UK trainer denies utilizing adopted child as ‘plaything’ however admits ‘enjoying with genitals’

WARNING, DISTRESSING CONTENT: Jamie Varley, 37, is accused of the murder and sexual abuse of Preston Davey, 13 months, whom he had adopted with his partner John McGowan-Fazakerley

View 5 Images

A teacher accused of the murder and sexual abuse of an adopted baby boy has denied he used him as a “plaything” for his “own amusement and gratification”.

Jamie Varley, 37, is alleged to have regularly sexually, physically and emotionally abused Preston Davey, 13 months, whom he had adopted with his partner John McGowan-Fazakerley. Preston, previously described as happy, healthy and “bubbly”, began living with the defendants at their home in Blackpool, Lancashire, on April 1, 2023, Preston Crown Court has heard.

However, the prosecution alleges that in the four months leading up to his death on July 27, he was routinely mistreated, indecent images and videos were taken of him, and he was sexually abused and physically assaulted, suffering 40 traumatic injuries found during a post-mortem examination.

In cross-examination on Wednesday, prosecutor Peter Wright KC said to Varley: “This little boy was your plaything, wasn’t he?” Varley replied: “You are wrong.” Mr Wright continued: “And you routinely abused him.” Varley repeated: “You are wrong.”

Mr Wright added: “For your own amusement and gratification. “Incorrect,” said Varley. The prosecutor went on: “All of this in a space of less than four months. It went from him coming into your home and leaving it dead, didn’t it?”

The defendant responded: “He did pass away in our care, yes.” Preston was rushed to hospital after suffering a collapse and cardiac arrest, allegedly following a sexual assault by Varley.

Varley informed the police that he had momentarily left the child in the bath and when he returned, the boy was off his bath seat and submerged. However, a post-mortem examination dismissed drowning as the cause of death and identified multiple non-accidental, internal and external injuries.

The cause of Preston’s death was determined to be acute upper airways obstruction, either by smothering or an object or objects inserted into his mouth. Parts of his anatomy were described as “abnormal”, with some injuries consistent with “forcible penetration” and clinical signs of sexual abuse.

Varley maintained that he had never sexually assaulted Preston and refuted Mr Wright’s suggestion that he had obstructed Preston’s airways more than once. Mr Wright stated: “And on the day he died such was the obstruction of his upper airways, caused by you, that he perished. You killed him.” Varley responded: “I have not.”

He then accused the defendant of providing a “wholly false account” about discovering him in the bath and fearing he had drowned. Mr Wright asserted: “I am going to suggest this is all rehearsed. It is all made up by you to conceal what you really did.” Varley retorted: “That’s incorrect.”

The prosecutor suggested: “You thought you would be able to cover it up as a drowning.” Varley replied: “I would be more intelligent, sir, if that was the case. I genuinely thought he had drowned.” In challenging Varley over the numerous inconsistencies in his accounts given at the hospital and to the police, Mr Wright stated: “You have been making it up from the start to the end, haven’t you?”

Varley responded: “I would say it was a very traumatic day, sir. It was the worst day of our lives. I could hardly speak that day. I was all over.” Mr Wright then suggested: “I am going to suggest that when you got to the hospital your apparent state of distress was a complete charade.”

Varley retorted: “That’s not true.” Mr Wright continued: “And your inability then to be able to settle and answer questions was because you were working overtime to come up with an explanation for what you had done to him?

“That is not true,” Varley insisted. Mr Wright proposed: “Buying time to try to think of a way out.” Varley countered: “That’s not correct.”

The defendant denied that subsequent police examination of images on his phone showed he had repeatedly ill-treated the child. Mr Wright suggested that Varley filmed Preston playing with his genitals for “your own sexual gratification”.

Varley refuted: “You are 100% wrong. I found it to be funny. At the time I felt it was fine.” Mr Wright put forward to Varley that by July 2023 his partner also had a sexual interest in Preston. Varley clarified: “John and I don’t have a sexual interest in children.”

Mr Wright asserted: “That little boy was the plaything of both of you, wasn’t he?” “No,” Varley denied. Mr Wright concluded: “And you each ill-treated him, didn’t you?” Varley stated: “No we did not.” Mr Wright questioned: “You were obsessed with this boy in a sexual nature, weren’t you?”

The defendant responded: “You are wrong.” Varley refuted claims that he was “struggling to cope” with Preston, would “lose his temper” and had physically abused the boy. He declared: “I would give anything for that boy.”

Mr Wright accused: “You were abusing this boy, weren’t you?” Varley retorted: “No, we were not. I just know he was in a safe and loving home. He loved us and we loved him.”

Varley denies charges of murder, manslaughter, two counts of assault by penetration, five counts of cruelty to a child, grievous bodily harm, sexual assault of a child, 13 counts of taking indecent photos or videos of a child, one of distributing an indecent photo of a child, to his co-accused, and one of making an indecent photo.

McGowan-Fazakerley, 32, denies charges of allowing the death of a child, three counts of child cruelty and one count of the sexual assault of a child. The trial continues…

For the latest breaking news and stories from across the globe from the Daily Star, sign up for our newsletters.