GUILTY UK - Ellie Butler, 6, brutally murdered, Sutton, 28 Oct 2013 #2

[cottonweaver]

Yeah. Well I said that the video could scupper the case and it should be reported. It was obvious that it was an intentional post. On the day the Jury went out of all times.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

doncha just love this thread/these posters! ***

TBH it's got to be one of the nicest threads I've been on ( and this is only my third) , no trolls and a welcoming atmosphere and no one trying to out-do each other by being a clever -d*ck/be dismissive , if you know what I mean! It's not as if we have all agreed either, eg. on JG particularly and we see that difference coming out in the Judge's "leniency" on JG I suppose, as well as the sentencing guidelines for cruelty and the difficulty of making a stronger charge for her at the beginning.

*** so well done all of you, spotting that YT vid and then getting on it. You made the Daily Mirror I realise in hindsight , LOL. Anyway, flutterby's posts on this have now made it all clear. ( Send it all on ladies & gents: how the hell does a copy of police evidence video get from a Defence lawyer to a defendant in the first place. Interesting!)
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ellie-butler-murder-trial-collapsed-8248596


Remember thread 1 early days, when we were getting paranoid about JG browsing the forum late at night and I was mithering that "that woman" would look for any reason for a mistrial based on social media gossip about the case. I was always looking over my shoulder ! (As we only had about 5 posters logged in posting and mainly guests and whenever you Googled BB the WS forum came right at the top of the list, ie. easy to find if you were JG, bored and triple- vodka in hand late at night , surfing net for media opinion on herself!! And boy we know that woman liked to Google!)

Anyway, now it's over and reporting restrictions are down, it would still be good to get some clarity for all posters on what they can and cannot post, what poses risk re litigation. The UK laws on libel are actually quite strict in practice but the WS "not appropriate" is sometimes less clear, if you follow me.

Anyway, of all the threads I have followed this is far the most tragic for me, her age and total powerlessness.

I watched his full video, Mr Gray and read his guardian articles, he is pushing for a public enquiry with the two other kids, I wonder should we set up a petition or something like that to support him whilst the general public are still so upset about this case?

Any volunteers or opinions on that?

 

[cottonweaver]

what Mr Gray has said

"“Lin was trying to hang on for the conclusion of the trial to see justice done for Ellie but she didn’t manage it,” Gray says. “I’m working with my other two children, Julie and Jamie, who were also devoted to Ellie, to expose what went on and get the answers nobody has so far been prepared to give us about why Ellie had to die.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...vastation-complete-neal-gray?CMP=share_btn_tw


In the video interview on the same site he says he is fighting for a public inquest for Ellie. Do you think maybe he means a public enquiry? I'm not sure how it works

https://www.theguardian.com/society...ler-grandfather-murder-video?CMP=share_btn_tw

 

[Supernovae]

I'd like to know how the family court judge (Justice King?) sitting in 2014 to decide on Ellie's sibling's care order, decided that BB had hit Ellie with the table leg. a) no table leg was mentioned in the trial as far as I know and b) how can she make that ruling at a time when he is technically innocent until proven guilty?

Perhaps it's the way it has been reported - maybe she said something like on the balance of probabilities?

There would have had to be a fact finding in family court as part of the care proceedings relating to the other child and this would have had to take place fairly quickly so that it could be fed into decisions made about their future. They couldn't wait two or three years to provide resolution. Also civil court fact findings are done on the basis of balance of probability and not beyond reasonable doubt as in the criminal courts.

 

[cottonweaver]

Meanwhile Butler, a removals man, was the product of a broken home and a mother who drank. He was also a vicious recidivist.
The two were not living together when Ellie was born in December 2006.
To start with, Butler played the doting dad. He wanted his daughter's name to begin with 'E' because he supported Everton. He bought her books, DVDs, and a teddy. 'I still remember her sucking on my little finger,' he told the Old Bailey......
Someone who knew Gray back then described her as 'insecure and fragile'. Women involved with men like Butler usually are. But few would have sacrificed their own children.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nst-savage-****-beat-death.html#ixzz4CINDPchJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook.........

Just a few snippets of things I didn't know , in publications from this morning

 

[cottonweaver]

another

'You f*** with me you f****** c***': The hate-filled letter Ben Butler sent to Ellie's grandparents
Angry father penned threat to Ellie's maternal grandparents Neal and Linda
At the time, they had care of little Ellie and were determined to keep her
He wrote: 'I will get you, find you and find out where you and your family all live'
Mr Gray is calling for public inquiry into the failings around Ellie's death

....According to the Guardian, the letter said: 'You f*** with me you f****** c***... I will get you and find you and find out where you and your family all live.'
The poisonous note, written in June 2008, was just the tip of the iceberg in what emerged as Butler's aggressive, abusive and ultimately murderous character - a trait which Mr Gray detected almost immediately.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-sent-Ellie-s-grandparents.html#ixzz4CINzoaRL
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[cottonweaver]

a clip from today's radio 4, Mr Gray interview, Ellie's nightmares and fear of S4C, threats to E from JG - unreal, the sudden call from JG - do you want to see Ellie - this is still very bizarre why did JG phone 30 mins before, out of blue on day before her death, considering the huge number of missed contact visits before this?

presume full interview on Iplayer , listen live now etc


snippet of him talking

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03z3hsm

 

[Tortoise]

There would have had to be a fact finding in family court as part of the care proceedings relating to the other child and this would have had to take place fairly quickly so that it could be fed into decisions made about their future. They couldn't wait two or three years to provide resolution. Also civil court fact findings are done on the basis of balance of probability and not beyond reasonable doubt as in the criminal courts.

I've seen now that it was on the balance of probabilities. But I am still confused about this broken table leg. I have never heard it mentioned in the trial, but there must have been a broken table leg for that statement to have been made.

"As part of the process Justice Eleanor King made a "fact-finding judgement" which said: "I am satisfied so that I am sure that Ellie died as a result of the father either hitting her on the back of the head with the leg of a child's table, or swinging her with such violence that her head came so forcefully into contact with the table leg that the leg broke and she sustained the skull fracture from which she died."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36516384

 

[cottonweaver]

was wondering when ageism would creep into this

Asked how he tried to keep her, Mr Gray said: "As hard as we could over a period from 2009-2010, to 2011-2012, in 2011 the local authority asked my wife and I whether we would like to adopt Ellie because we passed all the criteria.

"But a social worker blocked it and advised the parents that we were going to adopt Ellie and the application was stopped. We were backed by the London Borough of Sutton's children's services to adopt Ellie.

"We found it very devastating , we tried to fight it tooth and nail but every time we were protested we were told we were troublemakers and we were elderly people and we weren't worthy of looking after children."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-grandfather-tells-how-girl-begged-not-to-be/

 

[cottonweaver]

and the most important one, about Family Courts, same argument that has rumbled on for years.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...r-family-courts-opened-public-scrutiny-judges

and knowledgeable commentary:

It would appear that Justice Hogg overlooked or ignored or failed to acquire risk assessments and previous historical concerns. Hogg appeared to fatally remove the Local Authority (with its statutory protection responsibilities) and use an independent organisation that appeared to work without any scrutiny, supervision or audit. Hogg and S4C actions were catastrophic. Due to Hoggs decision that there was a miscarriage of justice, it seemed to have given the child murderer Butler and his twisted accomplice Gray a licence to child abuse. Poor Ellie lost any protection and I find it gut wrenching that when Ellie asked to speak to the judge because she didn't want to go back to her heartless abusive parents S4C said it wasn't necessary. Neal, I'm so sorry for your loss and so sad your prophetic words, 'you will have blood on your hands' became true. However it is so difficult for protection agencies when dealing with such sinister people like Butler and Gray who manipulated everyone around them including the people who could have saved Ellie. My view is that where there is doubt, children should be on protection plans until it is clear that the doubt is unfounded. Custody hearings can never have precedence over Children Act Section 47 duties.

 

[Tortoise]

This also concerns me. I've thought long and hard about this and I can't see how the trial judge (in the first GBH conviction) had not given proper direction. The jury either was there to decide if he had caused the injuries or not. If they thought he had not, or were not sure, the only inference (that I can think of) from that would be that Ellie's collapse and injuries were due to a different and unknown cause. Perhaps I'm blind to other possibilities.

"The Court of Appeal had re-examined the highly complex and controversial medical evidence used to convict him and ruled the trial judge had not given the jury proper direction. The judgement said the jury had not been offered the option of considering whether some of Ellie's symptoms were due to an unknown cause. No retrial was ordered."

​http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36516384

 

[Tortoise]

a clip from today's radio 4, Mr Gray interview, Ellie's nightmares and fear of S4C, threats to E from JG - unreal, the sudden call from JG - do you want to see Ellie - this is still very bizarre why did JG phone 30 mins before, out of blue on day before her death, considering the huge number of missed contact visits before this?

presume full interview on Iplayer , listen live now etc


snippet of him talking

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03z3hsm

This brings me back to the build up in the week or 2 before Ellie died. There was pandemonium in that household by all accounts, and I think it was because of their paranoia that they would come under investigation again. School headmaster said he couldn't approach Social Services because he had no evidence of harm, but I don't think JG/BB knew this. It's everywhere you look - in the aggression with the school, him finding her diary and exploding, Ellie's injuries from 1st to 14th Oct, first the broken scapula and then the later skull trauma - and still having facial bruises and face paint on 27th Oct, JG's letter to BB saying wtte 'it's not working - I'm heartbroken, you hate me, I'd do anything for you and I proved that last week', the hasty visit to the docs with the ear-pinning excuse, McDonalds visit with grandparents. Now I've read this morning that their neighbour was invited to their flat on the Saturday night (2 days before Ellie was murdered) to a loud party and she said she was surprised the children didn't wake up. I think they were in a frenzy. JG took the Friday off work and told them BB was away. I think she was running around like a headless chicken, putting out fires. Half term looms up, and he is not happy. He clashes with Ellie, and Ellie is 'difficult', not in the sense that we would think she was difficult, because she was being absolutely brave and normal and reacting to living with all this violence and brutality and chaos and having no one on her side and no one she could talk to in confidence - even her grandparents, but difficult in his eyes - not submissive and silent. She was his punch bag, and now it looks as if YD was also on the receiving end of his fists, or possibly a back slam into a wall or piece of furniture.

When I see that very short clip of his police interview all I see is guilt written all over him, and a vile evil bully. It just exudes from him even when he is putting on his innocent act. And JG's interview, I can't actually believe the woman who was interviewing her didn't pick up on her falseness. It was so obvious she was lying, to me anyway. That's not what grief looks like, even if there were tears.

Something else I've noticed about them both is that they frequently said in court, wtte I'm not guilty - or he's not guilty - 100%. If that's not a giveaway statement I don't know what is. Innocence doesn't need 100% or any percentage - that is said for effect and to try and convince. Innocence doesn't need to try and convince, it just presents itself and it rings through like a clear bell.

 

[dalsglen]

Really struggling to catch up, still on page 21 and not been able to read any links yet :gaah: o/t watching a friends wee one today, so with my two 19 months and a 6 month old not much time to read but managed to catch JG dad on this morning, soooo sad, poor man

 

[Gigi-G]

what Mr Gray has said

"“Lin was trying to hang on for the conclusion of the trial to see justice done for Ellie but she didn’t manage it,” Gray says. “I’m working with my other two children, Julie and Jamie, who were also devoted to Ellie, to expose what went on and get the answers nobody has so far been prepared to give us about why Ellie had to die.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...vastation-complete-neal-gray?CMP=share_btn_tw


In the video interview on the same site he says he is fighting for a public inquest for Ellie. Do you think maybe he means a public enquiry? I'm not sure how it works

https://www.theguardian.com/society...ler-grandfather-murder-video?CMP=share_btn_tw

I think that he wants answers... just real straight answers about just why did things that were in place for Ellie just fall short to eventuate her death.
If (and we know they were) the child's parents are hostile and rebuff the agencies involved in the child's well being. Then THOSE agencies MUST have the POWER with the full agreement and backup from the POLICE. And a warrant issued to that effect.
Albeit a warrant not dissimilar to those the Police use on a raid. In the situation if parents are not attending meetings or failing their duty in liason with agencies. The police can obtain entry to the child's premises. On a 'raid type' position.
No child should EVER be endangered. A law past somewhat like I just described would possible 'save' this world from another Ellie!

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Gigi-G]

There would have had to be a fact finding in family court as part of the care proceedings relating to the other child and this would have had to take place fairly quickly so that it could be fed into decisions made about their future. They couldn't wait two or three years to provide resolution. Also civil court fact findings are done on the basis of balance of probability and not beyond reasonable doubt as in the criminal courts.

Law of probabilities/possibilities

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Gigi-G]

doncha just love this thread/these posters! ***

TBH it's got to be one of the nicest threads I've been on ( and this is only my third) , no trolls and a welcoming atmosphere and no one trying to out-do each other by being a clever -d*ck/be dismissive , if you know what I mean! It's not as if we have all agreed either, eg. on JG particularly and we see that difference coming out in the Judge's "leniency" on JG I suppose, as well as the sentencing guidelines for cruelty and the difficulty of making a stronger charge for her at the beginning.

*** so well done all of you, spotting that YT vid and then getting on it. You made the Daily Mirror I realise in hindsight , LOL. Anyway, flutterby's posts on this have now made it all clear. ( Send it all on ladies & gents: how the hell does a copy of police evidence video get from a Defence lawyer to a defendant in the first place. Interesting!)
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ellie-butler-murder-trial-collapsed-8248596


Remember thread 1 early days, when we were getting paranoid about JG browsing the forum late at night and I was mithering that "that woman" would look for any reason for a mistrial based on social media gossip about the case. I was always looking over my shoulder ! (As we only had about 5 posters logged in posting and mainly guests and whenever you Googled BB the WS forum came right at the top of the list, ie. easy to find if you were JG, bored and triple- vodka in hand late at night , surfing net for media opinion on herself!! And boy we know that woman liked to Google!)

Anyway, now it's over and reporting restrictions are down, it would still be good to get some clarity for all posters on what they can and cannot post, what poses risk re litigation. The UK laws on libel are actually quite strict in practice but the WS "not appropriate" is sometimes less clear, if you follow me.

Anyway, of all the threads I have followed this is far the most tragic for me, her age and total powerlessness.

I watched his full video, Mr Gray and read his guardian articles, he is pushing for a public enquiry with the two other kids, I wonder should we set up a petition or something like that to support him whilst the general public are still so upset about this case?

Any volunteers or opinions on that?

Same this is my third case now. I've seen WS on many a cold case advertised. Used by the LE/Legal teams. I've not been trolled on any yet. I've witnessed character assassination and pretty much libellous quotes. But I think that can happen in the heat of the moment and the sensitivity of the case. Cuz as we know. There can be much gory/scary/emotive situations involved. And I think it helps if the thread has a certain air of decorum and respect. Or just a WS user. Keep reminding of WS guidelines for discussion

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[ColourPurple]

Just popping on as a recurring thought keeps flashing into my head re JG demanding/overuse of opiates in hospital. If they were given in tablet form could she have been stockpiling them to give to Ellie to treat painful injuries that they didn't want doctors to know about? On the one hand it's an horrific thought that Ellie may have been so injured that JG knew she needed serious pain medication, on the other hand I think I'd prefer to know that Ellie at least received some kind of pain relief for her injuries.

 

[Gigi-G]

I've seen now that it was on the balance of probabilities. But I am still confused about this broken table leg. I have never heard it mentioned in the trial, but there must have been a broken table leg for that statement to have been made.

"As part of the process Justice Eleanor King made a "fact-finding judgement" which said: "I am satisfied so that I am sure that Ellie died as a result of the father either hitting her on the back of the head with the leg of a child's table, or swinging her with such violence that her head came so forcefully into contact with the table leg that the leg broke and she sustained the skull fracture from which she died."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36516384

To me that was her interpretation of the way Ellie met her death. None of us will ever know the exact details into what actually did transpire. We could say as much that he beat her with the fallen curtain pole... we know Ellie met her end via BBs hands. By blunt force trauma..

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Gigi-G]

was wondering when ageism would creep into this


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-grandfather-tells-how-girl-begged-not-to-be/

That does really annoying me. They were good enough to foster but not adopt. If they had adopted Ellie. I think Nanny would still be with us today

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Gigi-G]

and the most important one, about Family Courts, same argument that has rumbled on for years.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...r-family-courts-opened-public-scrutiny-judges

and knowledgeable commentary:

As I said above above.... Police intervention after non compliance with agencies

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Gigi-G]

This also concerns me. I've thought long and hard about this and I can't see how the trial judge (in the first GBH conviction) had not given proper direction. The jury either was there to decide if he had caused the injuries or not. If they thought he had not, or were not sure, the only inference (that I can think of) from that would be that Ellie's collapse and injuries were due to a different and unknown cause. Perhaps I'm blind to other possibilities.

"The Court of Appeal had re-examined the highly complex and controversial medical evidence used to convict him and ruled the trial judge had not given the jury proper direction. The judgement said the jury had not been offered the option of considering whether some of Ellie's symptoms were due to an unknown cause. No retrial was ordered."

​http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36516384

Whether they decided that the information they had at hand wouldn't of been enough to exact a majority Jury vote and that's why it wasn't pushed further.
You imagine how much money BB and JG Have added to the public purse since 2007.
It's got to amount now well into the 100s of thousands.
And we all know that area Council's had their resources capped. It's the lesser of two evils. That is why I'm saying any adult who has care of a child that has come under scrutiny of the health authorities. If they fail to keep appointments then police MUST have the power given to them with a warrant to bust down the door if necessary to gain access to the child in question.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk