Here are some excerpts from the Sheriff's determination which have a bearing on various of the discussions above:

"... the accident was caused when Liam picked up an un-terminated electrical power cable and plug from a settee in the living room of the family home and thereafter made his way into the toy room where he plugged that un-terminated power cable into a socket. The socket was either already switched on or alternatively Liam switched it on. Either way, he received an electric shock at a touch voltage of 240 volts because he handled the exposed un-terminated copper conductors with the live wire in one hand and either the neutral or earth wire in the other thereby creating the conditions for a hand to hand electric shock."


"Mr Rough was commissioned to do that work because he was a general handyman. He did electrical, joinery and plumbing work of a general nature for (the landlord)and for other letting agencies. He was not a qualified electrician. His only formal training in electrical work occurred when he took a course in electrical safety when at college. That was between thirty five and forty years before the events that ground this Inquiry. As at February 2009 he had been acting as a handyman for some six years"

"On examination of Liam there were entry and exit wounds on both hands which were consistent with him having sustained an electric shock."

"Liam had burn marks present on both of his hands. The marks were slightly more severe on his left hand. The appearance of the burn marks on both hands exhibited the classic features caused by electrocution. The presence of those marks on both hands was consistent with him having held an electrical wire in both hands with the result that an electrical current passed through his body. The effect of the electrical current passing through his body had caused a massive shock to his heart. This had caused death within seconds before he realised what had happened to him and before he had the opportunity to feel pain."

"I accept the expert evidence of Mr Madden based on his examination of the new cable and plug that Liam grasped the bare wires of the live conductor in one hand and the bare wires of the neutral conductor in the other."

"Liam was aware that a plug inserted into a wall socket could lead to the television in the living room being activated. A short but unspecified time before the day in question, he had started the practice of pulling out plugs from the socket in the living room into which the television was plugged regularly. This practice amused him, which sounds as if he saw this activity as a sort of game, and that even although his mother had told him that it was bad to do that. I consider his state of knowledge about what a plug could achieve to be significant for what happened. Exhibiting the characteristic inquisitiveness of a small boy of his age, he seemed to have developed an interest in electric plugs presumably because of what that might mean for him and, in particular, 1 instance that it could result in him being able to watch television."

"Liam would not have died when, where and how he did if he had been denied access to the new cable and plug once it had been disconnected from the new oven."


I leave the above statements to speak for themselves, except to point out that Liam could just as easily have pulled out the TV plug to insert the unterminated lead.

Let us imagine a theoretical socket cover which was the correct size, and by some means (yet to be discovered) was genuinely child proof. Such a perfect device would only be effective if there were no sockets in the house without one of these plugged in. That means that there can be no TV, phone charger or anything else plugged in. Such a scenario is unlikely to be acceptable in any practical situation, and that fact, of itself, negates the idea that plug-in socket covers will prevent children plugging in appliances.


In my professional capacity I have long been aware that socket covers were unnecessary, and that they can give rise to additional dangers which are not present when they are not used. As a mother I do all that I can to protect my children. I have had the unsettling experience of taking my children to the house of a friend who did use socket covers, and discovering that my (then) 12 month old daughter was perfectly capable or removing a socket cover in seconds (having watched my friend insert the cover after she pulled out a plug!) I was not a happy mummy to find her trying to put it back in, covered in dribble.

The vast majority of the material on the FatallyFlawed web site, including the Liam story, was in place before I became involved with the campaign, however I find myself completely in agreement with both the material and the motives of the founders. That is why I volunteered to assist them. The idea that Liam's misfortune should not be held up as a warning to parents of what can happen if children are allowed access to "dangerous things attached to plugs" is a concept that I find utterly stupid. Liam's death was a pointless tragedy, but at least his memory can serve to alert others.