Harrowing call to police by Grantham mother Daniela Espirito Santo played to Lincoln inquest into her death
A mother revealed she had been sleeping on her sofa for two years in a 40-minute call to police operators about the abuse she was being subjected to.
Two of Daniela Espírito Santo’s calls to police were played to the jury inquest today (Wednesday), including a short one where she hung up on Boxing Day in 2019, and a longer phone conversation between her and the operator on December 29.
The inquest is being held into her death at her home on Chestnut Grove, in Grantham, on April 9, 2020, hours after an assault by her partner, Julio Jesus.
In the first call, on December 26, Daniela can be heard telling a phone operator: “I want to report an assault.”
The operator tries to transfer her through to another service, but the call ends.
The second call, on December 29, lasted just over 40 minutes. It begins with Daniela, who can be heard holding back tears or crying at times, asking: “What happens if I report someone for assault?”
The operator explains that the police will “take it very seriously because it’s domestic violence”.
Daniela then goes on to tell the operator about how domestic abuse had been “happening for a while”, noting that police had attended on previous occasions.
“He says it wasn’t his fault, I was the one who tripped,” she tells him.
The operator makes continued efforts to reassure Daniela that the police are there to help, telling her not to “worry about what Mr Jesus says, because he’s only just trying to cover his back”.
The National Domestic Violence Helpline is a 24hr Freephone available on 0808 2000 247 operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
She further expresses fears that Mr Jesus would attempt to blame her, which the operator says “he might do, but that’s not the case” before urging her to stay strong. Later, they call her “brave” for reporting the situation.
Daniela tells the operator about an incident on Christmas Day, when she said that during an argument, she had attempted to stop Mr Jesus from leaving.
She then described him being “in her face” before grabbing her arm and “pushing it” into her throat.
“He got hold of my whole body and was squeezing me,” she says. “To the point where I brought all my food back… it hurts to breathe.
“He grabbed me and chucked me further into the corridor so I wouldn’t be near the door.”
Then, in a further incident the following day, she described how Mr Jesus held her from behind in what she called a “bear hug,” pulling her away from the kitchen sink, after which Daniela fell and hit her head on a kitchen pillar, resulting in blurred vision and a headache.
She said he had claimed it was her fault they fell, adding: “I said it was because he was trying to get me away from that specific spot.”
She goes on to accept that domestic abuse-type behaviour had happened from the very start, but describes how, in each incident, Mr Jesus would leave, only to come home later “crying like a baby” and begging for forgiveness.
She also told the operator how he would stay close to her during these times, even sitting on the arm of the sofa and continually touching or trying to hug her when she wanted space away from him.
The inquest has previously heard how Daniela had reportedly considered splitting up from Mr Jesus on a number of occasions.
During the call, the operator continues to reassure Daniela that these are things the police need to know about.
To those outside the relationship looking in, she explained that everything appeared fine, and Daniela expressed fears that no-one in her family would believe her or would question if she had done anything. She said she had been told not to say anything and to let Mr Jesus calm down.
“Why should I have to shut up? Why?” she asks the operator.
She told the operator about instances when Mr Jesus had said that because his family were in Portugal “we’re the only family he’s got, so why would he want to lose that?”
She also said: “He said before that if I did anything he would never have contact again, he would just walk.”
She also noted that she didn’t go out without Mr Jesus, especially since the birth of their second child, due to struggles getting pushchairs downstairs from her second-floor flat.
She said she didn’t “go to the café anymore, I never socialise with anyone.”
Daniela then tells the operator that for two-and-a-half years, she has slept mainly on the sofa, even during her pregnancy, due to fears of him waking up or that he was making strange noises.
The jury had heard previously how Mr Jesus was reportedly spending money on drugs, including speed (amphetamine) and weed (cannabis), and Daniela said he would often wake up from those, and she was worried about the impact it would have on her child.
“The sofa has been dented from where I lie there and sit there,” she said.
“When I had the baby, I slept in the bed for three nights but moved back because I didn’t want the crying to wake him up.”
She explained that when she tried to talk to him or explain her frustrations, Mr Jesus would often just walk out.
The jury had previously heard of incidents in which Mr Jesus was reported missing by Daniela.
She said he sometimes went away for a night or two, and sometimes it was a much shorter time before returning and asking her to forgive him.
“He comes back and cries like a baby and hugs the children and I just forgive him,” she says.
Daniela appeared to try to defend Mr Jesus on a number of occasions, saying he is a “good father” to their children, and also panicking that if he is arrested, he might lose his job—suggesting that she feared being unable to support her children.
The operator responds: “He’s not a good father if he’s treating you like that.”
At the end of the call, the operator advised Daniela to call the police on 999 if he returned and to lock the door.
During the second day of the inquest, the jury also heard from further officers involved in attending previous calls on November 6, 2019, as well as an inspector who oversaw the response to Daniela’s call on December 29.
The incidents were previously discussed on the first day of the inquest on Tuesday.
Several officers have now confirmed that they recalled no “formal” or “practical” training on coercive and controlling behaviour—an offence which came into force in 2015.
However, they said they made decisions based on the information in front of them at the time.
Family counsel solicitors asked officers about a number of risk indicators they suggested were not fully considered during DASH (Domestic Abuse, Stalking and Harassment) reports carried out when police responded to incidents.
These include previous assault reports, drug abuse, jealousy, isolation, and financial issues related to drugs.
They have also been questioning why Independent Persons or referalls to Domestic Abuse organisations had not been made.
Officers have been questioned on why they did not include a previous incident in May 2019 during the November 6 incident.
It was also revealed that a safeguarding referral was made to Children’s Services on November 7 after officers submitted a “medium” risk DASH assessment.
Sgt Alex Taylor, a police constable at the time, told the inquest he had overwritten an AI prompt to label the risk as “standard” at the time, a decision which was supported by Sgt David Gordon, who oversaw the decision.
The PC who responded to the December 29 call is due to appear before the inquest on a later date to explain his actions, including why he graded the incident as “standard” risk, despite a previous “medium” risk being presented in November.
Emma-Louise Fenelon, the family’s counsel, described the assessment today as “wholly inadequate,” noting that many aspects of the call to the police were not present within it.
Inspector Jonathan Birkin, from Lincolnshire Police—the officer who signed off on the report—defended the decision today, acknowledging that the DASH report “could have been better” when asked if it could have been more comprehensive.
However, he defended the decision not to push for the arrest or for a Domestic Violence Protection Notice due to the length of time since the incident and previous experiences with the Crown Prosecution Service around decisions to act on common assault cases—in particular, as Daniela had again made no official complaint.
The inquest continues.
