Grandmother denies assaulting toddler who died after head injury
Kerry Ives, 46, and her husband Michael Ives, 47, are alleged to have been in the living room of their home in Flintshire, North Wales, with grandson Ethan Ives-Griffiths on August 14th, 2021 when he suffered a 'catastrophic' head injury, leading to his death two days later.
Advertisement
Giving evidence at Mold Crown Court on Wednesday, she was asked by Owen Edwards KC, defending: 'Did you assault Ethan on August 14th?'
She replied: 'No.'
Ives also denied seeing, helping with or encouraging an assault on that date.
The grandmother, who wiped her eyes with a tissue at points during her evidence, described Ethan as a 'bubbly little child' and said he came to stay at their home in Garden City from about June 24th, 2021 for a few weeks, before going back to his mother – her daughter, Shannon Ives.
Advertisement
Shannon and Ethan then both came to stay at the house from July 16th until his death, the court heard.
Asked how her daughter behaved towards Ethan, she said: 'She used to smack him, up the head.'
After Mr Edwards asked in what circumstances that would happen, Ives said: 'He'd probably pissed her off, just by laughing at her if she told him off.'
She said on August 14th she noticed a red mark on Ethan's face after he had been in the bedroom with his mother.
Advertisement
Ives said she did not see Shannon hit Ethan that day, but was later reminded of her defence statement in which she said she saw Shannon strike her son to his head as they walked to the living room.
She told the court she was in the living room with her husband that evening, while Shannon was upstairs, when she turned and saw Michael Ives catching Ethan.
Ives said: 'Michael picked him back up and then he did it again so Michael lay him on the carpet.'
Asked how it looked, she said: 'It was horrible.'
Advertisement
She said she shouted for Shannon, who came down from upstairs and later called her other daughter, Nicole, over Facetime, the court heard.
The accused said: 'Nicole had gone through something similar with her son. I just needed some advice for what to do.'
She then rang an ambulance, but the court heard the time between Kerry Ives shouting for her daughter to come downstairs and phoning emergency services was 18 minutes.
Ives said: 'I was panicking. I didn't know what was going on.'
Advertisement
Kerry Ives, originally from Wolverhampton, accepted the way her husband carried Ethan, by his arm, in CCTV footage from August 4th, 2021, was 'cruel'.
She said: 'It wasn't nice.'
Ives said at the time she did not see her husband holding Ethan in that way and denied the footage showed her watching as Ethan was carried from a trampoline in the back garden.
She said: 'I was just staring, that's what I usually do, just stare and glaze.'
Asked what she would have done if she had seen her husband carrying the toddler like that, she said: 'I'd have told him to pack it in.'
She accepted she did see him lift Ethan over a railing by his arm in later footage which was shown to the court.
Gordon Cole KC, defending Shannon Ives, said: 'Do you regret how Michael treated Ethan?'
She said: 'Yes.'
When Mr Cole asked why she had not initially told the jury she had seen her husband carry Ethan like that, she said: 'I can't answer.'
She added: 'I'm not protecting him.'
Michael and Kerry Ives, of Kingsley Road, Garden City, deny murder, an alternative count of causing or allowing the death of a child, and cruelty to a person under 16.
Shannon Ives, of Nant Garmon, Mold, denies causing or allowing the death of a child and cruelty to a person under 16.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
16 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Parliament's chief bell ringer is hit with £100,000 court bill after ripping out banker neighbour's gate to his £2m west London home on day he moved in
Parliament's master bellringer has been hit with a £100,000-plus court bill after tearing out the front gates of his banker neighbour's £2m west London home. Retired financier Nicholas Partick-Hiley bought his mews cottage in Fulham, in August 2023, planning to make the property a dream home for his retirement alongside wife, Lisa. But the 64-year-old was shocked when he arrived on the day of completion to find his new neighbour bell-ringer neighbour, Adrian Udal, 65, demolishing the door and roller gate securing the front of his home. Mr Udal, who had lived next door to the couple's property for 30 years, insisted he had a right to do what he did as he owns the land the gate was on. However, the couple sued and won the case last month after Judge Nicholas Parfitt branded Mr Udal's actions 'wanton destruction' and 'carefully pre-planned'. And now Mr Udal - Secretary of the Belfry at St Margaret's Church, a medieval building next to Westminster Abbey which acts as place of worship for the Houses of Parliament - has been left facing a £100,000-plus bill after being ordered to pay the legal costs of the case. In a short hearing at Mayor's and City County Court, Judge Parfitt ordered him to pay £85,000 up front towards his neighbours' estimated £100,000-plus legal bill. He will also have to pay the couple £10,000 compensation for what he did, as well as his own lawyers' significant costs, which have not been revealed in court. Mr Udal is a veteran bell-ringer, whose Secretary of the Belfy role involves liasing with clergy when bellringing is needed for special church, state and parliamentary events, while he is proud to have 'rung in' the New Year almost every year since 2000. He also works as a broadcast editor and has a keen interest in antique clocks, while his wife, Helen, is also a campanologist, being bell tower captain at St Gabriel's Church Pimlico. Mr Partick-Hiley is a retired financier and former managing director and head of sales for North America investment banking specialists Panmure Gordon. During the trial last month, Judge Parfitt was told how the two neighbouring homes are in an unusual layout, with the Partick-Hileys' house located behind Mr Udal's property and reachable across a drive and through a passageway, which passes under part of his house and into their courtyard. The drive and passageway are owned by Mr Udal, but the Partick-Hileys have the right to pass over it to get to their house, the court heard. Explaining the background to the row, Mark Warwick KC, for the Partick-Hileys, said: 'On the day of completion, Mr Partick-Hiley arrived at the property at about 12.10. 'He was astonished to find Mr Udal and another man. The two men were in the process of destroying the door and gate. They were also disconnecting wiring that connected the property to various services. 'No advance warning of any kind had been given by Mr Udal, or anyone on his behalf, that such extraordinary behaviour was going to happen. 'Mr Partick-Hiley endeavoured to remain calm. He contacted his solicitors, he felt helpless. 'Mr Udal and (the other man) continued with their demolition work until about 5pm. 'His actions were plainly carefully pre-planned. No amount of persuasion, including the involvement of the police, has caused him to resile, or seemingly regret, his actions. 'The impact of these actions, and contentions, has been serious, their quiet enjoyment and actual enjoyment of their home has been disrupted.' The couple sued for an injunction against Mr Udal, claiming the right to put up new gates across the opening which leads to their house, citing 'security concerns' in the affluent street. They said they were aware of a conflict between their home's previous owner and Mr Udal before moving in, but thought it was settled until Mr Udal was witnessed dismantling the disputed gate. Through their solicitors, they had contacted him two months before the move, explaining that they planned to install 'better looking and more functional gates' once they moved in, although making clear they would welcome Mr Udal's input on the style and design of those gates. But in response, the couple alleged their new neighbour began to plot how to remove and install new gates, buying his own set of metal barriers on July 13, 2023, which Mr Warwick claimed showed that 'he was planning to carry out the destruction of the existing gates'. When the day of completion arrived, 'Mr Udal and his accomplice duly set about destroying the gates and disconnecting services running through the driveway', he added. Their barrister claimed Mr Udal had 'carefully planned' what he did and did so 'at a time to cause maximum disruption and distress.' Soon afterwards, the couple's lawyers wrote to Mr Udal insisting that the removed gates were their property and that it was up to them to decide what alternatives should be put in their place. 'Mr Udal disagreed,' said the KC, adding: 'On September 10, he began to hang metal gates, of his own choosing, right next to the pavement.' In court, the couple insisted they have the right to erect and site entrance gates 'on either side of the opening that runs under part of Mr Udal's house,' plus the right to park a car in the area. But Mr Udal insisted their right only extends to having the strip gated at the front of the property next to the pavement and they have no right to have a car on his land. He said that in removing the existing roller gate and door, and installing a new gate next to the pavement at the end of the driveway, he had done no more than assert his legitimate rights as freehold owner of the passage between the two homes. Handing victory to the bell master's neighbours, Judge Parfitt slammed his 'wrongful act of wanton any reasonable and objective person should have realised would cause considerable upset and discomfort' and ordered him to pay £10,000 damages. 'Mr Udal was a poor witness who came across as preferring his own perception of what might be helpful to his own case, regardless of any objective reality,' he continued. 'The overall impression was that truth for him, in the context of legal proceedings at least, was no obstacle to a clever argument about language or the other evidence. 'He referred to his destruction of the roller shutter and furniture as his having 'returned' it to (the former owner). 'This is also using expressions normally used to describe something helpful - getting something back to the owner - as a means of sugar-coating the reality of what he was doing: destroying part of the claimants' property on the very day they were moving in and would have expected to find the roller shutter and furniture providing a secure and private barrier between the road and their new house. 'On a balance of probabilities, the defendant had planned to destroy the roller shutter and furniture on the day of completion and perhaps hoped that it would be a fait accompli by the time the claimants arrived. 'In any event, he continued his actions even after they had arrived and it was clear that they objected.' The judge found that the gates Mr Udal removed were in the correct position and that the couple have a right 'to pass and re-pass either on foot, or with or without vehicles' down the drive and passage. He added: 'Mr Udal's actions in respect of the roller gates and furniture was an inappropriate and wrongful act of wanton destruction designed, in my view, to, at best, take advantage of the gap between owners occurring at completion, and conduct which any reasonable and objective person should have realised would cause considerable upset and discomfort to the new owners.' Returning to court last week to decide on matters consequential to his judgment, Judge Parfitt ordered Mr Udal to tear out the gate he installed within two weeks. He said the Mr Partick-Hileys would have the right to install their own, but that if it is to be lockable they must ensure that Mr Udal is able to get in if he wants to get to the back of his house. He also ordered him to pay £85,000 towards their lawyers' bills - estimated at over £100,000 - ahead of an assessment at a later date. His own lawyers' bills were not revealed in court papers. Representing himself via a video link, Mr Udal said he was planning to challenge the decision on appeal.
Daily Mail
22 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Oisin Murphy has barely flinched since his involvement in a car smash that left a woman in hospital... his rap sheet makes for gruesome reading and this is an embarrassment for the sport, writes DOMINIC KING
How could Oisin Murphy do it? It was the question that kept being asked, over and over, on Monday, April 28 on one of those glorious evenings at Windsor, when sun shines and the crowd hums. It had been 41 hours since he had been involved in a car accident so serious a female passenger was hospitalised and Murphy was arrested, for 'causing serious injury by dangerous driving and failing to provide specimen for analysis'. Word travels quickly in an industry such as horseracing and upon hearing of Murphy's predicament, many expected the horses for which he'd been booked that night to require new riders. Sources allege the Champion Jockey had been at a party in Reading in the hours before the crash. Murphy, we learned during a hearing at Reading Magistrates Court, had 66mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood in his system when he was subsequently tested at police station at 7am; police had been called to the scene of the accident at 12.15am. It is astonishing detail. Had it been down to the British Horseracing Authority (BHA), Murphy wouldn't have been legged up on Sea Founder, a three-year-old trained by Richard Hughes for prominent owner Abdulla Al Mansoori in the one-mile maiden at 530pm, but their attempts to impose a suspension failed. Was Murphy physically in the right condition to be on board a thoroughbred? Racecourses have strict protocols that must be passed before jockeys go out to ride, including breathalysers, but there he was, in a set of yellow and black silks. He wasn't just on board – he won. All the shock of crashing the vehicle, all the trauma of understanding the female he had been travelling with was receiving urgent medical care – none of it was evident as he brought Sea Founder through with a perfectly-timed run, looking typically artistic in the saddle. 'Kieren Fallon talks about not being perfect but I'll ask you: how did he manage to win an Arc with the court case he was facing the next day?' Murphy asked me during an interview at Salisbury racecourse last October. 'It takes incredible mental strength. You need to be brazen, almost. 'You need to forget about the troubles in your life and the impact it could have on you to focus on a horse race. The Arc is the one race I want to win more than any other and him winning it on Dylan Thomas is the most memorable moment of my childhood, from a flat racing perspective.' He told me plenty that day. This particular excerpt came from a section when we talked about riders with demons and he immediately cited Fallon in 2007, when he conjured one of the greatest rides ever seen at Longchamp 24 hours before appearing at the High Court over race fixing charges. Reading it again, how revealing is it? Murphy has gone about his business in the last nine weeks, riding 64 winners – worth a combined total of £1.5million – from owners such as Sir Alex Ferguson, Michael Owen, Lady Lloyd-Weber and leading bloodstock operations. He's barely flinched. Even last Friday at Doncaster, the day after his charge became public, he was in the weighing room without a care. Some of his behaviour has been met with a growing sense of mystification by his colleagues. And remember: the £70,000 he's been fined will barely make a dent in his finances. Equally mystifying has been how some people have continued to book him for rides but as Peter Collier, owner of a handicapper called Annexation whom Murphy rode to finish second at Doncaster told me: 'He is the best. When I knew he was available, I wanted him. He was amenable to us.' Quite how he's been that way is hard to fathom. For this is the latest, self-inflicted storm to come howling into his town and his rap sheet makes for gruesome reading. In 2022, there was a 14-month ban after breaching Covid rules, misleading the BHA and two alcohol breaches. This has been an embarrassment for racing and nobody will forget his ability to self-destruct Events spiralled for him after he lied to racing's governing body about a trip he had taken in September 2020, telling them he had gone to Lake Como – which was then on the safe to travel list – when he had instead gone to Mykonos. That preceded him a pub fracas in October 2021 with a leading bloodstock agent. Murphy was stood down from riding the following day, having failed the breathalyser test at Newmarket. Having been embroiled in a battle to win the jockeys championship, he'd been using drink as a crutch. Alcohol made him a different person and, as we reflected on those misdemeanours that afternoon at Salsibury, he spoke with unexpected honesty. A fourth jockeys title was about to be presented to him, on Champions afternoon at Ascot, but he insisted sobriety was his biggest achievement. 'My focus while I was banned was staying sober, putting my life back together and using the time to make sure I was ready for when the BHA give me the green light,' he explained. 'I just know I can't have a drink. I don't want it to spiral out of control. 'When I do stop riding, I want to be happy with the way my career ended. Whether that is the next five years or 10 years, it won't be much longer than that. The only way I can do that is by staying sober. I genuinely believe that. I'm sorry. I'm jumping from loads of topics here.' The question only he can answer now is whether he has lost that focus and, if so, when did it happen? The industry is rife with rumours, none of which paint him in a good light but none of which can be committed to print because they cannot be substantiated. If he has slipped, he needs help. Still, he will carry on regardless. He rides in New York tonight and nobody has come out to condemn him. The BHA's inability to impose a sanction, too, is just as staggering. This has been an embarrassment for the sport. At his best, this 29-year-old had the capacity to get people engaged in the sport with his honest video appraisals on social media, following good and bad rides, well received. On horseback, he makes you think of the late, great Walter Swinburn with poise, skill and timing. The good stuff, though, doesn't get remembered when you plough a car into a tree or you fight or flout rules when the vast majority are playing it by the book. He had the ability to forget about his troubles on horseback. It's a shame nobody will forget his ability to self-destruct.
Telegraph
30 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The nepo baby millennial lawyer who spared Diddy from life behind bars
As the verdict was read out in courtroom 26A in lower Manhattan, Sean 'Diddy' Combs, tightly squeezed Teny Geragos's hand and raised it in the air. Nearly two months ago, the lawyer sitting to his left had glided over to the wooden podium to deliver a controversial opening statement in which she admitted her client was a violent domestic abuser. She did not deny that he had done some terrible things, but that wasn't what Combs was on trial for, she told the court. It was a risky move, but as the jury foreman delivered the verdict on Wednesday morning, it was clearly one that had paid off. Combs was acquitted on the most serious offences of sex trafficking and racketeering and found guilty of two charges of transporting prostitutes. As Combs put his head in his hands and fell to the ground to celebrate, Ms Geragos dabbed at her tears with a tissue and hugged his family members. The three not guilty verdicts were not just a partial victory for Combs – it was a career-defining win for Ms Geragos, who was one of his 'dream team' of lawyers led by Marc Agnifilo. Following in the footsteps of her father Mark Geragos, the celebrity lawyer who has defended stars including Chris Brown, Michael Jackson and Winona Ryder, it was the moment in which the 34-year-old carved out her own name as defender for the deep-pocketed. In court she faced lead prosecutor Maurene Comey, the daughter of James Comey, the former head of the FBI, in what appeared to be the battle of the 'nepo babies'. The prosecution had alleged Combs used force and financial control to coerce his ex-girlfriends Cassie Ventura and a witness testifying under the pseudonym Jane into days-long drug-fuelled sex parties during which they would allegedly be made to sleep with male prostitutes. In her opening statement Ms Geragos claimed that Combs's alleged victims were in consensual relationships and while he had beaten his girlfriends, this did not amount to sex trafficking. 'Sean Combs is a complicated man. But this is not a complicated case. This case is about love, jealousy, infidelity and money,' Ms Geragos told the court. 'Sean Combs has a bad temper and sometimes he gets out of control,' Ms Geragos said. 'We take full responsibility for the domestic violence. Domestic violence is not sex trafficking.' Later, when commenting on the allegations involving Jane, she added: 'Being a willing participant in your own life is not sex trafficking.' Months before she began attempting to convince the jury Combs was not a sex trafficker or the masterminds of a decades-long criminal enterprise, Ms Geragos had been batting for her client on a rather different platform. Via a TikTok account with the bio 'criminal defence attorney breaking down the latest news' she posted a series of videos about civil lawsuits filed against him, insisting he was innocent. 'All right, here we go again, Diddy sued by a former bandmate; I'm his lawyer and here's why you should care,' Ms Geragos said during one clip. Her father, Mr Geragos, 67, who was an adviser to Combs's legal team, was admonished by the judge at the start of the trial for using another platform to talk about the case. He was called out by Judge Arun Subramanian for calling the prosecution a 'six-pack of white women' on his podcast. Ms Geragos's career so far appears to be on a similar trajectory to her father's. After graduating with a degree in art history and media, culture and communications from New York University, Ms Geragos went on to study at the Loyola Law School in Chicago, the same law school where her father trained. Ms Geragos worked as a judicial extern for a Supreme Court Justice in Kings County, New York, while studying for her degree before becoming licenced by both the New York and California state bars in 2017. She worked as a law clerk at the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office and her father's firm, Geragos & Geragos, before joining New York City based firm Brafman & Associates PC as a trial attorney. She left the firm after nearly eight years to join Agnifilo Intrater LLP as a founding partner. She has represented defendants in federal and state trials in cases involving sexual assault, fraud and public corruption, according to the firm's website. Her expertise is in cases involving sexual misconduct. Ms Geragos met her husband Ashwinn Krishnaswamy while studying at NYU. The couple married at her parents' home in Los Angeles in 2021 in a ceremony inspired by the Jardin du Luxembourg in Paris. They have one child and Ms Geragos is pregnant with their second. After the trial concluded, Ms Geragos spoke briefly outside the court in Lower Manhattan. 'I first want to thank my client Sean Combs for trusting us, myself and everybody here, this incredible dream team that he put together,' she said. 'He is incredible. I want to thank him,' she said, adding that he had 'not sexually assaulted anybody'. Later that evening she made a brief appearance on the 2 Angry Men podcast that her father co-hosts alongside Harvey Levin, the founder of TMZ. Mr Geragos said he was on 'childcare duty' because his daughter was off to celebrate the outcome of the trial. Appearing on the camera for a brief moment, Ms Geragos, stood grinning from ear to ear. 'I feel great,' she said.
