Crime

Defendant denies causing injuries to two-month-old baby

Published

1 month ago

December 2, 2025

Christopher Phillips explains “rattle” incident during questioning

CHRISTOPHER PHILLIPS, the 28-year-old man accused of sexually assaulting and causing serious physical harm to a two-month-old baby in January 2021, continued giving evidence before the jury this morning (Tuesday). Phillips repeatedly denied causing any injury to the infant — referred to in court as Baby C — and insisted he had never harmed him physically or sexually.

Phillips is on trial alongside the baby’s mother, who cannot be named for legal reasons, who is charged with causing or allowing serious physical harm. Both defendants deny the allegations.

Relationship and childcare involvement

Phillips told the court he met the baby’s mother on Tinder when the child was about two weeks old. He said his involvement in caring for the infant increased after Christmas 2020 but was limited to occasional help with feeding, bathing and nappy changing. He said the mother was “95 per cent of the time” present when he undertook any care tasks.

He said he first saw bright red blood in the baby’s nappy around 12 January 2021, which he attributed to constipation and a possible haemorrhoid, saying he recognised the condition because he suffered from them himself.

On the night of 23–24 January, Phillips said he changed the baby’s nappy three times. At around 22:17, he took a photograph of blood in the nappy and sent it to the mother, who was in the living room, explaining he thought it might be useful if she needed to show a doctor. He told the jury the baby’s anus “did not look injured” during any of the changes.

Sex toys and pornography

The jury were shown photographs of a number of sexual items recovered from a drawer beside the bed. Phillips confirmed that several of the items — including anal beads, butt plugs, an inflatable anal device, lubricant and a bottle of amyl nitrate (“poppers”) — belonged to him.

He accepted that he and the mother had engaged in anal play using toys, though he said there had never been penile-anal intercourse. He acknowledged viewing anal pornography and said he had deleted some search history and intimate photographs from his phone out of “embarrassment”.

The “rattle” incident

Phillips also admitted an incident involving one of the baby’s rattles. He said that after “mucking around” with the mother on the sofa, he picked up the rattle from the floor, mistaking its shape for a sex toy:

“I picked it up and began to press it against my anus, but never actually inserted it.”

He described the moment as “a moment of jocularity”.

After the prosecution concluded its questioning, John Hipkin KC, began a forceful cross-examination.

Hipkin KC put it to Phillips that the significant anal injury later identified in hospital could only have been caused by one of the two adults present in the flat that night.

He highlighted that Phillips had changed the baby’s nappy three times without noticing any injury and questioned him about his detailed knowledge of anal lubrication, dilation and the use of fingers before larger objects.

Hipkin KC suggested Phillips had used Sudocrem as a lubricant to insert a finger into the baby on or around 15 January, and again on the night of 23–24 January. Phillips denied this repeatedly: “Absolutely not.”

Phillips said he left the flat shortly before 03:00am on 24 January with the baby “settled and quiet”. He also denied deleting any material involving the baby from his phone.

Observations about the mother

Asked about the co-defendant’s care of the child, Phillips described her as “a loving mother”, though he recalled two occasions he found unusual: one where she placed the baby down “hard and fast” into the cot while tired, and another where she sat staring at a wall for around 20 seconds while holding him.

Clear denials

Phillips ended his evidence by telling the jury: “I absolutely did not harm Baby C physically or sexually.”

The trial continues this afternoon (Tuesday, Nov 2) before His Honour Judge Paul Thomas KC.

Crime

Pembroke Dock man fined for harassment offence

Published

1 minute ago

January 12, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Guilty plea entered at Haverfordwest Magistrates’ Court

A PEMBROKE DOCK man has been fined after admitting a harassment offence.

Ryan Winterford, aged 33, of Cuckoo Wood, Pembroke Dock, appeared before Haverfordwest Magistrates’ Court on Monday (Jan 12) where he pleaded guilty to a single charge of harassment without violence.

The offence, contrary to section 2 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, was committed on December 25, 2025.

Winterford entered his guilty plea at the first hearing, and the conviction was formally recorded by the court on Monday.

Magistrates imposed a fine of £153 and ordered Winterford to pay prosecution costs to the Crown Prosecution Service.

Crime

Man admits harassment, assault and sharing intimate image

Published

3 minutes ago

January 12, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Guilty pleas entered at Haverfordwest Magistrates’ Court

A MAN with no fixed address has admitted a series of offences including harassment, assault, and sharing an intimate image without consent.

Brandon Pugh, aged 26, appeared before Haverfordwest Magistrates’ Court on Monday (Jan 12) where he pleaded guilty to three separate offences committed in Pembrokeshire last autumn.

The court heard that on October 30, 2025, Pugh carried out harassment without violence, contrary to section 2 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

He also admitted assault by beating, an offence under section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, committed on November 6, 2025.

In addition, Pugh pleaded guilty to sharing a photograph or film of a person in an intimate state without their consent, an offence under section 33 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, also committed on November 6, 2025.

All three guilty pleas were entered on December 23, 2025, and were taken into account by the court when sentence was passed.

As part of the outcome, Pugh was ordered to pay £200 in compensation. He was also ordered to pay costs to the Crown Prosecution Service.

Crime

Lammy defends curbs on jury trials amid Labour backlash

Published

26 minutes ago

January 12, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Justice secretary says reforms are needed to tackle court delays as senior MP threatens by-election

JUSTICE SECRETARY David Lammy has defended plans to restrict the use of jury trials, arguing the changes are necessary to reduce growing delays and “save the criminal justice system”, as opposition mounts within Labour ranks.

The proposals, which would remove the automatic right to a jury trial for offences carrying a likely prison sentence of three years or less, have sparked a rebellion from backbench MPs and concern among parts of the legal profession.

Speaking on Monday (Jan 12), Mr Lammy said the Crown Court backlog in England and Wales — now standing at around 80,000 cases — could not be cleared without significant reform. He said the measures were designed to ensure the system was “fit for purpose” and capable of delivering justice more quickly for victims and defendants alike.

Mr Lammy recently visited Canada to examine its use of judge-only trials, where many criminal cases are heard without a jury. He said the approach had operated there for decades and was “very normal”, adding that in some cases defendants preferred being tried by a single judge.

He said he was open to a “sunset clause” that would make the changes temporary, allowing Parliament to review their impact. He said he hoped the backlog would be significantly reduced by 2029, ahead of the next general election, and cleared entirely by the mid-2030s.

However, the plans have triggered a fierce response from Labour MP Karl Turner, a former shadow attorney general and practising criminal barrister. Mr Turner has warned he would consider resigning from Parliament to force a by-election unless the proposals are dropped.

Breaking the Labour whip for the first time since entering the Commons in 2010, Mr Turner sided with the Conservatives in a protest vote against the reforms. He accused the Government of undermining a cornerstone of the justice system and told Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, himself a former director of public prosecutions, that he “ought to be ashamed”.

In interviews with The Sunday Times and Times Radio, Mr Turner said he was “completely ashamed” of the proposals and claimed Mr Lammy had been misled by civil servants pushing for long-standing changes.

He also warned that a by-election in his Hull East seat, which he won with a majority of 3,920 in 2024, could be vulnerable to Reform UK.

Despite the growing unease on the Labour benches, the Government is expected to press ahead with legislation, insisting the reforms are essential to prevent further delays and restore confidence in the criminal courts.