Arthur killers’ sentences to be reviewed
Attorney General’s Office will decide whether undue leniency was shown to father and stepmother
THE jail sentences of the couple who killed six-year-old Arthur LabinjoHughes are to be reviewed, the Attorney General has confirmed.
The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) confirmed on Saturday afternoon that the sentences are to be reviewed to “determine whether they were too low”.
The AGO has 28 days from the date of sentence to review a case, assess whether it falls under the Unduly Lenient Sentence (ULS) scheme, and make a decision as to whether to refer a sentence to the Court of Appeal. A spokesperson for the AGO said: “The Attorney General’s thoughts are with those who loved Arthur. I can confirm that the sentences given to Emma Tustin and Thomas Hughes have been referred to the Attorney General for review to determine whether they were too low.” The Court of Appeal then makes the decision about the sentence.
It comes after Solihull MP Julian urge Suella Braverman, QC, to refer the case to the Court of Appeal so harsher prison terms can be imposed on the couple who killed the six-year-old boy.
Arthur was left with a severe brain injury while in the sole care of Emma Tustin, 32, who was jailed for life after being convicted of murder by repeatedly assaulting the child at her home in Birmingham on June 16, 2020. He died the following day in hospital.
A total of 130 bruises were discovered on his body because he had been subjected to months of abuse by his “spiteful and sadistic” carers. He had been poisoned with salt, denied food and drink and made to stand for hours in the hallway.
Tustin was given a minimum term of 29 years in prison. Arthur’s father, Thomas Hughes, 29, was sentenced to 21 years for manslaughter after being found to have “encouraged” the abuse.
Shortly after laying flowers in the Shirley area of Birmingham, where the boy lived, Mr Knight said: “There’s a palpable sense of real loss and tragedy over this.
“And also, frankly, a sense of anger and questions about how this was allowed to happen, how these monsters were allowed to inflict this horrible torture on this young defenceless boy.
“We need to get to the bottom of how this happened and we need to ensure those who have failed him are accountable. Under the ULS, Court of Appeal judges can increase the original sentence if it is too low, keep it the same or decide to refuse to hear the case. Wendy Thorogood, the director of the Association of Child Protection Professionals, said Arthur should have been the top priority for local social services.
However, owing to lockdown and the closure of schools there may have been fewer chances for the authorities to identify him as being at risk.
“I can’t comment on what they actually witnessed but you have to remember he was at the hands of quite cruel people who could manipulate him, his environment and professionals,” she told Times Radio.
“[This] was under Covid, so he wasn’t actually getting additional oversight from school and education.”
A serious case review is underway into the circumstances around Arthur’s death after it emerged that social workers had visited the house in the months before he died and found no cause for concern. Anna Edmundson, Head of Policy and Public Affairs at the NSPCC, warned that other children who still have not returned to classes could be at risk of falling off social services’ radar.
“We know from the tragic case of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes and the increase in contacts to our helpline … that there was an increased risk to some young people while schools were closed during the lockdowns,” she said.
“Worryingly, too many children who are known to be vulnerable are still not attending school and they cannot be allowed to slip off the radar. Authorities need to work together to establish where these vulnerable children are, whether they are safe and well and how they can be supported to be back in school.”
Lord Laming, who led the inquiry into the death of Victoria Climbié and reviewed the case of baby Peter Connelly, said the training of social workers may need to be reviewed.