A WOMAN who stabbed her partner during a drug-fuelled episode walked straight into Haverfordwest Police Station and told officers what she had done, Swansea Crown Court has heard.

Amy Woolston, 22, of Dartmouth Street in Milford Haven, arrived at the station at around 8:00pm on June 13 and said: “I stabbed my ex-partner earlier… he’s alright and he let me walk off,” prosecutor Tom Scapens told the court.

The pair had taken acid together earlier in the day, and Woolston claimed she believed she could feel “stab marks in her back” before the incident.

Police find victim with four wounds

Officers went to the victim’s home to check on him. He was not there at first, but returned shortly afterwards. He appeared sober and told police: “Just a couple of things,” before pointing to injuries on his back.

He had three stab or puncture wounds to his back and another to his bicep.

The victim said that when he arrived home from the shop, Woolston was acting “a bit shifty”. After asking if she was alright, she grabbed something from the windowsill — described as either a knife or a shard of glass — and stabbed him.

He told officers he had “had worse from her before”, did not support a prosecution, and refused to go to hospital.

Defendant has long history of violence

Woolston pleaded guilty to unlawful wounding. The court heard she had amassed 20 previous convictions from 10 court appearances, including assaults, battery, and offences against emergency workers.

Defending, Dyfed Thomas said Woolston had longstanding mental health problems and had been off medication prescribed for paranoid schizophrenia at the time.
“She’s had a difficult upbringing,” he added, saying she was remorseful and now compliant with treatment.

Woolston was jailed for 12 months, but the court heard she has already served the equivalent time on remand and will be released imminently on a 12-month licence.

A MILFORD HAVEN woman has been handed a lengthy driving ban after admitting driving with a controlled drug in her system more than ten times over the legal limit.

SENTENCED AT HAVERFORDWEST

Sally Allen, 43, of Wentworth Close, Hubberston, appeared before Haverfordwest Magistrates’ Court on Thursday (Dec 4) for sentencing, having pleaded guilty on November 25 to driving with a proportion of a specified controlled drug above the prescribed limit.

The court heard that Allen was stopped on August 25 on the Old Hakin Road at Tiers Cross while driving an Audi A3. Blood analysis showed 509µg/l of Benzoylecgonine, a breakdown product of cocaine. The legal limit is 50µg/l.

COMMUNITY ORDER AND REHABILITATION

Magistrates imposed a 40-month driving ban, backdated to her interim disqualification which began on November 25.

Allen was also handed a 12-month community order, requiring her to complete 10 days of rehabilitation activities as directed by the Probation Service.

She was fined £120, ordered to pay £85 prosecution costs and a £114 surcharge. Her financial penalties will be paid in £25 monthly instalments from January 1, 2026.

The bench—Mrs H Roberts, Mr M Shankland and Mrs J Morris—said her guilty plea had been taken into account when passing sentence.

Court hears from timid mother who was barely audible in the witness box who said she carried out no checks to establish whether Phillips was safe to be around her child

A MOTHER who cannot be named for legal reasons gave evidence yesterday in the trial of Christopher Phillips, the man accused of physically and sexually assaulting her infant son – referred to as Baby C – and causing him life-changing injuries in January 2021.

Phillips, 37 at the time, had been in a relationship with the mother for only a few weeks when Baby C, then around 10 weeks old, suffered catastrophic anal injuries at a flat in Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire. The child was rushed to Glangwili Hospital in the early hours of January 24 and survived, but the harm was permanent. Phillips denies 11 counts of sexual penetration of a child under 13, four counts of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, and one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, all between December 20, 2020, and January 25, 2021. The mother denies two charges of causing or allowing a child to suffer serious physical harm and two charges of child cruelty by neglect.

The prosecution alleges that Phillips deliberately inflicted the injuries while alone with the baby during nappy changes, using a finger coated in Sudocrem as lubricant on multiple occasions, leading to escalating harm including blood in the nappies and ultimately a massive tear and prolapse. A central part of their case is that the mother repeatedly allowed Phillips unsupervised access to her son – including taking him into another room to change his nappy and shut the door – despite knowing very little about him and despite behaviour that should have raised alarm, such as his insistence on privacy and her own unease.

Late on Thursday morning (Dec 4), under lengthy and forceful cross-examination by Caroline Rees KC, prosecuting, the mother appeared composed but spoke so quietly and timidly that people in court struggled to hear her answers. She conceded point after point:

• She carried out no checks to establish whether Phillips was safe to be around her child.
• She allowed him to be alone with Baby C from the very start of January 2021 (possibly even before 2 January).
• She ignored her own concerns and permitted Phillips to shut the door while changing the baby’s nappy, telling her not to enter or accusing her of “micromanaging”.
• She accepted that this had exposed her son to “a massive risk” and had been “a terrible idea”.

The mother explained that Phillips had said he wanted to learn nappy-changing because he “never got the chance” with his own child. She initially stayed in the room but soon permitted him to take Baby C into a separate room alone. She also recounted noticing odd details during changes, such as Phillips having Sudocrem around his finger “as if it had come from a pot” – despite her not owning a pot of the cream – and him leaving the room without putting the baby’s babygro back on after fastening the nappy, which immediately struck her as wrong. A few days earlier, she had discovered extensive bruising to the baby’s bottom, a swollen testicle and blood in his nappy, prompting her to confide in family and seek medical advice, though Phillips became angry when she mentioned the appointments.

Key moments from the cross-examination

Caroline Rees KC: “You took no steps whatsoever to keep Baby C safe, did you?” Mother (barely audible): “No.”

Caroline Rees KC: “You did absolutely nothing to keep him safe, did you?” Mother: “No.”

When His Honour Judge Paul Thomas KC asked her to clarify for the jury why she let Phillips change the baby alone, she confirmed:

“I wasn’t allowed in the room. If I tried to go in he would accuse me of micromanaging.”

She said this made her feel “annoyed”, but she “ignored it”.

Caroline Rees KC put it directly to the mother:

• “The signs were all there, weren’t they?”
• “It was a terrible idea, wasn’t it?”
• “You could have stopped it at any time – by doing the changes yourself or by ending the relationship.”
• “This man wanted to have your baby on his own more than is normal.”

The mother eventually accepted each proposition, agreeing that:

• Allowing Phillips to change the baby alone had been “a terrible idea”;
• The warning signs that she should have stopped it were present;
• Phillips’ desire to be alone with her son was greater than normal.

She admitted she had been “keen to have company” and had tolerated behaviour she should never have accepted.

Legal matters will be dealt with tomorrow morning only. Closing speeches are expected to continue into Monday.

The trial continues.