murder trial shown clips of baby being kicked, tortured

thebigbiffo

I dont normally go in for these 'cut his balls off' threads but this made me want to get on a plane and torture this b'astard to death. What an animal. From Lancashire in the UK and reported in todays Indo.

Murder trial shown clips of baby being kicked, tortured


By Pat Hurst in London

Thursday November 18 2010

Shocking video clips taken by a man slapping and kicking a crying 15-month-old boy he later allegedly murdered were shown to a court yesterday.
Jurors held hands over their mouths as they watched the clips taken on a mobile phone as the screams and cries of baby Charlie Hunt rang out in the hushed courtroom.
Darren Newton (32), from Earby, Lancashire, took the videos for his "pleasure" and "satisfaction" as over a number of months he abused his girlfriend's young son, Manchester Crown Court heard.
Newton hid his "dark and wicked side" to film the graphic clips while Charlie's mother, Laura Chapman, was out of the house and the factory worker was left alone with the baby.
Titles of the series of clips included 'Crying, no toys in pen, ahhhh', 'Squeezing toe in cot', 'Two minutes of pain' and 'Shivering no water', taken when Charlie was naked in an empty bath.
In one graphic clip, titled 'Happy Slap' taken two weeks before Charlie died, and a precursor, the prosecution alleges, to the fatal attack, Newton is seen to slap the child 12 times on the head as he screams.
As tears rolled down the cheeks of the sobbing youngster, Newton is seen forcing his finger into the tot's ear then roughly twisting the ear as Charlie raises his hand in defence.
The clip ends with the crying child being kicked on the floor.
Two weeks later, Charlie was taken to hospital and died from head injuries in what the prosecution claims was a final, fatal attack. Charlie was found to have severe brain injuries, including swelling and bleeding to his brain and damage and bleeding to his eyes.
Newton pleaded guilty to 12 counts of child cruelty but denies two counts of child cruelty and the murder of Charlie on November 19 last year.
Dennis Watson said Newton "took pleasure from the fact Charlie was suffering from cruel and wicked behaviour".
Opening the case for the prosecution, Mr Watson continued: "Between June last year and November last year, Darren Newton, this defendant in the dock, carried out repeated assaults and other acts of cruelty on a young boy, Charlie Hunt, who was barely a year old.
"Not only did he do that he filmed himself doing it on his mobile phone."
Ms Chapman met Newton in early 2009, after moving in next door to him, where he lived with his parents in Earby.
And though he was not the father, it appeared he got on well with Charlie, but he was also "protective" and "private" about his mobile phone.
"The sad truth was whatever the outward appearances, they hid a dark and wicked side to the defendant which only surfaced when he was alone with Charlie," Mr Watson added. "That side of him was only discovered after Charlie had died."
In months leading up to his death, Charlie was taken to hospital suffering from vomiting and "fits" but was discharged.
But on November 19 last year, Newton was again left alone with the youngster. He had finished his 6am to 2pm shift at a local factory and was home by 2.30pm.
By 4.30pm, as Charlie deteriorated, he went next door for help and, as his father gave mouth-to-mouth to the child, he called an ambulance.

Bruising
Charlie appeared limp and was struggling to breathe. He was rushed to Airedale Hospital, West Yorkshire, but was pronounced dead at 5.45pm.
Doctors noticed he had bruises on his right eyelid, right cheek and right big toe, the court heard.
Newton later told police he played with the child but when he went to change his nappy noticed his eyes were "glazed".
He said the boy looked like he had had a fit but tests by doctors showed Charlie had suffered massive head trauma.
During a post-mortem, which concluded head injuries as the cause of death, the pathologist noticed brain trauma, suspended the procedure and called in more specialist medics to assess the damage to the child.
The child was found to have suffered extensive bleeding to his retina and brain, swelling to the brain and deep bruising to the top of the head.
There was also an area of "dead" brain tissue and some of the injuries dated back to the period when Charlie had been taken to hospital suffering "fits", according to medical experts.
A Home Office pathologist concluded the injuries were deliberately inflicted and not caused by a fit or convulsion.
"Those head injuries are completely inconsistent with the defendant's explanation of a fit," Mr Watson added.
"On the contrary, the injuries are consistent with Charlie being struck on the head in a very similar manner to that seen in the previous video clip, 'Happy Slap' two weeks earlier. Charlie had been hit and hit shortly before he died."
With the findings, Newton was arrested and detectives examined his mobile phone, finding the clips he had taken during the abuse.
The trial is expected to last three weeks.

Sorry for not brightening up your day folks, but I just could not believe the vileness of some b'astard beating on a child this young and recording it on his mobile for his own pleasure:mad:

Duggy747

I have seen and read many, many disturbing things on the net. Truly vile and degrading evil that a human can lower themselves to, right down to the point where it's not even human anymore.................but this was just an absolute sickener to read.

He has voided his right to life. Fùck liberalism and anti-eye for an eye bullshìt, he deserves to die in the most painful way imaginable.

chin_grin

Well, that was a tough read!

As much as I hate babies/wouldn't have one. This sort of behaviour is pure evil. No other way to describe it really.

FatherLen

thats pretty sick. the world has gone a bit fucked in the last while

Adam

oouch chaaawwwlie

123balltv

any Man or Woman who does this to a poor innocent
child should be gased,shot in the head,electrocuted etc sickos
I hate these stories :mad:

I hope they rot in hell because they dont
get any proper punishment on this earth

The_Minister

What. an. unmitigated. ****.

optogirl

Adam wrote: »

oouch chaaawwwlie

What?

thebigbiffo

Duggy747 wrote: »

I have seen and read many, many disturbing things on the net. Truly vile and degrading evil that a human can lower themselves to.................but this was just an absolute sickener to read.

He has voided his right to life. Fùck liberalism and anti-eye for an eye bullshìt, he deserves to die in the most painful way imaginable.

i dont normally get too wound up by this kind of thing but this turned my stomach. i swear this, if this guy had dont this to one of my kids i would kill him - as slowly as is possible - and do my time without a care in world.

syklops

Why was it necessary to show the video to the jurors?

Would it not be enough to have a police officer view the tape and submit it to the court that he had seen it and to describe roughly what it entailed? Did they really have to put the jurors and other court personnel through it?

Hell, even a single still from the video showing one act of abuse would have been the nail in the coffin.

Ectoplasm

This is fúcking sickening. Reading that turned my stomach. What the hell has to be wrong with someone that they could not only do that to a defenseless child but record it too?

He deserves to rot in prison for the rest of his days. Actually he deserves worse. :mad:

The_Minister

chin_grin wrote: »

Well, that was a tough read!

As much as I hate babies/wouldn't have one. This sort of behaviour is pure evil. No other way to describe it really.

Was the proviso really necessary?

keano_afc

Will hopefully get put away for a long long time.

Might have been different had it happened here, would have more than likely been given 5 years suspended and a walk up Croagh Patrick.

Adam

in seriousness, that man should never see the light of day again.

thebigbiffo

syklops wrote: »

Why was it necessary to show the video to the jurors?

Would it not be enough to have a police officer view the tape and submit it to the court that he had seen it and to describe roughly what it entailed? Did they really have to put the jurors and other court personnel through it?

Hell, even a single still from the video showing one act of abuse would have been the nail in the coffin.

you can't really hold back when you're trying to ensure a successful prosecution. i wouldn't facy being on that jury, that's for sure.

thebigbiffo

Adam wrote: »

oouch chaaawwwlie

please tell me this is funny in a way i'm not getting?

Adam

thebigbiffo wrote: »

please tell me this is funny in a way i'm not getting?

charlie bit my finger...? even starving africans have seen that clip man.... -_-

chin_grin

The_Minister wrote: »

Was the proviso really necessary?

Eh, is you asking me also?

I mean, if it irks you as much as to comment on it I can go back and edit mine? It'll take as much effort as you put in to posting.

I'm so so sorry if that upset you. I mean I didn't mean to offend those who breed and procreate only to find out that they're not worthy of having reproductive organs.

I'm not pointing that at you, just.........in general. Or regarding this news story.

Sykk

I'm afraid of ever knowing someone like this. I'd probably have to torture them, or do something worse that would result in jail time.. ****ing disgusts me that people like this are allowed to live.

No doubt he'll be let out in 2 years and given a new name, identity and 100k to get his new life in order.

Makes me sick to the core.

thebigbiffo

Adam wrote: »

charlie bit my finger...? even starving africans have seen that clip man.... -_-

yeah, i've seen it...

hybridmouse

Adam wrote: »

charlie bit my finger...? even starving africans have seen that clip man.... -_-

And that's appropriate in relation to this story how?

Stercus Accidit

Wasn't the baby P guy scalded and beaten in prison? I am happy to sit back and leave the scum at this guy, he is now target number one for them.

Jesus Wept

rabble

faceman

syklops wrote: »

Why was it necessary to show the video to the jurors?

Would it not be enough to have a police officer view the tape and submit it to the court that he had seen it and to describe roughly what it entailed? Did they really have to put the jurors and other court personnel through it?

Hell, even a single still from the video showing one act of abuse would have been the nail in the coffin.

The same question could be asked as to why the OP felt it necessary to share the full article which includes the detail of the abuse and the reaction it has received.

The_Minister

chin_grin wrote: »

Eh, is you asking me also?

I mean, if it irks you as much as to comment on it I can go back and edit mine? It'll take as much effort as you put in to posting.

I'm so so sorry if that upset you. I mean I didn't mean to offend those who breed and procreate only to find out that they're not worthy of having reproductive organs.

I'm not pointing that at you, just.........in general. Or regarding this news story.

It just struck me as unnecessary.

If a traveller had died, you wouldn't say "I know he was a traveller, I don't like travellers, but I'm still sorry"?

Same with any group of people.

You may belong to that weird minority who don't like babies (I confess that while I may never have children, I fail to see how anyone cannot see that babies tend to be cute as buttons), but that doesn't mean you need to add a proviso to the effect that it is a bad thing the baby died, despite the fact that you never want one.

It just struck me as unnecessary.

Blazer

I'd quite happily volunteer to kill this piece of shít.:mad:
Hell I'd even pay for it...vermin like this lose all rights to life as far as I'm concerned and the pc brigade be damned.

Stercus Accidit

The-Rigger wrote: »

rabble

OMG LOL SO WITTY

thanks thanks thanks

The_Minister

Sc@recrow wrote: »

I'd quite happily volunteer to kill this piece of shít.:mad:
Hell I'd even pay for it...vermin like this lose all rights to life as far as I'm concerned and the pc brigade be damned.

Yep, because the PC brigade love baby-killers.

chin_grin

The_Minister wrote: »

It just struck me as unnecessary.

If a traveller had died, you wouldn't say "I know he was a traveller, I don't like travellers, but I'm still sorry"?

Same with any group of people.

You may belong to that weird minority who don't like babies (I confess that while I may never have children, I fail to see how anyone cannot see that babies tend to be cute as buttons), but that doesn't mean you need to add a proviso to the effect that it is a bad thing the baby died, despite the fact that you never want one.

It just struck me as unnecessary.

No. It was in context to someone who doesn't even like babies. Which is where I was coming from.

Like "I hate them......but.......oh that's just horrible!".

(EDIT: Meaning "I wish them harm......". But that's just the imagination.)

I may have worded it a little crassly.

Anyways, relating to the story. Do I really have to post the Henderson Castration Tools video again?

Greyfox

syklops wrote: »

Why was it necessary to show the video to the jurors?

Yes, because the jury need to understand that the scumbag on trial is a evil piece of sh** and should be treated like like a piece of sh** for the rest of his life. This scumbag has given up his "human rights" by proving to the world that he does not deserve to be treated like a human being any more

bonerm

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Wasn't the baby P guy scalded and beaten in prison? I am happy to sit back and leave the scum at this guy, he is now target number one for them.

I love the way criminals have "standards" as to what illegal behaviours are deemed acceptable to them and what are not.