I hadn't realised that the text where he threatened to "maim" JG was related to Ellie. According to the Guardian he threatened to maim her if she bought Ellie home. I'm not sure if this was on one of the days you were in court but if it was did they expand on that at all? I can't work out if it means he didn't want Ellie back or didn't want JG back or didn't want either of them back but I'd be really interested to find out where she was bringing Ellie back from and if it was about Ellie, why BB didn't want her back... and did JG come back with Ellie anyway? Also whether the date of the text tied in with the dates of any of Ellie's injuries or her absences from school or google searches.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-video-with-dark-mark-around-eye-during-trial
I have no doubt whatsoever of his guilt, or her guilt as a participating abuser.
1. No reason for discovering Ellie -
They've stitched themselves over with the cake excuse. It was served onto 4 plates in the kitchen. Clearly JG did this (if he did it there would have been 2 pieces, or 3) and it was her reason for sending YD to wake up Ellie. She said this in her police interview the day after, at a time when they hadn't had a chance to align their stories in detail. She stuck with that story until he changed his story when they went to trial in 2015.
If there was another reason for him discovering Ellie he would have given it and wouldn't have changed that part, as he knew it would cause problems for JG's story. He's forced her to admit perverting the course of justice by saying her account of finding Ellie was a lie.
2. JG's blood in the bathroom -
They've both woven JG's visit to the bathroom as soon as she came home, into their versions. I don't think it would have been an important part of his version, or a memory he would have - he can't remember other things because he was in shock - it is something they've agreed to align, not realising that it didn't need to be something he was aware of. By putting it in his version too he's made it a suspicious event. He's trying to account for her blood drops without knowing if she would have left any. They know they have to explain JG's blood drops in the bath. What they haven't explained is her trail leading to the bathroom from Ellie's room. If it was something innocuous such as JG getting a nose bleed in Ellie's room or even injuring herself, they would have just said that. So he injured her. And he must have gone into her room or the bathroom to get JG's towel to throw away. How did he know she had left a bloodied towel?
3. The September school absence -
This is not explained by JG not knowing the date term started. The school rang them both and left messages on both their phones, and emailed, yet they still did not send Ellie back until the following week. That would have been my question to her as a juror. This absence coincides with JG's search for head trauma, which she says was for BB.
4. Not taking Ellie to the hospital for concussion -
His excuse is 2007, her excuse is Ellie seemed fine. Neither are plausible. He would take Ellie to the GP in June when her injuries and symptoms were less serious. They had both done enough medical research to know that concussion was a serious event, especially in a child with life threatening brain injuries as a baby. She didn't even make an internet search then to see what the advice was, so they were hiding this event and she would put herself and him before getting medical treatment for Ellie. Wouldn't even tell the school to keep a special eye on her, when bruising was obvious so she had a reason to be concerned. School had to ask Ellie what happened so obviously neither parent had explained to the teacher.
5. Broken scapula -
Nothing explains why Ellie would not have been in pain or have restricted movement from a broken shoulder, meaning they must have been aware. She was kept off swimming either because of the bruises or because she couldn't rotate her arm fully, even after having been kept at home for 14 days. Getting a medical letter on 8th Oct because school is pressing, but still not sending Ellie back to school until 14th Oct. They've set up a cover story for this with family flu but JG was at work during this time and texting BB saying she was taking pills because she was so ill but had to work. It was their 'evidence' in case Social Services became involved again.
6. JG's list of Ellie's problems -
They are both massively embarrassed about this list. They know it shows that they had singled out Ellie for persecution.
7. Ellie wetting herself -
They are both at pains to say this was about YD. They know what this signifies in a child of Ellie's age - she has been fine for 6 years until she returned to their home.
8. BB's texts -
He hates JG and Ellie. Ellie is just like JG with her mouth. Take Ellie and don't come back. No mention of YD. Ellie obviously triggers his rage and violence and loss of control, just like JG.
9. JG's hospital admissions in a false name -
For this never ending pregnancy termination. There was no ectopic pregnancy, there would not have been uncertainty about that from a 16 week scan. There was no need for the false name, other than protecting BB because of DV injuries.
10. JG's background -
Missing from her evidence in chief. Starts from the date she met BB. He gave his childhood history, hers was passed over. If there was anything there to be proud about - good upbringing, respectability etc they would have laboured it to make a good impression with the jury.
11. Ellie's frequent injuries start after the Social Workers stop visiting -
Nothing for 6 years in care. Nothing November 2015 to end March 2016. Everything starts after that. Every time she is in his care.Twice as a baby of 6 and 7 weeks old, as soon as she arrives at his house. 1st being burns from a radiator to a baby wrapped in a blanket and too young to move herself, 2nd being brain injuries. Nothing in foster care for 6 years, or at school. No tripping over. Every time it involves a black eye and head injury.
12. Tricking the jury with old videos -
Using videos from when Ellie was clearly still in care and being acclimatised to her parents. Her bob haircut grew out after her return. Without those there was an early video of both girls scootering on their patio, a Christmas video, both not long after their return and a sports day run and YD's birthday party. Neither of the two later ones show Ellie looking particularly happy. And JG lied about her experiences with Ellie in the snow and at the pub, when she wasn't even there. Why not use examples of good times where she was with Ellie, if there were any.
13. JG's head lump on her birthday, the same day BB found her diary - the two different excuses for this.
14. JG's diary disposal -
Inconsistent accounts to the jury. He said in EIC he threw it away on the day Ellie died. He said under cross-exam it had been thrown out weeks earlier, when he discovered it. She said she threw it away when he discovered it. Same bin he used when he got rid of rubbish on 28th Oct. No coincidence.
15. Not calling an ambulance -
JG knew Ellie was seriously injured when BB called her. She did not call an ambulance in the taxi. That is cruelty and neglect right there, even without a broken shoulder. She attempted resuscitation so had no reason to think it might not be too late, and an ambulance might still save her.
16. No one asks YD what happened -
The first thing you would do. You would be driven by a need to know how your child died. Lack of questions means no need to ask.
17. Lack of shock -
Walking of dog, smile, wave and chat with neighbours about weather is callous and calculated. Sending YD to wake up her dead sister is unimaginable.
18. Covering up for BB -
She has many reasons to suspect it was BB. She could turn him in, walk away and potentially keep YD. He has something on her. Even if that was just she didn't act to protect Ellie, she enabled it. Or is it that she was violent too? We know she split his jaw. Her drunkenness?
I hadn't realised that the text where he threatened to "maim" JG was related to Ellie. According to the Guardian he threatened to maim her if she bought Ellie home. I'm not sure if this was on one of the days you were in court but if it was did they expand on that at all? I can't work out if it means he didn't want Ellie back or didn't want JG back or didn't want either of them back but I'd be really interested to find out where she was bringing Ellie back from and if it was about Ellie, why BB didn't want her back... and did JG come back with Ellie anyway? Also whether the date of the text tied in with the dates of any of Ellie's injuries or her absences from school or google searches.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-video-with-dark-mark-around-eye-during-trial
He has said quite categorically on evidence he hated JG at that time. Therefore the fact he.seems to feel Ellie is a mini version of JG in my view is why he when JG wasn't there he took it out on Ellie. In his warped view in 2007 he did nothing wrong, although we all agree to differ , so on his view his life he hates is all down to JG and Ellie. They are a reminder of how he was wronged and went to prison. That's why younger daughter escapes his wrath as well as other reasons ir she wasn't old enough to challenge etc. But it is clear from the evidence he viewed JG and Ellie in the same light! If JG searches are to be believed in October 2009 he hates the younger daughter who was born in sept 2009. She may have escaped as Ellie was more of a challenge at 6 years old and the little one couldn't do that ! I can't get still why Ellie didn't tell the grandparents what was happening I hear she saw them the day before she died had she said something to provoke BB Who knows. The fact they have t been called for either the pros or the defence is interesting g In itself. If the jury had heard from them that Ellie had never fallen over etc in my view would have been key evidence or if they Had said they could not get access to Ellie on the later months etc I think that could be a mistake from the prosecutor on not making them give evidence as hard as it is. That would have been the killer blow and would really have helped the jury if they need any more convincing !
Sun 27th Oct - meet grandparents in McDonalds. Probably means Ellie has no signs of injuries.
BBM
Was the trip to McDonalds/meeting the grandparents there something that was brought up in Court?
I can't find any mention of it in on line reporting.
That does not surprise me in itself but I am wondering where it came from and whether it has been corroborated by anyone else? Given Gray and Butler both being consummate liars I am reluctant to take their word/s for anything re Ellie's last days.
I have the same reluctance as you Nellie, to believe anything they say. But I think I noticed this was corroborated, I think, 99% certain, there was a text on JG's phone to BB saying they were in McD's. I don't think it mentioned the grandparents but it backed up their location.
Like others I find it very interesting that Ellie's maternal GPs were not called to give evidence either for the prosecution or defence. It seems amazing to me that aside from her parents [liars both] and sister [too young to testify] the last people who knew Ellie well to see her alive [if they saw her that Sunday] have not given evidence. The only reported quote from them I have found was a very short 'reaction' quote made by the maternal grandfather shortly after Ellie's death in this article.
http://http://www.dailymail.co.uk/n...ed-home-died-paramedics-battled-save-her.html
Maybe this is some confusion on my part and it was paternal GPS who were at McDonalds that day? I would love to know where the info about the GPs being there at McDonalds originated, [and which 'set' of GPs it was], if anyone knows.
Just want to add my thanks again for the Court reporting on this case you do, Tortoise. It really does add so much depth about what actually transpires in Court compared to what the media choose to focus on.
Anyway the day Ellie died. His account was not natural. He quickly opened Ellie's bedroom door, don't know why he did it quickly, he's telling it as if he knows there will be a problem, he describes the scene that he saw as everything else first and Ellie last. The YD, where she was sitting and what she was doing, the open wardrobe doors, and then he saw Ellie laying with her feet facing the wardrobe. If I walked into a room, I think I would notice what wasn't right first, the child laying still where she shouldn't be. That is the most obvious focal point - the unexpected. I don't think you take in rooms like a camera panning around - your eye is immediately drawn to a very unusual sight. And then he went over, looked at Ellie, shook her, decided she was dead, removed YD and left the room, closing the door. Not going back in the room until JG came home.
It is not true. No human does that. She may have just been unconscious, how does he know she's dead? He's not described how he checked that or concluded that. He's not described talking to Ellie, saying anything to YD, what were you doing in here, how did Ellie hurt herself, why didn't you come and get Daddy to help Ellie, most important he hasn't said why he didn't get an ambulance straight away. There is no reason on earth to not call an ambulance to see if life saving treatment can be given, even if you think you will be blamed. That does not stand in the way of human instinct to try to save a life. He could not account for having done nothing to help her. He could not answer the questions. He is not human, not a father, he has no love in him. I don't think anyone accepts a death has occurred in that short time-frame, of a couple of minutes. If the person is dear to you, I think you would have unrealistic hopes it wasn't true and something could be done, even if you feared the worst. He seems to have drawn on a psychic ability to determine it had to have occurred a long time before he opened the door, so it was too late to do anything. There is no reason for that assumption.
His account lacks verisimilitude.
There is no real right or wrong way to recount witnessing even an expected death let alone the discovery that someone is suddenly and shockingly dead or seriously injured, but somehow we normals know a truthful account when we hear it, and can recognise an untruthful account equally well.
Like you I was prepared to consider that somehow this child had had an improbable accident, but none of the evidence supports that and his account - or rather, story - just doesn't hang together.
Chances are neither of them will ever admit what they know to be the truth. He can't admit it because he is the great Ben Butler who just made a small error in thinking he could beat the **** out of his own kid and get away with it. She won't admit it because she is in his thrall and nothing else matters to her. Hopefully the Jury will see through them and they'll both go to prison, regardless.
Thanks Nellie. It was definitely the maternal grandparents because BB told JG to go easy on them, and it was quite a focus of the trial - how she had such a bad relationship with her father.