The murder of 13-month-old Preston Davey is a case that begins with brutality but does not end there. It extends into the institutions that assessed, approved, and ultimately placed him into the care of the man who killed him.
Disgraced paedophile Jamie Varley, has been sentenced to a whole life order for murder and sexual abuse – including 13 counts of taking indecent photos or videos of a defenceless child entrusted to him by the state. His 32-year-old partner, McGowan-Fazakerley, was sentenced to 25 years after being found guilty of sexual assault, child cruelty, and allowing Preston’s death.
Baby Preston was placed with the “gay couple” within weeks of first meeting them. That speed was striking. It suggests not a cautious, child-centred process, but one that may have prioritised momentum over depth. In safeguarding, haste is not efficiency; it is risk.
Genesis 1:27-28 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Support NCCSS / Christian Voice →
Timeline of Preston’s life
Preston Davey was born four weeks early, weighing 5lb 7oz, to Sarah Davey at Wythenshawe Hospital, south Manchester on 16 June 2022. Five days later, the newborn was placed into emergency care with foster parents by Oldham Council via an interim care order, where he remains for the first nine months of his life.
On the 6th of January 2023, Jamie Varley, a former teacher and John McGowan-Fazakerley, were approved for adoption by Adoption Now, a company “providing services” to local councils. By the 13th February 2023, Varley and McGowan-Fazakerley made their first visit to see Preston at his foster parents’ home. Precisely the 1st of April 2023, he was taken into care with the men.
Barely six days later, The former teacher texts his sister, a baby sleep trainer, saying: “He’s dead meat today. Didn’t sleep last night after 11.30. Up every, one and a half hours.”
You would think the term “dead meat would raise suspicions, but no. Whatever happened behind closed doors continued till 25 May 2023 at 11.10am, when Preston was reported to have been rushed to Blackpool Victoria Hospital, floppy and unresponsive, with Varley reporting a seizure and breathing difficulties.
Nursing staff notice bruising to Preston’s head. A medical report states that Preston had “unexplained injuries, inconsistent with a version of events given”.
Hospital safeguarding are informed, and social services and Lancashire Police are called. It’s eventually decided that the bruises to a baby learning to walk are not regarded as suspicious.
Mr. Varley and McGowan-Fazakerley took Preston Davey to Blackpool Victoria Hospital on 30 June 2023 with symptoms including a rash, diarrhoea, vomiting and a high temperature, although bruising was also noted by medics. A home video was shown to explain the bruising, but it was later found to have been filmed 12 days earlier, while Varley remarked: “You lot are going to think we have been abusing him or something.”
Preston was taken back to hospital on 6 July with a fractured elbow, which Varley said had happened while placing him in his cot the night before. After an X-ray, he was put in a cast, and a social worker texted Varley to say there were “absolutely no concerns”, before later visiting the home and noting the child’s sad demeanour. The following day, an independent reviewer visited Preston, and that same week Varley told a colleague he was having “dark thoughts” about drowning or suffocating the child.
By 23 July, Mr. Varley had taken a series of photographs showing Preston in a deeply disturbing state, apparently asleep or unconscious and partially suspended in his cot. Four days later, he recorded a 35-second video of Preston in severe respiratory distress. Preston was later taken to hospital in a critical condition, with Varley claiming he had found him submerged in the bath, but he was pronounced dead at 7.18pm after attempts to resuscitate him failed.
Targets, pressure, and institutional failure
At the centre of this case sits Adoption Now, an agency operating across five local authorities. Its internal targets required the approval of 100 adopters per year, a figure it consistently failed to meet. Yet despite falling numbers, the pressure remained.
Targets of this kind shape behaviour. When social workers operate under numerical expectations, the careful exercise of professional judgement can be eroded. Approval risks becoming an outcome to achieve rather than a conclusion reached through caution.
The agency’s performance reflects this emphasis on speed. Adoption Now ranked highly for matching children quickly, with a significant proportion placed within three months. Preston’s case appears to have moved even faster.
In modern Britain, where there have been deeply troubling and well-documented cases of children suffering serious abuse including within their own families, it is reasonable to ask whether safeguarding standards are always being applied with sufficient rigour when children are placed in alternative homes. Why are children put in homes of two “gay men” who by themselves have created an idea of what family means? Why in Heaven’s sake should this be allowed in the first place?
Psalm 127:3-4 Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord: and the fruit of the womb is his reward…As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth.
Sign our petition for freedom
and against woke laws →
Lancashire Police statement
Detective Chief Inspector Andy Fellows of Lancashire Police delivered statements following sentencing, including a statement from Preston’s biological mother, Sarah Davey.
She said: “Preston Paul Arlo Davey was perfect from the moment he was born. The second he was placed in my arms, I fell completely in love with him.
“He was my baby, my son. And from that day on, I never wanted to let him go.
“For the first seven months of his life, I was lucky enough to spend precious time with him. He had the most beautiful smile, one that could light up any room.
“Those memories should have brought me comfort, but instead they are now mixed with pain because I know what they put him through in his final moments.
“He was defenceless. He relied entirely on them. The adults responsible for him to love him, care for him and keep him safe.
“Instead, they caused him suffering. They took away his chance to grow up, to go to school, to make friends, to live a full life. They took everything from him.”
Professor Julie Selwyn’s assessment
Professor Julie Selwyn, emeritus professor of education and adoption at the University of Oxford, offered a stark assessment of the pressures within the system.
She described Adoption Now as “an agency under pressure”.
She warned that the target to approve 100 adopters a year was “very unhelpful”.
She also criticised Adoption Now’s target of placing 60 per cent of children “in house” with its own approved adopters to avoid paying an inter-agency fee, saying it was misguided because there was no overall cost difference to the taxpayer.
“Setting targets isn’t helpful,” she said. “When you place a child, the placement should always be the one that meets the child’s needs, not the cheapest placement.”
Its 2023–24 report stated that there had been “three allegations made against Adoption Now adopters”, describing this as “an unusually high number within one year”.
However, it concluded that the incidents, including a child injury deemed accidental and a separate substantiated harm case, “were entirely unrelated and had very different elements to them”.
Reflecting on this, she added that such cases “should be raising some concerns to see if there is a pattern, or if there is anything that links them.”
Financial incentives and misplaced priorities
The 2022 DfE review reported industry concerns that financial incentives to prioritise agencies’ own adopters led to matches that felt “pushed or forced”.
The pressures were not only numerical but financial. Adoption Now pursued a policy of placing 60 per cent of children “in house” with its own approved adopters, avoiding inter-agency fees.
While this may appear efficient, it introduces a clear risk. When cost-saving becomes embedded in decision-making, placements may be shaped by convenience rather than suitability.
The Department for Education’s 2022 review warned that such incentives could lead to placements being “pushed or forced”. That concern is not theoretical; it reflects recognised weaknesses within the system.
In this case, the warning carries weight. If decisions were influenced, even indirectly, by targets or financial considerations, then the system failed in its primary duty to the child.
Warning signs that were not taken seriously
Adoption Now’s own reporting raises further concern. In 2023–24, it acknowledged an unusually high number of serious allegations involving adopters, including Preston’s murder.
Despite this, the incidents were treated as isolated and not indicative of broader issues. That judgement is difficult to defend. Cases of this severity demand scrutiny, not reassurance.
This points to a deeper institutional weakness: a reluctance to recognise patterns when they are uncomfortable or inconvenient. Such an approach does not simply fail to learn lessons. It risks allowing the same failures to persist.
Ideology, recruitment, and the child’s needs
Alongside these operational pressures, the agency was actively seeking to expand recruitment among specific demographic groups, including “LGBT” applicants and single men. Yes single men.
Recruitment in itself is not the issue. The critical question is whether those efforts were aligned with the needs of children awaiting placement.
The Department for Education’s review highlighted a disconnect in this area, with agencies recruiting broadly while struggling to match children appropriately. The question remains pressing: why recruit adopters who do not meet the identified needs of children?
When recruitment becomes an objective in itself, the focus shifts. Assessment risks becoming about eligibility within a campaign rather than suitability for a vulnerable child.
That is not a neutral change. It alters the priorities of the system in ways that carry real consequences.
“Sick to my stomach”
Singer Ellie Goulding spoke publicly following the sentencing, expressing shock and anger after learning the details of the case.
She said she felt both heartbreak and fury. She also revealed that the case had left her unable to sleep.
“I am absolutely sick to my stomach hearing about the story of Preston Davy,” she wrote. I have lost sleep and cried. I’ve never said this before about anyone (somehow) but I wish nothing but horrible, horrible things for JAMIE VARLEY and his partner John. Evil, evil human beings.
“I hope their new inmates are aware of their crimes.”
Ms.Goulding continued: “That helpless child was completely failed by the adoption agency.
“Never ever can anything close to this happen again. Truly despicable.”
The moral failure at the heart of the case
At its core, this is not only a policy failure but a moral one. A child who depended entirely on adults for protection was placed into a situation where he was subjected to unimaginable harm.
His mother’s words make that reality stark. Preston was “perfect from the moment he was born”, a child who should have been surrounded by care and security. Instead, those entrusted with his life destroyed it.
No system can justify such an outcome by pointing to targets, “diversity initiatives”, or administrative processes. The only meaningful measure is whether the child was protected.
In this case, he was not.
Previous Articles
Paedophile Exposed: Are Nurseries Safe? →
Suicide: Family and foster parents at odds over 15-year-old’s funeral arrangements →
Defend Freedom for ‘Conversion Therapy’ →
Who is defying the Supreme Court’s biological realities ? →
Nicola Sturgeon admits to being ‘part of problem on trans issues’ →
Kemi Badenoch warns of a ‘new form of conversion therapy’ →
Gay Conversion Therapy ban? Here come the Thought Police →
NHS to Fast-track Surgery for ‘Trans’ Patients →
Government Sits on “Trans” Guidance →
Read and pray
READ: Gen 1:27; Gen 1:27; Exod 20:13; Lev 19:32;Deut 6:6-7 Deut 30:19; 1 Sam 2:3; 2Sam 23:3; Psalm 82:3–4; Prov 14:12, 31:8–9; Isa 1:17
PRAY: Pray for the soul of baby Preston.
Thank God for the court verdict.
Pray that the Lord will judge every single person complicit one way or another.
Pray that the Lord will raise up humble, God-fearing, honest, truthful, capable men with courage to lead us.
Pray our leaders must turn away from the current Establishment death-wish and proclaim the King of kings of our Christian constitution.
Let us know what YOU think in the comments below.
Support us!
We appreciate your support; it enables our research and helps us inform your prayers.
So click below to support Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings
Click on the social media links below to share this post:
