Just glossing over some excellent posts.What was the issue then with her father. ?From what I have heard when she got pregnant with Ellie she livedwith them and then. Moved out. The grandparents however took Ellie on. They couldn't have done this without JG putting them forward and they would have been checked out thoroughly by social services the implication being they had no history that would cause an issue ie convictions etc I would have thought that any issues with bringing up their children would have also been explored. But JG seems to say her and her father did t get along at all. Is this another lie or did she lie to social services about her relationship with her dad to ensure that Ellie went to them Rather than be adopted? Maybe for her it was the lesser of 2 evils ? I don't know. I wonder if her parents are quite old fashioned as BB made a comment that Ellie hadn't even bee. To McDonald's or the cinema like it was a criticism. I just wonder if the whole issue with her and her dad has been Exaggerated by her and him because the grandparents would nt give Ellie back easily in 2012 and also didn't like BB or trust his supposed innocence. I would imagine this has got worse since 2013 therefore JG as she does has fixated on them Hating them for not supporting and believing BB.
I'm not holding it here too long. I'm in a Morphine stupor. Body's awake but the mind isn't.
Just to let you know JG'S father is Neal Gray. He's 67.
If they've mentioned the date of this text I have forgotten, because I haven't been writing anything down in court.
What prosecution did, when they selected texts to ask JG about, it seems to me, is ask her about different texts to the ones they asked BB about. I think the prosecutors (Brown and FitzGerald) had a plan to not ask questions where the other defendant had already given an answer, because they had both been in court to hear each other's evidence and they were aligning their answers in court. That became very obvious.
But what JG did was deflect from the questions. BB did it too. Went off on a tangent and not answer the question. So many times, virtually all the way through those days of evidence, and pros. would wait until they had finished their speeches and then point out that they had not answered and repeat the question. If they tried to stop them from straying off topic midway they would both say 'I haven't finished yet'. So arrogant. So in relation to this text JG addressed the jury and said 'look at my face, do I look like I've been maimed?' She wouldn't answer things like what was happening at the time the text was sent, and why he included Ellie.
Trying to build up a picture of what was going down in the two weeks leading up to Ellie's death, when parents seem to be alert to possibility school is getting concerned.
Mon 14th Oct - Ellie returns to school having been absent since 1st Oct, with injuries. No sick note.
Thurs 17th Oct - JG's birthday. BB discovers her diary. She gets a lump on her head.
Fri 18th Oct - tells work she fell down some steps after having wine night before. Tells court she threw away the diary on way to bus stop.
School week of 21st - 25th Oct - BB's argument in corridor with headmaster about sick note, BB confrontational aggressive, is asked to leave. JG's urgent email to school about their victimisation.
Thurs 24th Oct, a school day - BB takes Ellie to the GP about ear-pinning. Is this just so GP can say he saw Ellie with no noted concerns about her appearance?
Fri 25th Oct, a school day - JG stays at home, Ellie is at school. Tells work that BB is away visiting his sick father. Tells court that she was sick, hence still slightly sick on Monday, when she texted her boss, saying she left work due to sickness. Why does she need to stay at home? I think he has walked out and left JG to do the school run.
Sun 27th Oct - meet grandparents in McDonalds. Probably means Ellie has no signs of injuries.
Mon 28th Oct - half-term. tells work BB still away and Ellie is being looked after by godfather.
I think BB, after his outburst at school, is going into melt down. Maybe he's walked out and said I'm not sticking around for this - we're going to be investigated again. To JG you can look after the children. He knows that if Ellie is given a proper health check, x-rays whatever, her broken shoulder will be discovered. Perhaps he goes to stay at Ian's, in a bid to distance himself. But it's not going to work retrospectively, the broken shoulder has already happened. But along come the grandparents, perhaps insisting on a visit. JG has mentioned their access in her email to the school - were they getting suspicious and poking around. Perhaps they would phone the school and ask if they had any concerns to add to their own - maybe JG's told them you cannot divulge information to my parents.
After the McD's visit, BB is anxious to know how it went. With his anxiety, violence is just under the surface.
I cannot think how he can not be aware that he won't get away with another assault on Ellie. They've used up all the tripping over excuses. If he is that worried about what is going to happen, why doesn't he just stay away? There is loss of control but he knew that was signing his own conviction if he did it one more time, Ellie survived it and was medically examined and questioned by trained Social Workers.
I'm coming back again to this being a deliberate murder. I just think he would know these injuries would be fatal. It's hard to comprehend, but maybe the first knock happened and if she was lying on the floor unconscious, maybe he shook her head violently against the floor, to smash it at the back, causing the two spinal injuries. He's picked her head up leaving the grip marks under the jawline, and hit her head forcefully back down again. Sorry for the gruesomeness.
Just remembering JG's text to BB - "you nutted me like a bloke."
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.
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.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk