Family court criticised over Ellie Butler death

Neil Puffett
Wednesday, June 22, 2016

A serious case review has criticised the role of the family courts for their role in returning six-year-old Ellie Butler to her parents 11 months before she was beaten to death by her father.

Ellie Butler suffered fatal head injuries while being looked after by her father Ben Butler. Picture: Metropolitan Police
Ellie Butler suffered fatal head injuries while being looked after by her father Ben Butler. Picture: Metropolitan Police

Ellie suffered fatal head injuries while being looked after by her father Ben Butler, 36, at their home in Sutton, south-west London, in October 2013.

A serious case review (SCR) into the circumstances around the death criticised family court judge Mrs Justice Hogg and private social workers at Services For Children (S4C), who were appointed in place of social workers from the London borough of Sutton.

Ellie had been removed from her parents, care at seven weeks old after Butler was arrested and later charged and convicted of assaulting her. He was convicted in March 2009 of causing his daughter grievous bodily harm and was sentenced to 18 months in prison. However, his conviction was later overturned in the court of appeal on a legal technicality and he launched a campaign to regain custody of her and her younger sibling.

Social workers at Sutton Council opposed the return of Ellie and her sibling to their parents, but Justice Hogg, in addition to ordering their return, took the step of "exonerating" Ben Butler of causing injuries to Ellie in the past.

She ordered that public bodies holding files on Ellie should prominently mark them with the statement that Butler had been exonerated of all allegations of physical abuse of Ellie Butler by the High Court.

"Despite a significant range of concerns and worrying incidents (albeit below the threshold for statutory intervention) being documented by agencies before and after Ellie went to live with her parents, the effect of the court judgment and exoneration, combined with the parents, refusal of any voluntary engagement with support services, meant that no intervention that might have made a difference was possible," the serious case review states.

Christine Davies, independent chair of Sutton's local safeguarding children board, said the family court's decision to clear Ben Butler of harming Ellie in 2007, combined with its subsequent order for agencies to be sent a letter to that effect, had a "very significant impact" on how agencies could protect Ellie and her sibling.

"Ben Butler's exoneration and the judge's statement about him being a victim of a miscarriage of justice had the effect of handing all power to the parents," she said.

"This, coupled with the assessment made by Services For Children to support Ellie and her sibling to be cared for by their parents were critical factors."

The SCR also states that, in line with statutory guidance, all agencies were asked to provide an independent management review of their involvement in the case. The judiciary declined - supplying family court judgments instead.

"It was not possible for the serious case review to gain greater insight into the decisions of the family court, as the judiciary did not provide an independent management review of its involvement," Davies said.

Justice Hogg retired shortly before Ben Butler's murder trial began.

CYP Now Digital membership

  • Latest digital issues
  • Latest online articles
  • Archive of more than 60,000 articles
  • Unlimited access to our online Topic Hubs
  • Archive of digital editions
  • Themed supplements

From £15 / month

Subscribe

CYP Now Magazine

  • Latest print issues
  • Themed supplements

From £12 / month

Subscribe