UK - Logan Mwangi, 5, found dead in Wales River, Bridgend, 31 July 2021 *arrests, inc. minor*

[Dcflag]

Perhaps, JC has taken the rap. If they cannot prove AW was involved in the actual murder, they can't charge her with it. If we were to guess also that of the two people on CCTV, AW was not one of them, it would continue to make the decision on charges difficult.

Personally I think she was present, I think they had a lack of regard for Logan, I'd imagine they dosed him up and sent him to bed without a second thought to the injuries he had actually sustained. I don't believe her narrative that she found him at 5am, that gives a VERY small cover up window, especially given the fact that he was her son.

I truly believe she should be charged with more. I also think the 13 year old was implicated in CCTV, hence why he has also been charged.

 

[Cherwell]

I thought they were in Isolation until the Saturday due to Covid? I’ll see if I can pull that.

Human nature being how it is, people don't always do what they're supposed to do and Covid isolation is a case in point. A lot of people, given that they don't feel ill and have no symptoms, will be nipping out when it suits them.

 

[Little Nicki]

I'm not saying this is what I think happened BUT...

Hypothetically IF the 13 year old had inflicted the injuries and JC had (falsely) confessed to the police that he did it himself ... And there was no evidence (as yet) to prove either way ..... What would happen? Do the police have to just accept his confession at this stage?

This isn't my opinion, just a question ... but I'll MOO anyway - just to be on the safe side.

Re Quoting my own post from yesterday. Does anyone know the answer to this?

 

[Newsjunkiejen]

Re Quoting my own post from yesterday. Does anyone know the answer to this?

Are you meaning what would the police do if they knew it wasn't JC (but couldn't prove it was the 13yr old) but JC was confessing to it anyway?

It's a tough one. Can police accept a confession they believe to be false if they don't have the evidence to proof otherwise?

As an aside, I should think there will be a LOT of work going on by detectives and forensic teams round the clock right now to try and bring further charges against both the 13yr old and AW.

 

[DC50]

If we were to guess also that of the two people on CCTV, AW was not one of them, it would continue to make the decision on charges difficult.

MOO has always been that the 13 year old was one of the people on video seen disposing of the body. To charge him with PTCOJ otherwise seems a push even if he went along with their concocted story, he is after all just 13. That's my view on it anyhow.

 

[Newsjunkiejen]

Re Quoting my own post from yesterday. Does anyone know the answer to this?

I found the information on this link interesting.

I don't know if the same would apply here in the UK, but it basically details how there is a general criminal law principle known as the 'Corpus Delicti' rule.

The rule dictates that a confession, standing alone, isn't enough for a conviction.

Is a Confession Alone Enough to Convict a Defendant?

 

[JosieJo]

I thought they were in Isolation until the Saturday due to Covid? I’ll see if I can pull that.

Yes that was definitely reported ..though it was also reported logan had been out playing...impossible to know ..unfortunately people do not always isolate completely for the full period

 

[infinit]

Unless there are more charges to come I struggle with AW being present when her son was attacked. (Based on current charges)
A possible scenario that would fit the current charges is that the attack happened during the evening with AW being out.
On returning her son may have been unconscious or unfortunately already dead with her not finding him till later

I just don't understand why she would go along with it if she wasn't aware at all. If you're a normal parent and you find your child unconcious or not breathing unexpectedly you're calling 999 surely? Why would you even entertain going along with it. Surely your entire focus would be getting medical care for your child.

Her story of waking up to him missing clearly doesn't seem to have held up as they seem to have felt they have the evidence to charge.

 

[infinit]

MOO has always been that the 13 year old was one of the people on video seen disposing of the body. To charge him with PTCOJ otherwise seems a push even if he went along with their concocted story, he is after all just 13. That's my view on it anyhow.

I have such mixed feelings. I know he's beyond the age of criminal responsibility, but I think a lot of 13 year olds in his position would just do what the adults say to do. I think he might have a decent defence of duress considering the other child in the house had just been killed...

JMO.

 

[Little Nicki]

Are you meaning what would the police do if they knew it wasn't JC (but couldn't prove it was the 13yr old) but JC was confessing to it anyway?

It's a tough one. Can police accept a confession they believe to be false if they don't have the evidence to proof otherwise?

As an aside, I should think there will be a LOT of work going on by detectives and forensic teams round the clock right now to try and bring further charges against both the 13yr old and AW.

In a nutshell, yes. That is what I'm asking. At this early stage they obviously still have lot of investigating to do and evidence to build.

I'm just wondering if at this point, IF all they know is that Logan died and that the 3 people charged were present and able to inflict the injuries BUT they don't YET know for sure which one of the 3 did the actual deed BUT THEN one of them confesses (possibly falsely to cover for the actual guilty party) .... Do the police have to accept the confession at this early stage - unless they can prove otherwise.

In reference to yr 2nd post (which I wasn't able to quote) They obviously already know he was there and involved to some degree so any confession would just be 'extra' evidence - on top of what they already have. So it's not a random, stand alone confession on its own in this instance.

 

[infinit]

In a nutshell, yes. That is what I'm asking. At this early stage they obviously still have lot of investigating to do and evidence to build.

I'm just wondering if at this point, IF all they know is that Logan died and that the 3 people charged were present and able to inflict the injuries BUT they don't YET know for sure which one of the 3 did the actual deed BUT THEN one of them confesses (possibly falsely to cover for the actual guilty party) .... Do the police have to accept the confession at this early stage - unless they can prove otherwise.

In reference to yr 2nd post (which I wasn't able to quote) They obviously already know he was there and involved to some degree so any confession would just be 'extra' evidence - on top of what they already have. So it's not a random, stand alone confession on its own in this instance.

They'd accept it while they continue to investigate it I assume considering there is enough evidence to suggest there was atleast some involvement. I think they'd probably make it clear to them also that a confession won't stop the investigation.

JMO.

 

[ChloLo]

The police cannot knowingly charge someone for a crime they didn’t commit, the CPS wouldn’t be able to prosecute either. The key word is knowingly.

 

[LucyRocket]

Re Quoting my own post from yesterday. Does anyone know the answer to this?

Do they have to? No. Could they? Yes.

The police gather information, take statements, conduct interviews. They also use their experience to make judgement on the truthfulness of the responses and the way the arrestee conducts themselves; their 'feel' for the truth. They get to a point on the clock where they have to charge, or release. They take everything they have to the CPS in way of evidence to that point, and also are able to put forward their opinion. CPS will then make the decision on charges and instruct the detective on what to do. Taking everything into consideration, each case is different. Eg. they might feel a confession is false but decide to charge anyway, hoping that might put pressure on another to feel guilty and tell the truth, which matches up to the evidence and will make the case stronger. They then have the option to de-arrest and re-arrest for an alternative charge, such as PCOJ. Alternatively, they might charge with PCOJ which is reasonable whether they were perpetrator or complicit, if they feel that the evidence-gathering is likely to be fruitful in securing a further charge at a later date, secure in the knowledge that the PCOJ is sufficient to keep them in custody while this is developing.

 

[JosieJo]

I just don't understand why she would go along with it if she wasn't aware at all. If you're a normal parent and you find your child unconcious or not breathing unexpectedly you're calling 999 surely? Why would you even entertain going along with it. Surely your entire focus would be getting medical care for your child.

Her story of waking up to him missing clearly doesn't seem to have held up as they seem to have felt they have the evidence to charge.

Totally agree ..to get help would be any normal mothers instinct ...I can only think he stopped her doing that somehow then persuading her to help cover up

 

[Sooty]

I don’t believe mum was involved in the murder, or abuse of Logan. I just can’t believe it - she seemed a happy mum, happy in herself too, and seemed to enjoy the company of children (admittedly this is an impression from fb interactions, but it seemed genuine to me and consistent).

However, I am struggling to work out a scenario where that happy looking mum would come across her beautiful child, dead, doesn’t know how death occurred, but at that moment she involves herself in the disposal of his body, rather than call for an investigation into his sudden, unexpected death.
Was that reaction an unfathomable panic response? Did she come across his ripped t shirt and other signs of violence and know that it could only have been caused by one of the two other people in the flat; one who was a child himself, and one who she was in love with? I mean, on top of your shock and disbelief finding your child dead, you just couldn’t process any of it could you? That most sickening betrayal. You wouldn’t be able to believe that someone you cared for could do such a terrible thing like that.….. (She called JC ‘beautiful smile, massive heart, kind hearted soul, amazing man’ on one of his pics). And then to make that call to the police with that far-out story….that’s when I think that only real fear would make you do that.
So maybe she did believe it, maybe she knew it and it terrified her because of what it meant for them ( that other person, or them all )
Or maybe she was aware that there had been something….maybe it looked like/ sounded like / was explained like rough play, wrestling, rugby tackling or something, she didn’t see the bad stuff. Logan maybe had shown signs he was hurt, but she wasn’t aware how badly, she didn’t realise he was bleeding inside, because she hadn’t seen the whole thing…. he was put to bed, maybe he was changed from his ripped t shirt and put in her bed with her because he didn’t seem well, which is why she found him so early in the morning.

I know none of this makes real sense, but I wanted to write my thoughts out and see if it helped clarify them a bit.

All MOO

 

[Little Nicki]

Do they have to? No. Could they? Yes.

The police gather information, take statements, conduct interviews. They also use their experience to make judgement on the truthfulness of the responses and the way the arrestee conducts themselves; their 'feel' for the truth. They get to a point on the clock where they have to charge, or release. They take everything they have to the CPS in way of evidence to that point, and also are able to put forward their opinion. CPS will then make the decision on charges and instruct the detective on what to do. Taking everything into consideration, each case is different. Eg. they might feel a confession is false but decide to charge anyway, hoping that might put pressure on another to feel guilty and tell the truth, which matches up to the evidence and will make the case stronger. They then have the option to de-arrest and re-arrest for an alternative charge, such as PCOJ. Alternatively, they might charge with PCOJ which is reasonable whether they were perpetrator or complicit, if they feel that the evidence-gathering is likely to be fruitful in securing a further charge at a later date, secure in the knowledge that the PCOJ is sufficient to keep them in custody while this is developing.

Yes I'm fully aware of the process of interviewing, charging, possibility of charges being added or changed at a later date, how and what they would investigate etc.... I just wanted to know if anyone knew if they HAD TO accept any confession AT THIS POINT. Even though they can obviously change their stance on this at any time - if or when they find evidence to prove otherwise. I'm not even saying that I think that's what happened here in this case, I'm more just interested in how it would work at this early stage with a confession.

MOO

 

[JuicyLucy]

Yes I'm fully aware of the process of interviewing, charging, possibility of charges being added or changed at a later date, how and what they would investigate etc.... I just wanted to know if anyone knew if they HAD TO accept any confession AT THIS POINT. Even though they can obviously change their stance on this at any time - if or when they find evidence to prove otherwise. I'm not even saying that I think that's what happened here in this case, I'm more just interested in how it would work at this early stage with a confession.

MOO

I think not. If you had someone in custody who was confessing to a murder but was unable, say, to provide any accurate information about the state of the victim or the circumstances of the crime, then I doubt the police would have to accept that at face value. But I don't think that's what's happened here in any case.

I've wondered myself if JC is covering for the 13yo, but I think that with injuries that specific it would be difficult for anyone who was not in the room at the time to describe convincingly what occurred and how. So in the event the confession is pure fabrication, then at the very least he was probably present and did nothing to intervene in the unfolding horror of one child killing another, which seems unlikely in itself.

What I do think is possible is that JC took the decision to have the 13yo help dispose of the body in the river in the hope that he could keep AW out of any criminal proceedings in order to avoid losing the baby. He may have expected that the 13yo wouldn't be charged with anything, which tbf surprised a lot of us too. So I do think there's been some fudging of the blame going on but I don't think it extends as far as a false confession.

Speculation/JMO

 

[LucyRocket]

Yes I'm fully aware of the process of interviewing, charging, possibility of charges being added or changed at a later date, how and what they would investigate etc.... I just wanted to know if anyone knew if they HAD TO accept any confession AT THIS POINT. Even though they can obviously change their stance on this at any time - if or when they find evidence to prove otherwise. I'm not even saying that I think that's what happened here in this case, I'm more just interested in how it would work at this early stage with a confession.

MOO

Ahhh ok. I could have ended it with my first sentence then Do they have to? No

 

[infinit]

I don’t believe mum was involved in the murder, or abuse of Logan. I just can’t believe it - she seemed a happy mum, happy in herself too, and seemed to enjoy the company of children (admittedly this is an impression from fb interactions, but it seemed genuine to me and consistent).

However, I am struggling to work out a scenario where that happy looking mum would come across her beautiful child, dead, doesn’t know how death occurred, but at that moment she involves herself in the disposal of his body, rather than call for an investigation into his sudden, unexpected death.
Was that reaction an unfathomable panic response? Did she come across his ripped t shirt and other signs of violence and know that it could only have been caused by one of the two other people in the flat; one who was a child himself, and one who she was in love with? I mean, on top of your shock and disbelief finding your child dead, you just couldn’t process any of it could you? That most sickening betrayal. You wouldn’t be able to believe that someone you cared for could do such a terrible thing like that.….. (She called JC ‘beautiful smile, massive heart, kind hearted soul, amazing man’ on one of his pics). And then to make that call to the police with that far-out story….that’s when I think that only real fear would make you do that.
So maybe she did believe it, maybe she knew it and it terrified her because of what it meant for them ( that other person, or them all )
Or maybe she was aware that there had been something….maybe it looked like/ sounded like / was explained like rough play, wrestling, rugby tackling or something, she didn’t see the bad stuff. Logan maybe had shown signs he was hurt, but she wasn’t aware how badly, she didn’t realise he was bleeding inside, because she hadn’t seen the whole thing…. he was put to bed, maybe he was changed from his ripped t shirt and put in her bed with her because he didn’t seem well, which is why she found him so early in the morning.

I know none of this makes real sense, but I wanted to write my thoughts out and see if it helped clarify them a bit.

All MOO

I'm interested that they've given this range of dates which goes all the way back to Wednesday, seems weird if this all happened that night on the 31st:

The court heard all charges relate to the period between the 28 July and 1 August.

Logan Mwangi: Mum and step-dad in court over death of boy, five

 

[Lucy6226]

I'm interested that they've given this range of dates which goes all the way back to Wednesday, seems weird if this all happened that night on the 31st:

Logan Mwangi: Mum and step-dad in court over death of boy, five

Could be the last time he was seen alive to the date his body was found. Standard practice to cover all the dates to help conviction. Wouldn't want these getting away on a technicality.