Semina Halliwell Inquest: Day Five

Day five - Semina Halliwell inquest – Friday 17 January

A summary of evidence heard during the inquest into the tragic death of 12-year-old Semina Halliwell in Southport in 2021 at Bootle Town Hall.

BRENDA JONES – FORMER EARLY HELP WORKER AT SEFTON COUNCIL

Ms Jones said she was experienced at working with troubled families and had first become aware of Semina in August 2020 when the Halliwell family was allocated to her. She said her role was to offer emotional support for Semina’s mum Rachel and the younger children in the family following reports of domestic incidents involving Semina’s older brother.

In terms of other support she said at the time she was aware Semina was under the support of CAMHS (Child and Adolescents Mental Health Service). She said she wasn’t given any information about Semina’s medical condition at the time, just about the situation at home.

She said she spoke to Rachel and they had a conversation about what Rachel needed from Early Help and what emotional support she needed. She said at that time she was able to offer her counselling and speak to the siblings to see how they were feeling.

She said upon meeting Semina she found her to be a happy, jolly 12 year-old child and she did not notice anything different or of concern with her.

When asked if she noticed a difference in Semina in October 2020 she said Semina continued to be happy and when she visited the family home Semina would be watching TV and eating snacks. She said it was a generally happy family home and Semina had not come across as sad or unhappy.

She said she had received information from mum that Semina was self-harming and that her school attendance was poor.

She said a collaborative action plan had been put in place involving Early Help, mum and the school which had been updated when Semina was given her autism diagnosis.

Ms Jones said she had been absent from work in January 2021 with Covid and the next appointment was when the children returned to school. She said she called the school to arrange a meeting with Semina.

She said meetings which had been due to take place in late February and early March had been cancelled because mum Rachel was unwell but she said they continued to communicate through texts and telephone calls.

In relation to March 2021 (when the sexual offence allegation came to light) Ms Jones said she had been notified, when she returned from annual leave in April, by her manager that an incident had happened and for her to give Rachel a call.

She said she had spoken at length with Rachel about finding out about the incident with Semina in the wooded area (the alleged sexual assault) and Rachel going round to the alleged offender’s house with a baseball bat and being very angry.

She said she had gone to see Semina at school the following week. She said when she met her she looked happy and they had spoken about positive relationships, friendships and peers. She said they had discussed kindness and friends and what a loyal friend was and said Semina had a very good grasp of what a good friend would do or not do.

When asked if she had spoken to Semina about the incident in the wooded area she said she had asked Semina about the incident and Semina had asked ‘which incident?’ which had left Ms Jones taken aback.

She said Semina had gone on to tell her about having a boy in her bedroom (and having sex with him). Ms Jones said she did not use the word consensual but broke it down and asked her if it was something she had wanted to do rather than being forced to do it. She said Semina was open and honest and it was something she had wanted to happen and she was not forced.

She said they had also spoke about another young boy asking her for a kiss earlier in the year which she had not wanted to do. She said Semina had said she had not wanted any interaction with him sexually and that she was frightened.

Ms Jones said after they spoke she spoke to Semina’s mum. She said the matter had then been escalated to the MASH (multi-agency safeguarding hub team) and she had spoken to them about what she had heard from Semina and her mum.

She said it was then her job to continue to support the family until a decision was made whether to step the matter up to social care or stay with Early Help. She said she continued supporting the family until January 2022.

When asked by Miss Johnson, representing the family if she had experience working with children with ASD (autism spectrum disorder) she said she had and agreed that ASD could present differently depending on the person.

When asked if Semina would shutdown from conversations Ms Jones said then when meeting the family if the questions were not directed at her (Semina) she would walk away.

She said she was aware of the incidents involving Semina’s older brother and the school attendance and that the impact should be considered as a factor when looking at her vulnerability and needs. In light of lockdown restrictions during Covid she said she agreed face-to-face meetings were better for Semina.

She said during a period of illness in January 2021 when Ms Jones had been off work her case was not assigned to anyone else.

She said she could not recall the school sharing info about Semina sending naked images to another student.

When asked if the sending of the image was evidence of sexualised behaviour she said that she would see it a sign of immature behaviour but she agreed in the context of the photos being sent 14 days after the alleged sexual assault involving Semina that it could be.

When asked if she was aware the CAMHS worker had not seen Semina following the sexual assault allegation she said no and agreed it would have concerned and surprised her. She said if she had known that she would have stepped it up to the Rainbow Centre (a sexual offences referral centre at Alder Hey) and spoke to her manager to see how they could support Semina.

She said she had not been made aware of the earlier incident of Semina taking prescription medication but agreed that it was a significant indicator of risk.

JENNIFER JOHNSON – SOCIAL CARE, SEFTON COUNCIL

Miss Johnson said she was part of a very busy team which included a team manager and five social workers.

She said at the time each social worker would have been responsibility for at least 20 children.

When asked if there was sufficient number of social workers she said there was ‘never enough’ to do the job and they do the best they can with the resources they have.

She said Early Help would make a referral if there were safeguarding concerns and the multi-agency safeguarding hub (MASH) would triage it to see if the referral went through to Social Care or stayed with Early Help.

She said having a trainee social worker was fairly common practice and that Semina’s social worker Lucy Barnes had been a year three trainee on her final placement before qualifying as a social worker. She said Lucy was a good match to work with Semina as she had the time to build a relationship with her.

She said she would have supervised Lucy together with a team manager and if any concerns had been raised about Lucy and the work she was doing she would have been able to check with Ms Johnson or any of the social workers who could support her.

She said Brenda Jones (Early Help worker) had gone with Lucy, even though she was not a social worker, to visit the Halliwell family because Ms Jones had a pre-existing relationship with the family and could reassure them. She said it was best practice rather than a stranger the family had never met.

She said in relation to the allegation of sexual assault she believed mum had safeguarding in place and CAMHS and the school were already involved in supporting Semina and there was no need to escalate it as there was no risk in the home and they believed the support was adequate at that time.

She said Lucy had been allocated to Semina’s case in April 2021 and she was her supervisor. When asked what supervision looked like she said it involved fortnightly allocated one-to-one meetings where they could talk about the children and have reflective discussion. She said Lucy would call her when she needed anything or there was anything she was unsure about and that they all brought their expertise to the role.

When asked if she thought Lucy was experienced enough to deal with a case as complex as Semina’s Miss Johnson said she held her decision that Miss Barnes was the most appropriate. She said there were no safeguarding at that point and it was about an assessment of need.

She said Lucy had visited the family on 8 June 2021 but she had tried not to discuss past events as she had wanted to keep it as positive as possible and what Semina to think positively and not worry about what was happening.

She said there were no direct safeguarding concerns raised by Lucy about Semina that day. She said she had been quiet but that there had been a lot going on.

She said Social Services had not been made aware of Semina taking prescription medication tablets in March 2021 or about the indecent images being circulated at school.

Miss Johnson, for the family, asked that because of the number of factors in Semina’s case whether there should have been a child action plan and she said no.

She said individual factors needed to be unpicked and supported and the plan was it for to be in the least intrusive way.

She said believed there was parental safeguarding in the home, that CAMHS were aware and working with Semina and that the support plan was no different than it would have been if Semina had been the subject of a child protection plan.

She said a child and family assessment had been completed by 27 May but had not been authorised due to manager’s availability and that the outcome had been a child in need plan.

In relation to a VPRF completed on 8 June Miss Johnson, for the family, said reference had been made to suicide and was asked if in that case she would expect it to be sent to social care and she said at times there were delays in reports being sent. She said if she had received the report she would have triaged it and asked the duty social worker to go out and visit the child.

When asked by Mr Weston, representing Sefton Council, what the advantages would be of having a child in need plan over a child protection plan she agreed it was a signal to parents that they (social care) wanted to work with them. She agreed a child protection plan could be seen as a hostile step and could make matters worse.

She said every family had a right to a private life and they (social care) always wanted to work with families and not against them.

The inquest resumes on Monday 20 January.