UK UK - Rikki Neave murder, age 6, Peterborough, 1994

missacorah · #1 09-12-2006, 09:37 AM

http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/n...sectionid=1783

This little lad lived about 10 minutes away from me at the time of his death.Please take a while to read through this highly interesting case - lots of twists and turns for you to ponder over.

His mother Ruth was charged but cleared of his murder and no one else has ever been tried for his murder. So sad...

missacorah · #2 09-13-2006, 04:01 AM

I'm a little disappointed no one has offered a theory!

Be grateful to hear your opinions on this one! Thanks!

I have a little tribute site to a few cases - nothing ground breaking - just my own little thing - my first try at anything like this so go easy on me!lol
www.missingchildrenlostandfound.piczo.com

docwho3 · #3 09-13-2006, 06:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by missacorah

I'm a little disappointed no one has offered a theory!

Be grateful to hear your opinions on this one! Thanks!. . .

Is there any reason that makes you think the jury got it right?

Juries sometimes allow guilty people to go free. In my opinion the OJ trial was one of those instances and there have been others. To offer a theory other than the one that investigators used to charge the mother with murder I would have to believe that the jury got it right and that the mother was innocent.

However the mother had no alibi that I am aware of and she was seen in the area near where the body was found at the right time to have been involved in his death. She was a self confessed high priestess of the occult & had books on sacrificing people and his body was found in a position and manner which matched the books she had and she had predicted to someone how or where the body would be found. She had been known to grab him by the throat in times past and she was on meth which it seems her husband supplied and I have read many true horror stories of what meth did to people and how they committed murders while under its influence.

Social services were told, more than once, she would kill the boy if she did not get help and on many occasions they were begged to take the boy away to save his life. Social services people merely collected their pay checks and did nothing to save the boy at all and as far as I am concerned they are as much to blame for his murder as the mother and should have been charged along with her.

Also the stepfather of the boy was a bigamist and was married to another while still being married to Rikki's mother. Did she get wind of something about the other woman and in combination with the drugs it snapped her? I don't know but somehow I doubt it. Maybe she thought she had made a deal with the devil and something about the boys dead sacrificed body was supposed to be proof of some imbued power which may be why she wanted to see it in such a way that it seemed odd to those present and was remarked about in print. I don't know.

I also do not know if she did the act alone or if she had help from some young person or young people. Only those who gathered evidence might have an idea of whether one or more than one person was involved in the death. She was a selfconfessed high priestess so maybe she managed to wow a young person or persons into becoming her followers. Maybe she used sex and/or drugs as an inducement. . . . maybe, but no evidence surfaced to connect anyone else to her in that way. The only other young person to be allegedly connected to the murder was one that had bragged to another kid that he had done the deed. Evidently that "confession" was not proven true by L.E. upon their investigation. Only in one article did I read where other boys had possibly been with Rikki for awhile on the day he died and this was in an article that was trying to make the case that his murder was similar to another previous murder so I may have read so fast that I confused that bit about boys with the Rikki case.

So far I see no reason to think the mother should not have been brought up on charge of murder.

Back to my original question:
Is there any reason that makes you think the jury got it right?

docwho3 · #4 09-13-2006, 06:58 AM

THE stepfather of Rikki Neave, the murdered schoolboy, was jailed for three years yesterday after admitting that he was a bigamist and a drug dealer.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlConte.../nneave09.html
***********
social workers paved the way for this murder to occur.
http://www.archive.official-document...169/chap-3.htm

Edited to add:
Children still at risk three years after Rikki murder
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlConte...15/nrik15.html
********************
Hard lesson learned from trail of abuse
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news...ea36de130f.lpf
************
trial
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/V...ticleID=893473

kazzbar · #5 09-13-2006, 08:10 AM

Poor Rikki Neave. No justice for the murder of a smallboy.Mother will only pay for her crime when she meets her maker. I wonder how many of the Social workers are still collecting paychecks even though they knew Rikki needed help?
Rikki's mum could not cope and sounds like she needed help for her drug addiction if nothing else. Why are children in danger just left? Is it to hard to 'take' them away?
We see Rikki Neaves all over the world and will keep seeing these cases.

Makes me so sad and angry. this is the reason I am thinking of doing short term foster care. just because I want to make a difference and help kids.

missacorah · #6 09-13-2006, 09:04 AM

Hi Docwho and Kazzbar and thank you for taking the time to raed up on this case.

In answer to your question Docwho I do not recall ever saying that I thought Ruth Neave was innocent and after double checking can confirm that nope I indeed never did! The points you raised in your post were spot on and ones I agree with. I read up on this case extensively yesterday and am under the impression Ruth Neave either comitted or was involved with her sons death.

docwho3 · #7 09-13-2006, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by missacorah

Hi Docwho and Kazzbar and thank you for taking the time to raed up on this case.

In answer to your question Docwho I do not recall ever saying that I thought Ruth Neave was innocent and after double checking can confirm that nope I indeed never did! The points you raised in your post were spot on and ones I agree with. I read up on this case extensively yesterday and am under the impression Ruth Neave either comitted or was involved with her sons death.

I agree that you never said that you thought she was innocent and I did not mean to sound as if I was taking you to task for anything. What I was trying to do was to ask why you needed or desired a theory be posted on this case as it seemed fairly clear that L.E. had got it right the first time. I posted the facts that I did partly to back up my own reasoning and also to help those who might not have yet read the case details because I noticed that there were not many details posted in the first post (although there was a good link to info.)

I was a bit upset that those social workers and their supervisors had allowed the boy to be killed and in a second post I posted the links to that info as well. Even the head of the agency itself seems to have been a pedophile who was sent to jail for several years for his acts against the children under his care. It seems that the other supervisors of the agency were "allowed" to retire although I think they should have been charged with murder or whatever it is called in that country when someone, by thir actions, shows depraved indifference to a child or person in mortal danger.

docwho3 · #8 09-13-2006, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kazzbar

Poor Rikki Neave. No justice for the murder of a smallboy.Mother will only pay for her crime when she meets her maker. I wonder how many of the Social workers are still collecting paychecks even though they knew Rikki needed help?. . .

According to what I read in researching this case, 3 of the social workers involved with the boys case were dismissed but later were reinstated when people (unnamed in the article that I read) charged that the workers were merely being used as scapegoats for their supervisors mishandling of the case.

missacorah · #9 09-14-2006, 08:26 AM

Hi Docwho - I certainly have no beef with you - think we may have got our wires crossed even though we are both on the same side!

Interested to hear about the head of the agency you mentioned! Knew nothing about that! If you can, could you post a link to that bit as I have missed it completely!

In answer to your question I wanted to bring up the case to hear other peoples views on the case and how it was handled etc - nothing more!

docwho3 · #10 09-14-2006, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by missacorah

Hi Docwho - I certainly have no beef with you - think we may have got our wires crossed even though we are both on the same side!. . .

Agreed!

Quote:

Originally Posted by missacorah

. . .Interested to hear about the head of the agency you mentioned! Knew nothing about that! If you can, could you post a link to that bit as I have missed it completely!

I misspoke in saying it was the head of the agency. When I reread the articles I saw that it was a senior member but that is bad enough. Here are some links:

". . .The department came under further scrutiny in March when Keith Laverack - a former senior member of the Cambridgeshire social services management team - was jailed for 18 years for the systematic sexual abuse of children in his care. . ."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlConte...15/nrik15.html
". . . As reported in yesterday (Friday, 06 January)'s News, serial paedophile Keith Laverack, who was jailed for 18 years for abusing and raping scores of children in council-run homes, will be able to apply for parole in March.
Laverack, who was described as social services' "blue-eyed boy" before his crimes were uncovered, held senior management positions and enjoyed a successful career despite a 20-year reign of abuse of children in the care system.
. . ."
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news...ea36de130f.lpf

Quote:

Originally Posted by missacorah

. . .In answer to your question I wanted to bring up the case to hear other peoples views on the case and how it was handled etc - nothing more!

Thanks for the explanation.

missacorah · #11 09-14-2006, 09:11 AM

God I had no idea about that! How on earth have I missed that?

I agree a senior member is as bad as the head - he was in a position of trust and there were multiple victims.

Disgusting!

coco · #12 09-18-2006, 11:14 AM

I read up on this case a bit the other day, and tried again tonight but have a bad headache and it isn't sinking in. Is there a timeline of events surrounding the murder do you all know, and also were there any other suspects, DNA evidence etc. Sorry do not mean to be dense but I can't get my act together, darn headache.

missacorah · #13 09-19-2006, 04:51 AM

http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/V...ticleID=892911

There is a factfile/timeline at the bottom of this link - just scroll down. Hope this helps.

As far as I know there were no other clear suspects. I know a teenager did confess but was then released. There was also an incident on the estate a few months prior to Rikkis death where a young boy was assalulted in the area near where Rikkis body was found.

Ruths partner, Dean never seemed to feature very much in the investigation which surprised me but I feel sure that Ruth needed help from someone in the aftermath of her sons murder if indeed she was the killer and I personally believe that she was.