18? If that and a lack of empathy for other humans, or for life itself, was added in...this all would add up to a dangerous combination. Add in a friend with similar interests who's also up for taking it into real life? Very, very rare, and very dangerous.

But overall, most teens with these conditions and interests will never do anything more criminal than minor shoplifting or smoking a spliff, and you don't need these conditions or interests to do those things and most kids who try those things will end up as normal hardworking adults.

My point is, that yes, there can be slightly higher possibilities of reading, researching, darker interests, that might have a bit higher likelihood in people with conditions like these (though the conditions aren't necessary to be an avid reader or have unusual interests). But it appears the individuals in this case have an extremely rare concordance of things adding together, along with free will and egging each other on, that has culminated in this horrific crime. It's not about social media, internet, television, modern culture, witchcraft, satanism, autism, social anxiety or awkwardness, or any of these things. It's a combination of a hundred different things and their decision to encourage each other and act on it.

JMO

 

[Amonet]

Can the jury see the defendants giving evidence?

They should be able to. As far as I know when a defendant has things like a privacy screen they're only screened from the public gallery, not from the jury. And I don't think these two were behind a screen as there was a court artist sketch of them from behind.

 

[Dotta]

What exactly was the motive of the murder?

Was it morbid curiosity?
Fulfilling sick fantasies?
Thrill seeking?
Personal dislike/animosity?
Some mental disturbances?
Some elements of transphobia?
(The code word to start the attack was "gay",
the murderer said he wanted to hear if the victim would scream "like a boy or a girl").

Was she streaming the murder live to the "dark web"?
Were the murderers under the influence of some drugs?
GX was reported to be the dealer of some substances - pills at school.
How did she even put her hands on such pills?

I hope the sentences will be adequate to the heinous crime.

Justice for Brianna!

JMO