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

[Tortoise]

But, but, but... I thought she knew immediately that Ellie was dead. Right away. Instantly. That's why she closed the door. That is why she didn't call an ambulance immediately. That, and because of course an ambulance isn't the first thing that pops into your mind when you find your daughter lifeless on the floor..

I'm beyond disgusted. I hope she keeps talking and talking.

What is so ugly about her is that she hasn't shown an ounce of shame. I know it's a trial, and I expected to hear denials and ugliness from all the details in this case, but it feels while all this is going on like Ellie is getting another trampling from her parents. Perhaps I am expecting too much when I have hopes of seeing some calm decorum and respect. All their overbearing rudeness isn't appropriate when a 6 year old child has lost her life. They have had 3 years nearly to stop and think about Ellie and what their behaviour has resulted in. They can't give her a second's thought.

I think they think it will give the impression that they are innocent and indignant, but it doesn't. The same could be done in a dignified way. You really do get a sense in that courtroom of how they are both bullies, too big for their boots, and how this is probably them scaled back, this is them on their best behaviour. It is as I thought, as if they have not grown up. They are delinquents. It has been quite shocking, to think that they had children entrusted and returned to their care, sanctioned by the courts, like an experiment, when so many people's concerns were simply ignored.

 

[Renee110]

Then he emphasized her cruelty and neglect. When she came home on 10th or 11th October and BB told her that Ellie had hit her head falling over the dog, she had been unconscious and had vomited, and had a bump on her head and a bloodshot eye. And she never took her to hospital. This she said, wasn't because of 2007, it was because she assessed her daughter as being absolutely fine and not needing treatment. And she said there had been no problems with Ellie's shoulder or arm. FitzG pointed out that school records showed she had had to sit and watch from the side of the pool while the class had a swimming lesson. Her kit had been forgotten.

That poor little girl.

She went from a loving home where she was nurtured and loved and in eight short months (although for her those months probably dragged on longer than her lived years) her life rapidly descended into a painful hell.

Even now, her own mommy and daddy reject her by not being truthful about her death and by not mourning her.

I have to wonder if she wasn't threatened about telling someone at school or her grandparents about her home life. I've never been abused like that, but I would think if you were raised in an abusive home you might think your life is normal, but she was with them for such a short time and she knew a different way of life. I just have to wonder why she didn't tell someone. Maybe she was too young? I don't know. I taught my daughter our phone number and how to dial 911 when she was way younger than Ellie, so I would think at her age she could have told a teacher or someone that she was hurt and scared?

 

[Gigi-G]

What is so ugly about her is that she hasn't shown an ounce of shame. I know it's a trial, and I expected to hear denials and ugliness from all the details in this case, but it feels while all this is going on like Ellie is getting another trampling from her parents. Perhaps I am expecting too much when I have hopes of seeing some calm decorum and respect. All their overbearing rudeness isn't appropriate when a 6 year old child has lost her life. They have had 3 years nearly to stop and think about Ellie and what their behaviour has resulted in. They can't give her a second's thought.

I think they think it will give the impression that they are innocent and indignant, but it doesn't. The same could be done in a dignified way. You really do get a sense in that courtroom of how they are both bullies, too big for their boots, and how this is probably them scaled back, this is them on their best behaviour. It is as I thought, as if they have not grown up. They are delinquents. It has been quite shocking, to think that they had children entrusted and returned to their care, sanctioned by the courts, like an experiment, when so many people's concerns were simply ignored.

I quite agree. Neither of them have 'grown up' yet alone adult enough to adequately look after a child let alone children. Ye God's I was married at 16. Had my eldest son at 18. I had my own home and it was down to me that my home ran like a well oiled land-rover. My husband wanted for nothing neither did my child. They were my priority. And that was final.
They are 30 something?
Has the world changed that much in the last 20 years?
A child is not an item or fashion accessory. A child is for LIFE! Over and above anything or anyone else!
I do hope this pair of idiots get plenty of time to sit in solitude. And ponder over the last 8 years... and find out where the fk they went wrong!

***APPALLED AND DISGUSTED***

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[cottonweaver]

The dog has woken me up - to be let out.
Lots more great posts on here again and some funny ones.

Fitzgerald looks like Benedict Cumberbatch to me and because GIgi has joined Twitter ( or Twatter as she has called it) she is going to be awake all night due to notifications. :laughing: Meanwhile JG has invited Cumberbatch back to hers to look at her laundry basket and spent last night bashing her legs to acquire some superficial bruising. (The poor jury, OTOH at least they will be paying attention. )

Anyway on a serious note- in reply to the questions on previous page and Tortoise seems to be still awake too....... she has got JG stomping through her mind?:scared:

Her lying -is she aware how unconvincing it is/ridiculous she is? Surely she can't be as her goal is to get him off and anything that interferes with that must be eliminated. So she must have a "lack" there, what Tortoise asked "is it mental blindness". Maybe it's a symptom of her illness? idk

However 'm sure you can be ill and still be conniving at the same time - occasionally her lies are cunning and credible and she does know when to stop. Occasionally she throws the dog a bone and knows when there is no excuse, so she accepts what Fitzgerald says - eg. on the list she says " yeah I was out of order", on one of his vile texts she replies" Yes that is disgusting, I haven't forgiven him for that"....etc
So she has some mental agility and as Tortoise posted there is some kind of intell. there.

I am reminded of a girl I came into contact with at work who made false allegations against staff. In retrospect it was easier to understand why she was such a fast & clever liar - she had been brought up in a home where she lied to survive- not excusing it as that was her choice. She was quite a tricky customer - she may have been ill additionally IDK but she took your breath away as you listened to her come up with, off the cuff, all sorts of devious nonsense. She also seemed, sometimes to read your mind and then try to "head you off at the pass " so it was all a bit of a paradox.
JG goes to surreal extremes but also knows when to stop occasionally and reign it back in and can guess what FitzG is thinking/headed. ( Think that'swhat Tortoise said. ) All very odd.


PS
So JG threw the diary away now! ( I just read) The pair must have had a chat night of the 17th as he changed his mind on the 18th which now seems to fit her version of the 26th. Scratch that again - T says that JG physically put the diary in a bus-stop area bin thus his 18th testimony now contradicts hers.

 

[cottonweaver]

finally did posters notice that she said , yesterday, during cross that she thought she heard E say Mummy in her ear? (Can't remember the context now so it might have just been her begging for sympathy, trying to seem like a normal mum)

OK JG lies& lies but if it were true - is that some guilt manifesting? Guilt plus "obstructed "bereavement ....?

PS . Re the jury have a list of questions for JG- think this is a good sign as to them really paying attention. I do hope that the judge allows these and she is brought back onto the stand.

 

[jog]

He went over the internet search '6 yr old urinating to be bad'

She said it was YD not Ellie.

'So you forgot your daughter's age. You're lying Miss G, this was obviously about Ellie.'

I would think she is suggesting it is younger child now because JG knows what the results of that search engine were Quite clearly states that if a child does this then it is a sign something is wrong and often a sign of abuse or something to that effect ! So if she admits she searched this about Ellie she again would have to admit there were issues she should have looked into or signs that she completely ignored . Maybe I credit her with too much intelligence by suggesting this but if that is not he case why lie pointlessly ?

 

[jog]

Interesting they have a list of ques for JG but had none for BB. Does this mean they are already convinced of his guilt but not sure on hers re the child cruelty ? Who knows

 

[cottonweaver]

I would think she is suggesting it is younger child now because JG knows what the results of that search engine were Quite clearly states that if a child does this then it is a sign something is wrong and often a sign of abuse or something to that effect ! So if she admits she searched this about Ellie she again would have to admit there were issues she should have looked into or signs that she completely ignored . Maybe I credit her with too much intelligence by suggesting this but if that is not he case why lie pointlessly ?

Think it's also possibly connected to the list that she is also denying they discussed and all the other searches she is denying related to Ellie.

She denies any search/list/concern/text which could evidence/supply BB with motivation for a fatal loss of temper as well as any search that might indicate E was being abused in any way. We've read about the extent of her denials yesterday of her own DV injuries so that she ends up looking totally ridiculous and written off as not a credible witness in this case.

 

[Tortoise]

There was a text BB sent JG in which he said YD had wet herself, and was copying Ellie to a T.

It was used as another example to show JG was lying.

 

[Tortoise]

JG couldn't explain her search for "PTSD and domestic violence", around the time of the family court proceedings. BB had been diagnosed with PTSD.

She said she did hundreds of searches around that time for brain injuries etc. QC said that doesn't explain the search. She said I can't explain it, I just did it for no particular reason. QC said so you just randomly decided to make that specific search. She said BB was getting into violent altercations when he went out. QC said that doesn't explain the domestic part. She said I can't help you, it was a long time ago.

 

[Legally Bland]

Anyway, court schedule -


Tomorrow no jury sitting - legal directions being given by judge to counsels in morning via email, and legal argument listed from 12pm

Friday - court sitting to hear Dr Mack by video link at 10am. Also jury gave judge a list of questions they want to ask JG and she might, depending on what the barristers decide, be recalled to the stand to answer them.

Next week - no court

Following week - Not sure what's happening Mon & Tues. Possible recall of Dr Stoodley to answer Dr Mack? Expecting Dr O to be linked by video on Weds 8th June - but still unconfirmed.

After that - closing arguments and summing up.

BIB. Depending on the questions, I'm thinking this has the possibility of an outburst being directed at the jury if this goes ahead.

Even indirectly if it's aimed at whoever asks the questions (the judge?).

 

[cottonweaver]

JG couldn't explain her search for "PTSD and domestic violence", around the time of the family court proceedings. BB had been diagnosed with PTSD.

She said she did hundreds of searches around that time for brain injuries etc. QC said that doesn't explain the search. She said I can't explain it, I just did it for no particular reason. QC said so you just randomly decided to make that specific search. She said BB was getting into violent altercations when he went out. QC said that doesn't explain the domestic part. She said I can't help you, it was a long time ago.

Well that is a surprise - BB had PTSD around 2013? Do you think that has been substantiated? ( I know he has said he suffers from anxiety now and does not sleep well)
I looked up what you reported for Aug 2013 in her search for " 'head swelling and trauma'"- it did bring up hits to do with brain injury.
DO you think she was looking for herself or for E ?

 

[cottonweaver]

BIB. Depending on the questions, I'm thinking this has the possibility of an outburst being directed at the jury if this goes ahead.

Even indirectly if it's aimed at whoever asks the questions (the judge?).

Yes Legally, I was wondering if she might start ranting towards the jury if she gets called back to testify.

Incidentally I remember the 2007 conviction of BB was a majority verdict . Think it was 10:2. The jury qs could be the qs of an uncertain juror who wants to be satisfied.
From T's accounts of a number(?) of jurors stifling laughter, it sounds like quite a few of them are already on the same page re JG.
I also wonder if some of her contradictory testimony has raised their BS detectors, for want of a better phrase, and they are asking for clarification on that kind of thing?
I also wonder how many of them are parents. Culturally we expect more of mums like JG so women defendants will get a lot of scrutiny - it's just how it is IMO.

 

[cottonweaver]

Was looking if there was an alternative to "obstructed " bereavement. Obviously people show loss in so many ways - some are more demonstrative than others. Anyway putting aside those common examples, what if someone really has no grief after a loss.

I appreciate JG has only known E for 6 weeks plus 11 months ( bar a few contact visits 2007-2012) but anyway this came up - sorry don't have the link now.

Q:**Why do certain people not exhibit any grief patterns?
A:**Up until recently, it hasn't really been known. Most investigators in the field, I think, would say that people who don't show grief have something wrong with them — they either are defensive, or cold, or they never cared about the person to begin with, or they weren't attached or
they score high on a measure we had of avoidant attachment.

I just wondered if it was part of her illness/ whichever PersDisorder( s) she has .

 

[Tortoise]

BIB. Depending on the questions, I'm thinking this has the possibility of an outburst being directed at the jury if this goes ahead.

Even indirectly if it's aimed at whoever asks the questions (the judge?).

To my knowledge, it depends on the question. If it's a matter that is already in evidence her barrister will address the jury and give the answer. It could be something technical, such as can the experts tell if JG's blood spots were menstrual or not. And the answer may be that this was or wasn't established from the forensic tests. But if it is a question that only JG can answer, something that they want to know and hasn't been asked, such as why did you lie about xyz, she can be recalled to the stand and the questions will, I think, be put to her by the judge.

I'm half tempted to go in tomorrow just to hear the questions. If they aren't reported in the press I shall forever wonder about it. Mmm, can I be bothered? Is anyone else going? I get the feeling these are questions for her to answer and not the barrister.

 

[Tortoise]

Well that is a surprise - BB had PTSD around 2013? Do you think that has been substantiated? ( I know he has said he suffers from anxiety now and does not sleep well)
I looked up what you reported for Aug 2013 in her search for " 'head swelling and trauma'"- it did bring up hits to do with brain injury.
DO you think she was looking for herself or for E ?

I would guess Ellie, because he texted her abt week before end of August and said Ellie's bumped her head. And she was off school first week of September, as we know, with that rubbish explanation.

 

[Tortoise]

I wish I could remember about his PTSD. He was diagnosed before the children were returned but I can't remember when.

 

[cottonweaver]

Last link

If you look in here you can see how the PDisorders overlap, how hard it would be for even a psych to say which of these JG might be suffering from, or several , as there are so many overlaps. Having a mixed one is v.common, esp. with BPD, apparently

I have tried to attach it but can't , when you open the link, it's number 4 of the tables in there. The table is called:

DSM-IV-TR Personality Disorders from the Perspective of the Five-Factor Model of General Personality Functioning

Along the top line of all the columns are the PDs she seems to fit with - eg. Borderline ( BPD) , Histrionic ( HPD) , Anti-social ( ASPD), Narcissism ( NPD) etc
Then the row headings have some of the traits she seems to display - looking at both her testimony and her actions/other evidence .
So traits like hostility, irresponsibility, fantasy, arrogance, deception.....etc etc

Anyway I am only putting this up to underscore how complex diagnosis is and how the JG traits overlap several PDs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_disorder#Diagnosis

I ended up there as I was looking at "compulsive lying" based on Tortoise's post/account of her relentless lies, is she aware she has not deceived etc etc

 

[cottonweaver]

I wish I could remember about his PTSD. He was diagnosed before the children were returned but I can't remember when.

I don't know if you recall the psych Prof. Michael SImpson on the OPistorius case. MS did some of the early research on PTSD and reckons it is one of the most mis-diagnosed syndromes and he seems to know what he is talking about.

 

[Tortoise]

Yes Legally, I was wondering if she might start ranting towards the jury if she gets called back to testify.

Incidentally I remember the 2007 conviction of BB was a majority verdict . Think it was 10:2. The jury qs could be the qs of an uncertain juror who wants to be satisfied.
From T's accounts of a number(?) of jurors stifling laughter, it sounds like quite a few of them are already on the same page re JG.
I also wonder if some of her contradictory testimony has raised their BS detectors, for want of a better phrase, and they are asking for clarification on that kind of thing?
I also wonder how many of them are parents. Culturally we expect more of mums like JG so women defendants will get a lot of scrutiny - it's just how it is IMO.

IMO at least 7 of them have the 'parent look' about them. Don't ask me what the parent look is lol.

There are 8 women and 4 men.