Discussion in 'Currently Awaiting Trial' started by StillDiggin, Aug 1, 2021.
Maybe it was a neighbors doorcam that had footage, not AW's.
I agree @Lucy6226 - it doesn’t fit at all.
That’s why I was wondering if she believed cause of death was one thing; but at the hospital the horrific truth was made clearer to her.
I can’t understand why he was found in a bin bag unless it was to make out an abductor caused his death by suffocation.
I'm thinking the bin bag was purely to disguise the fact they were carrying a 5yr old to the river. If they are known to fly tip, then no one is going to bat an eye lid at them carrying a bin bag towards the river
They may have put logan in the bin bag to take him to the river, as that may not look out of sorts as we ve been told they do fly tip in the river. But possibly taken him out the bag before putting him in the water.
'The court heard Logan's body was taken to the river in a plastic bin bag and his ripped t-shirt was also disposed of. The court heard the family often used the river for fly-tipping'
Bridgend man charged with 'harrowing' murder of boy, 5, after he was put in river in 'cover-up' | Daily Mail Online
Ahh so maybe they then threw the bin bag away with the t shirt. I missed that bit. I thought he was found in a bin bag.
I need to stop thinking about this case, it’s just too baffling!
Perhaps - if the bag of kindling seen in a photo being carried in an evidence bag was involved - he was carrying the supplies. Something might have been burned, even if not his body, or they might have changed their plan once there.
But if it came as a shock to her that his cause of death was as a result of a beating, why was she charged with PTCOJ?
I would have assumed that being charged with PTCOJ would mean that she was aware of what happened or helped cover it up perhaps, or lied to police about it?
This would surely quash the theory of it coming as a total surprise/shock to her about how he'd died..
The PTCOJ charge may just be to do with covering up the disposal of the body/ attempting to convince Police that something else had happened ie: abduction, rather than knowing how the actual alleged murder happened.
In MOO I think it is plausible that AW could've been under the influence of something and wasn't fully aware of what had occurred. Far fetched perhaps, but so is this whole scenario in my view.
I do believe the 13 year old could've been left to help concoct a cover up as others weren't sober.
There's also the toddler in the scenario too, perhaps AW was left to see to them while JC and 13yo went to the river and on their return she made the call to police?
The footage if from their camera seems a huge oversight but maybe they were just so convinced that their (quite frankly pathetic) cover story of an abduction would work that they thought nothing else of it.
All ifs, buts and maybes. I'm not sure even if we knew the full story it would make sense.
I'm not sure why you would expect someone to carry a body from their house openly? And if you're doing it in a hurry at night why you would stop to take them to take the body out of the bin bag or arrange it in some way? Its not that baffling. What would you have expected them to do? Buy a body bag, stretcher or roll of carpet?
For what its worth, my theory is a violent attack by the step father, witnesses by at least one of the mother and 13 year old and a panicked decision to remove the body and try to create a smokescreen alternative scenario that he'd been abducted or wandered off. Corcion could have been involved or it could have been part of a long standing abusive relationship where the step Dad was getting away with increasingly violent control of the little boy. Sadly all too often we have seen mothers standby as such abuse to their child escalates.
However, I have read hear something about the mother being shocked at the state of the injuries but I've not seen the media source that states that.... So I might be missing something.
Could the PTCOJ be something as "simple" as saying "no JC was with me the whole time and didn't leave the house"? when she knew he did.
It's quite possible she had no involvement in the murder or indeed the disposal. Which is why it makes me uncomfortable that just because she's a woman and a mother she's absolutely vilified by public opinion whilst the person who's actually charged with murder get's a comparatively easy ride...
I still struggle with the second person on the CCTV. Surely that person should be facing more charges... unless it's impossible to prove that that person knew that the item being disposed of was a body. That said PTCOJ is a very serious charge and they are possibly facing life sentences.
Intrigued. Keen for the plea hearings and whether we will ever find out what really went on.
AW was supposed to protect him. By introducing a violent man into the household who had access to her son, she bears some or even much of the blame for his brutal death. This stuff doesn't happen out of nowhere. He wasn't a stranger to the boy. Over time we'll find out more about everyone's role in the abuse, death and coverup of this innocent child. Despite not knowing the details, I feel that the mother is probably undercharged like the mother in the Bernadette Walker tragedy.
I find it hard to believe she went along with disposal of Logans body if she thought he died for other reasons.
More likely the violence was so regular she didn't think it was as serious as it was.
This is a very good point. As awful as it sounds, maybe she was so used to hearing poor Logan cry that she simply turned a blind eye to it the time it actually cost him his life.
Obviously this is supposition and MOO.
I cannot begin to wrap my head around how AW has done/allowed these things to happen. As a mother I just can’t.
If jon cole did murder Logan, I think the 13yo must of been a victim of his violence......jc is a horrible bastard
There does still need to be that ‘if’ though - until we know more and get the full picture.
I fell like lots of people are way overthinking this. To me, Occam’s Razor applies here.
JC was probably beating Logan on a fairly regular basis and (as often happens in these cases) went “too far”. There is no way, in a flat that size, that AW was unaware of this, but as so often happens she chose to put her love life ahead of her child.
On the night in question she may have been out of it or she may just have thought it was yet another “normal” incident of abuse. I think having discovered Logan was actually dead this time, they hatched a half baked plan to pretend he’d wandered out of the house and fallen in the river. Obviously being particularly stupid/drunk/drugged they didn’t realise the door camera would capture everything. If it’s a rented house, maybe they weren’t even aware it was there.
If JC struck the fatal blow and there’s no evidence AW was actually physically abusing Logan, then realistically there’s not much else she can be charged with. I would assume that the threshold for “causing or allowing the death of a child” hasn’t been met.
All MOO, JMO
I’ve been thinking a lot about the charge causing or allowing the death of a child. To me and I’m happy to be corrected if I’m wrong, the legislation reads like if you know there is a risk to the child such as another person and you don’t protect them from it. Which given there is no charge, it leads me to thinking there was no known abuse going on and JC wasn’t a known risk. All MOO