A mum and stepdad who locked their autistic son in an attic where he was found "close to death" have been jailed today
Lorna Hewitt, 43, and her husband Craig, 42, were each sentenced to six years behind bars after they were found guilty of falsely imprisoning Matthew Langley, 22, at their home in Sheffield, South Yorkshire.
Matthew was severely dehydrated and weighed just six stone - or 36 kilos - when he was found inside the vomit and faeces-covered room.
Judge Michael Slater, described Lorna Hewitt's actions as "a grave abuse of trust between a mother and her son" sentencing at Sheffield Crown Court on Friday.
He added: "You were the primary carer for Matthew with all his difficulties and challenges.
"It makes it all the more inexplicable to me that for those seven months you failed to provide him with the support and provision of food and drink that he craved and needed."
The Hewitts had earlier denied keeping Matthew captive at their home for seven months, but a jury found them both guilty.
The couple were also found guilty of causing or allowing a vulnerable adult to suffer serious physical harm.
Matthew was found by paramedics seriously underweight, dehydrated and "with his life hanging in the balance", the court heard.
Nicholas Campbell QC, prosecuting, previously said the ambulance service was called to the home in Sheffield, South Yorks., in the early hours of June 2, 2020.
Matthew was rushed to a hospital intensive care unit in a "pitiable state" with abrasions indicating he had been moving around on all fours, the prosecutor told the court.
He had suffered damage to a kidney with high sodium levels relating to severe dehydration, it was heard.
Mr Campbell added: "His sodium levels were dangerously high. They measured 180.
"They were so high they could shut down his brain and kill him. Anything above 145, there is a real chance of death.
"The Home Office pathologist examined the injuries and said the abrasions and bruises were consistent in his view with Matthew having been crawling on all fours over objects in his path."
When police went into the attic they found faeces and vomit all over the floor and the bedding, and it was swarming with buzzing flies, the court heard.
Police also found a key on the outside of the door, it was said.
Matthew, who has suffered from irritable bowel syndrome, incontinence, arthritis and learning difficulties, had weighed only six stone when he was found, Mr Campbell said.
In November 2019, just seven months prior, he had weighed eight-and-a-half stone, the court heard.
Seven months earlier, in November 2019, he had weighed eight-and-a-half stone, the court heard.
Thanks to the hard of medical professionals, Matthew made a good physical recovery and was discharged from the hospital weights 8.6 stone.
In mitigation, John Harrison, for Lorna Hewitt, read a report from psychologist Rekha Davis that said she was "vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation" and was "easily suggestible".
The report stated, he said: "Given her emotional vulnerability, Mrs Hewitt's capacity to consider the consequences of her actions and decisions is limited."
Miss Tana Adkin QC, representing Mr Craig Hewitt, said there had been a "significant change" in his understanding of what he had done throughout the court proceedings.
She said: "He is devastated about what happened to Mathew. He is not a deliberately cruel man in the sense that the courts see and have seen in the past.
"He is not someone that would punish Matthew for his autism."
However, Judge Slater disagreed with these characterisations as he sentenced the pair behind bars.
Addressing Craig Hewitt, the judge said: "You were complicit equally with wife Lorna Hewitt in care effectively-being switched off to any degree for Matthew as he was locked in his room and starved of food.
"That did not occur by negligence, it did not occur by recklessness.
"It was a plan between the pair of you. I'm quite satisfied that nothing in that household occurred without either you knowing about it or approving of it."
Speaking directly to Lorna Hewitt, he said: "It is argued on your behalf that you were particularly vulnerable and suggestible at the time."
"I had the benefit of observing you give evidence in the trial over the course of several days.
"It did not seem to me that you were not capable of standing up for yourself or that you were particularly suggestible. You were both an articulate, temperate and thoughtful witness."
