[~Kizwiz~]

Shannon Matthews was "drugged to subdue her" after she was kidnapped by her own mother and an accomplice, a jury has been told.

The girl's mother Karen and a man called Michael Donovan have gone on trial accused of kidnapping and falsely imprisoning her.

Prosecutor Julian Goose QC told Leeds Crown Court that Matthews, 33, raised the alarm about her daughter's disappearance on February 19.

But he said: "The 999 call was part of a dishonest - and we say wicked - plan by Michael Donovan and Karen Matthews. Shannon was an innocent victim of the plan.

"She was kidnapped and falsely imprisoned in the flat where Donovan lived. She was drugged to subdue her during the period of her captivity."
Shannon was given Temazepam tablets and travel sickness pills called Traveleeze to keep her quiet, the court heard.

Mr Goose said it was a "reasonable inference" that Donovan had used a strap found tied to a roof beam to restrain Shannon when he left the flat to go shopping.
He said: "It had a large loop at the end which, at full stretch, would reach around most of the flat but not permit anyone who was restrained by it from leaving through the front door."

Matthews sat in the dock alongside Donovan, 40, as Mr Goose outlined the case against them.

Matthews, of Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, and Donovan, from nearby Batley Carr, are both charged with the kidnap and false imprisonment of Shannon, who was nine at the time.

The disappearance sparked a massive search by West Yorkshire Police which became one of the highest-profile missing person inquiries ever seen in Britain.

The prosecutor said the cost of the search was almost £3.2m, and involved more than 300 police officers and even more members of the public.

Mr Goose said the "overwhelming likelihood is that the reason for the plan was dishonestly to obtain the reward money offered by the press" - which at its height was up to £50,000.

He told the jury: "The prosecution's case is that this plan was as dishonest as it was wicked.

"Karen Matthews was using one of her own children in her plan with Donovan to kidnap and falsely imprison her.

"Karen Matthews made impassioned public pleas for the recovery of her daughter, some of those you will see from television recordings shown on national television."

The court was later played the recording of the 999 call made by Matthews to the police in which she sounds upset as she describes her daughter and appeals for help.
Shannon lived with her mother at 24 Moorside Road, Dewsbury Moor.

The other adult living at the address was 22-year-old Craig Meehan, Matthews' boyfriend. Mr Goose said Donovan was Meehan's uncle.

Mr Goose went on: "The prosecution say that Karen Matthews is a consummate and convincing liar.

"Whilst Karen Matthews was misleading the police and the public, Michael Donovan kept Shannon hidden.

"As he was later to tell the police, the plan was to release Shannon in Dewsbury Market and for Donovan to discover her."

Sky News

I find this disgusting

[NettoSuperstar!]

No wonder she had bloody hallucinations! Poor girl

[NettoSuperstar!]

That trial came round quick

[~Kizwiz~]

No wonder she didnt want to go home to her mum!!!!!

[NettoSuperstar!]

No I know, what did happen to her did they put her in care or has the grandparents got her?

[XxShortyxX]

The mum must be sick in the head to do this to her own daughter. I feel so sorry for the girl. (the little girl not the mum)

[NettoSuperstar!]

they tried to get money of the Mcanns aswell dint they! The sickos

[Sticks]

I do not think we should be discussing this here

The Daily Mail version of this story has put at the bottom,

No comments are permitted on this article because legal proceedings are ongoing.

Perhaps, in light of that, this thread should be locked for legal reasons

[Red Moon]

The idea of sub judice is to avoid trial by media where the safeguards of the judicial system are disregarded with dire consequences for the case at hand and the public confidence of the administration of justice.

The practical concern is that trial by media, might affect potential jurors or to a lesser degree witnesses, leading them to make poor judgements or change testimonies, before or during the trial.

Now the question is this, would TiBB be committing contempt of court, by discussing this case. In theory yes it could, however it is extremely unlikely that a site like this would be taken to court. The Daily Mail however are a much bigger fish and have a much bigger readership than TiBB and I feel they are just being careful.

For that reason, I have opened the thread, however when replying to news stories like this remember the accused are just that until a verdict has been reached and under British law they are innocent until proven guilty.

I will bring this matter up in the Towers, and the ultimate judge as to this thread remains open will by Mark who is the one that could end up in court.

Red

[~Kizwiz~]

Just close it

Topic closed at thread starters request - Red