It is in the nature of young children to invest trust in authority figures while they acclimatise themselves to the world. It is not only the suffering inflicted but the abuse of trust that makes violence against children so shocking. Even among the worst of such acts, the killing of Star Hobson, a 16-month-old girl from Keighley in West Yorkshire, is hard to fathom in its cruelty and wickedness.
Savannah Brockhill, the partner of Star’s mother, was today found guilty of the toddler’s murder in 2020. Frankie Smith, the mother, was convicted of causing or allowing Star’s death. Both women will be sentenced tomorrow. The public will reasonably want answers to how so heinous a crime could have been possible when there is a statutory obligation on local authorities to safeguard the welfare of children in need. Previous inquiries into rare and horrifying cases of the murder of vulnerable children have concluded that the legislative framework is sound but there are gaps in implementing it. Such failings need to be identified and rectified fast.
Though the cases are distinct, Star’s murder is especially shocking given the conviction of the killers of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes this month. The murderer of each child was the domineering partner of a natural parent who callously allowed or enabled the cruelty to persist. Star suffered prolonged attack and sustained injuries, including a fracture to her leg caused by “forceful twisting”. In each case, family members or friends observed these injuries and scrupulously tried to raise the alarm. Why those warnings were not acted upon must be the focus of the forthcoming review into Arthur’s death. Star’s murder also demands a thorough investigation.
There is no ultimate explanation for human wickedness Brockhill and Smith aggravated their depravity by recording their abuse of Star in photos and videos. But there must be an explanation for why five referrals of Star’s case to Bradford city council between January and September 2020 went unheeded. The council, along with the city’s child safeguarding agencies, said they “deeply regret that not all the warning signs were seen”, but this does not address the question of why specific information about a named child was not acted upon.
Doubtless social services were stretched and underfunded and, as in Arthur’s case, the adult abusers were able to divert inquiries by false assurances. But it is the job of social workers and the police to see through such manipulation and rescue vulnerable children from danger. The Children Act 2004 puts a duty on local authorities in England to promote co-operation with relevant agencies. The evidence of the cases of Arthur and Star indicates severe failings at local level.
Advertisement
In the case of Victoria Climbié, who died in 2000 aged eight after tortures and beatings by her great-aunt and a man, an inquiry by Lord Laming examined how such horrors could have gone undetected by four separate local authorities. The Laming report criticised a lack of priority given to safeguarding and of effective organisation to intervene in abusive families.
Those recommendations must now be revisited and the question addressed of whether they were either inadequate to save the lives of Arthur and Star or were not properly enforced. In safeguarding children, human error and institutional failure have tragic costs.
