COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM SWANSEA CIVIL JUSTICE CENTRE
HIS HONOUR JUDGE JONES
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
LADY JUSTICE BLACK
MR JUSTICE DAVID RICHARDS
|- and -
|CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA AND OTHERS
Mr Matthew Rees (instructed by Jeff Lock at T Llewellyn Jones) for the Guardian
Mr Simon Slade( instructed by Davis Parson Allchurch Solicitors) for PSP (previously represented by Morgans solicitors)
Ms Carron Davies (instructed by Peter Lynn and Partners) for DSP (previously represented by Avery Naylor)
Mr Jamie Davies (instructed by Cameron Jones Hussell and Howe) for ASP (previously represented by Hutchinson Thomas Solicitors)
Hearing dates : Tuesday 18th January 2011
Crown Copyright ©
Lady Justice Black :
"47……I am satisfied …. that the pool of possible perpetrators, applying the test of "real possibility", does include PSP, the mother in this case and ASP."
"the "traffic" of the text messaging which starts on the morning of 8 January 2009 between M and PSP about CJ's injuries. Is it just a coincidence, I ask myself, that this is recorded from that point onwards?" [I have corrected what must be a typographical error in the original by substituting PSP for ASP]
"The next morning M picked CJ up and freaked out. She was asking me what the hell had happened to her daughter. I did not know what she meant and looked at CJ who was covered in bruises, her ears were dark and she had marks all up her back and on her cheek. These marks were different to the ones I had seen the night before. M was furious and kept asking me what had happened, and I could not answer as I had no idea. M said she would need to take her to the Doctor."
"So far as the mother is concerned in relation to credibility, she admitted to me quite frankly that she had lied to professionals about the continuing nature of her relationship with PSP in 2009. She admitted in the light of the text messaging that her relationship with PSP had ended on 8 January 2009 because of CJ's injuries and not for other reasons, as she stated to me at an earlier part of her evidence during these proceedings. So there were aspects of her evidence which I found extremely unsatisfactory."
Mr Justice David Richards
Lady Justice Arden