A Harrogate couple appeared in court today accused of a catalogue of child cruelty incidents against two boys including wanton violence and serving cereal laced with washing-up liquid.

The couple, whom we haven’t named to protect the identity of the children, appeared for the first day of their trial at York Crown Court yesterday (July 21).

Prosecutor Deborah Smithies said the female defendant was given custody of the boys following the death of their mother some years ago because their father “was not on the scene”.

The named defendant had known their late mother, also from Harrogate, and following an assessment by social services, she was granted legal guardianship of the boys.

“And so, the boys moved in permanently with (the defendant),” Ms Smithies told the jury.

Soon afterwards, the woman’s boyfriend moved into her home and they and the boys “lived there as a family”.

The older of the two brothers, who was in his early teens at the time, lived at the property for about three years. His much-younger brother remained at the house for a further three years after his brother eventually left due to the alleged abuse, said Ms Smithies.

“The prosecution say that during that time, (the two boys) did not find with the defendants a loving home; that instead they were repeatedly assaulted by the defendants, ill-treated and verbally abused,” she added.

Alleged abuse

The alleged victims later recounted to police the alleged abuse they had suffered at the hands of the couple.

In a recorded police interview, the older boy alleged the defendants set “restrictive rules” for him and his brother.

He said he was “not allowed to make a drink without asking” and he and his brother weren’t allowed to turn on the TV without permission. They were “made to feel unwelcome in the communal area of the house”.

“Food was restricted (and) portions of breakfast cereal measured out in advance for them, so they went to school hungry,” added Ms Smithies.

The older brother said he was “always hungry when he lived with them”.

“He remembers a period of a month or so when (the female defendant) told him he could make his own dinner, but he wasn’t allowed to use the oven,” said the prosecutor.

“All he could do was make beans on toast. He ate beans on toast every night for a while.”

She said that on one occasion, the boy found dirt in a sandwich in his packed lunch. He suspected that it was the male defendant who had sullied the sandwich because he had allegedly told the boy on a previous occasion that he had spat in his food at dinnertime.

“He said he never saw (the male defendant) spit in any food, but had to eat his dinner without being sure,” said Ms Smithies.

'Squeezed into unconsciousness'

He said there were physical assaults by both defendants, including the female who “punched and slapped him in the face with rings on her fingers”.

The alleged blows would “sometimes leave little scratches on his face”.

He said that the woman’s partner would “hit him harder” and on at least one occasion he was left with a bust nose.

On one occasion, two years after he moved in, the male defendant flew into a rage in the kitchen, grabbed him by the throat and “squeezed to the point where he lost consciousness”.

“(The alleged victim) came round on the kitchen floor and woke up with glass all around his head,” added Ms Smithies.

“It appeared the glass came from the oven door which he struck with the back of his head as he went down.”

She said it was after this incident that the boy decided he had to leave the house. He went to social services and spoke to a social worker who had been assigned to him and his brother when the female defendant was granted the guardianship order a few years earlier.

Ms Smithies said the boy told the social worker about the assault in the kitchen that day and that he didn’t want to go back home.

“But (the female defendant) had full parental responsibility for the boy and so where they stayed was up to her,” added the prosecutor.

'Spat on him'

The social worker contacted the female defendant to ask her if the boy had permission to stay with a friend that night “while the dust settled”, but the defendant said he had to return home.

Ms Smithies said the social worker went to the defendants’ home that same afternoon when the male defendant made it “very clear that he didn’t care about either of the boys” and expressed contempt for the older child whom he called names.

Despite this, the older brother remained at the house, in the couple’s care, for another year.

He said he was regularly “turfed out of the house very early in the morning”, with “nowhere else to go”. On one of these occasions, he went back to social services and said he “couldn’t stay there anymore and wanted to leave”.

By now, the boy was 16 years of age – old enough for social services to facilitate a move away from the property in Harrogate and allowing him to move in with a relative who lived in a different part of the country.

However, his younger brother stayed with the defendants for another three years. He would later tell police that he too was subjected to the “same controlling behaviour described by (his older brother)” at the hands of the defendants.

“He said that he wasn’t allowed to touch anything in the kitchen; that he wasn’t allowed to eat with the defendants at the same time as them and had to eat separately on his own,” added Ms Smithies.

He said that the male defendant made all the meals and there were times when he would find that his food had been adulterated and his breakfast cereal smeared with washing-up liquid from the sink.

Ms Smithies said:

Night in police cell

Ms Smithies said matters came to a head when, one day in the summer of 2022, the boy returned home after being at a friend’s house and was confronted by the male defendant who blocked his entry.

The defendant finally let him in, but then “pushed (the boy) up the stairs to his room”, got him in a “locked position” and bit him. He only let go when the female defendant entered the room.

“(The boy) started packing his things there and then,” said Ms Smithies.

“Both of the defendants tried to grasp the bag off him and (the female defendant) rang the police, and when police arrived at the house, she said (the boy) had assaulted (her partner).”

This resulted in the boy, who was by now a teenager, being arrested on suspicion of assault. He spent the night in a police cell.

The female defendant then contacted social services, asking them to pick the boy up from the police station, claiming she was “too angry” to go herself.

Another social worker went to pick the boy up from the police station and said he was crying when he came out.

“She drove him back to the defendants’ house and when she took him inside, an argument immediately started between (the boy) and (the female defendant),” said Ms Smithies.

“(The boy) was still crying, saying he didn’t want to be there.”

It was then that the social worker contacted a relative who said that she would take the boy in at her home.

The social worker drove the boy to York Railway Station where he caught a train to his new “loving” home. 

The two defendants were each charged with two counts of child cruelty relating to both boys and the male defendant was charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm relating to the incident in the kitchen involving the older brother.

They each denied all the alleged offences which are said to have occurred over a six-year period.

Ms Smithies told the court: “Each of (the alleged victims) has described a sustained course of mistreatment by the defendants, deliberate acts of assault, restriction and adulteration of food, cruel and controlling behaviour and, throughout, a total absence of care or affection towards them.”

Defence claims

Defence barrister Henry Fernandez, for the male defendant, said his client denied attacking the older brother in the kitchen and grabbing him around the throat, claiming he merely put his hand on the boy’s chest to protect his partner.

He claimed that his client had also acted in self-defence in the incident where he allegedly assaulted the younger brother in his bedroom.

“His case is that (the allegations) are fabrications; that the complainants were not ill-treated; they were not unfed, their food was not tampered with, and they were not physically assaulted,” added Mr Fernandez.

Conor Quinn, for the female defendant, said that when the two boys came to live with her, she “set boundaries that they were not used to and did not like”.

“(The two boys)…rebelled against these rules and these boundaries that had been set for them and, as a result, they were aggressive towards (her),” he added.

The trial continues.