Did The Covid Jabs Kill Man Utd Player Steve Bruce’s Grandchild?
A hero from my youth – Manchester United defender Steve Bruce – tragically lost a grandchild (Madison Bruce-Smith) to SIDS in October 2024
This post on X about this today caught my eye:
The GB News article goes on to say:
The family of former Newcastle manager Steve Bruce has achieved a significant legal victory in honour of Madison, the infant grandson of the football figure, who passed away at just four months old.
Following their campaign, stricter rules governing the use of the title “maternity nurse” will now be introduced.
The family’s push for reform came after tragedy struck when Madison died, prompting calls for greater oversight of those providing care to newborns and their parents.
Madison’s death followed incorrect guidance given to his family, who were advised to place the baby on his front while sleeping.
Eva Clements, the maternity nurse responsible for this dangerous recommendation, held no formal qualifications for the role.
The family had engaged Clements through Ruthie Maternity Services, an agency operating without any regulatory oversight.
The absence of industry standards meant there was no requirement for those marketing themselves as maternity nurses to demonstrate competence or training.
This has been widely amplified by other outlets, including the Manchester Evening News:
Notice the sub-heading ‘Without regulation this will happen again’.
To quote:
A coroner has called for urgent action to be taken at a national level over the unregulated ‘maternity services’ industry and ‘maternity nurses’ with no qualifications after the death of Manchester United great Steve Bruce’s grandson.
(The police had – in 2024 – actually arrested the maternity nurse and charged her with neglect, as reported here.)
So, in essence it is being claimed that putting the baby on its front to sleep was the definite and sole cause of the baby’s death.
Now, I do not know (because I haven’t examined it) what the actual strength of the evidence is for the back-to-sleep campaign, nor for what contribution to deaths from SIDS placing children on their fronts may have caused. (It is odd, though, to think – as claimed – that humanity evolved for thousands of years while tolerating an extremely dangerous practice, entirely unnoticed.)
But whatever the answers to those questions, is it not incumbent upon coroners and others to at least consider whether the baby had received any medical interventions recently?
This baby died in October 2024 at the age of 4 months. At that time – based on the UK schedule – this is what Madison would have been scheduled to receive at that age:
Now, it may well have been that Madison had not yet actually had these jabs at the time of death, but regardless, it is notable that it seems that this was never even considered by the coroner, even as a potential contributory factor1.
There is a surprising (or perhaps not) dearth of quality data available analysing temporal correlations between childhood vaccines and SIDS. Whilst the VAERS database does indeed raise concerns (see here), the counter-argument that (due to the nature of the VAERS system) reporting is biased towards deaths occurring close to the injections does carry some weight.
That said, it does seem to be non-contentious to argue that biological stressors are linked to SIDS and the injection – in one go – of seven different vaccines with all their adjuvants must constitute a significant biological stressor.
Generally, therefore, there is certainly a justifiable need to look into this data in much more depth than it has been so far.
What happens to people who raise concerns
There is undeniably an institutional reluctance to even entertain the possibility of links between vaccinations and infant deaths, as the case of Helen Grus demonstrates.
For those unaware, Helen Grus, an Ottawa police officer, was charged with discreditable conduct for “unauthorized private investigations” into potential links between infant deaths and COVID-19 vaccinations2.
The accusation centred around her contacting a deceased baby’s father to ask about the mother’s COVID-19 vaccination status, having noticed a “doubling or tripling of infant deaths“3; she had claimed it was “her duty to investigative criminal negligence on the part of the government”.
Needless to say, the official position was that the charges relate to the manner of her investigation, not the subject she was looking into. Over a year after her guilty verdict (see here), Grus is awaiting a hearing to decide on her punishment, and is suspended from duties meanwhile.
According to press reports, Grus has launched a lawsuit against the CBC claiming that their reporting was defamatory4, though I cannot find any details regarding its progress.
Did vaccines cause (or contribute to) the deaths of Sally Clark’s children?
Sally Clark was a solicitor wrongfully convicted in November 1999 of murdering her two sons; this was caused, it was said, by misleading statistical evidence regarding SIDS.
The verdict was later overturned and the story is regarded as a major miscarriage of justice.
Sadly, Sally Clark served three years in prison and a few years after her release died from the effects of alcololism.
The overturning of the conviction would not have happened without the tireless work of Sally’s father, Frank Lockyer, a retired policeman, who had reached the senior position of Divisional Commander in the Wiltshire Constabulary.
In searching for information on SIDS last year, I came across this article by Neville Hodgkinson about the case:
Hodgkinson states that:
- The jury in the Sally Clark trial was told to discount the DTP jab given to her second child, Harry, just five hours before he was found dead.
- At Sally’s trial the defence did not mention immunisation as a possible cause of death.
- Two prosecution witnesses, including the paediatrician Professor Sir Roy Meadow, assured the jury it could be discounted.
- Their statements went unchallenged, and the issue did not form any part of the appeal hearings.
- Professor Meadow, a former member of a Department of Health sub-committee on adverse reactions to vaccines, told the jury that he could not think of any natural explanation for Harry’s or Christopher’s deaths.
- An examination of related legal and other correspondence has now made clear the reason for this extraordinary omission. It is that child health experts, following public loss of confidence in vaccination when the risks of brain damage were first publicised, were trying to maintain a united front in preventing further debate.
- Even paediatricians who gave testimony on Mrs Clark’s behalf told defence lawyers that if vaccination were mentioned as a possible cause of Harry’s death, they would dispute it. Not wanting to confuse the jury, and with judges having a history of bowing to dominant medical opinion, the defence decided to stay silent on the issue.
This comment, under a Steve Kirsch article, claims that during her trial a nurse gave gave evidence for the prosecution and stated that:
“she knew the babies were fine the day before each of their deaths, as she’s seen them for their vaccines”
Neville’s article refers to Harry, Sally’s second child, but makes no reference to the first, Christopher; nor does the article make such an unequivocal assertion regarding the evidence given in court.
I therefore wrote to Neville Hodgkinson and asked him if he had access to a court transcript or other summary of the evidence. Unfortunately, he replied, he did not, and while Gordon Stewart5 would have been able to help, he is no longer with us.
However, looking into this a little further, it does seem that the weight of evidence DOES suggest that BOTH deaths followed soon after (and in Harry’s case a few hours after) vaccination.
In this BMJ rapid response6 about the case, the evidence was said to include the fact that:
It was agreed by the clinic staff that both babies were bonny and thriving when regularly examined, including a few hours before death.
The article also states that counsel had asserted that:
The only common factor, which may or may not be relevant, is that both deaths followed shortly after vaccination.
It is undisputed that Harry died only four hours after vaccination, and it appears that the court didn’t dispute the fact that Christopher had also been vaccinated only a short period prior to his death.
In 2003 Sally’s father, together with a friend John Batt, gave an interview to BBC Breakfast with [David] Frost, in which the following was said:
DAVID FROST: Understood. Absolutely understood. And was there any possibility that in fact that tragic illness was caused by vaccines?
JOHN BATT: Vaccines undoubtedly play a role. All the statistical evidence indicates that vaccines are absolutely safe. The problem is that most babies are given vaccines when they are losing their mother’s immune system and acquiring their own and they tend to get a dip in their immune system. Sally’s third child – the surviving son – had just such a thing happen when he was about to be vaccinated and they didn’t do it, just as a precaution, until they had got his white blood cell count up again.
FRANK LOCKYER: This probably has great significance actually, that a surviving child also had an immune deficiency at the time he was to be vaccinated, and had he been vaccinated, it could have been with disastrous circumstances. Now I don’t want you to think we’re against vaccination because I’m not, it’s a highly controversial subject, but we had, we had him vaccinated eventually but it’s the question of timing.
The main thing I note from that is how – despite being intimately acquainted with all the evidence, and having the possibility of a link to vaccines actually raised – Frank is extremely reluctant to come across as an “anti-vaxxer”.
The Sally Clark case is desperately sad on many levels – the initial conviction, her wrongful imprisonment, then her premature death.
Frank died in 2020 at the age of 90. The local paper wrote a detailed obituary, referring to him as a “pillar of the community”, which in his case appears to be more than a platitude.
The article details how he was “on the IRA ‘hit list’ in the 1970s and was awarded the Queen’s Police Medal for bravery after saving the life of a hostage during an armed siege”; it also discusses his involvement in heading up the “Salisbury Cathedral Spire Appeal, which raised the then-daunting sum of £6.5m required to save the world-famous building”.
Curiously, his daughter, and his part in securing her freedom, which must have made up a large part of his identity, is not mentioned once, which made me wonder whether the Frank whose obituary I was reading was in fact the same man as Sally’s father.
After all, it is usual in obituaries to mention what children someone had, whether they were still alive and so on.
However, how many Frank Lockyers who were senior in the Police in Salisbury can there have been? In the BBC interview Frank said he was 72 (in February 2003) and the man who died in May 2020 was 90.
Morover, the Salisbury Journal obituary states that his 2nd wife was Rosemary Squires (a moderately well-known former singer), and a website of well-known Wiltshire people states that:
The fact that no real lessons appear to have been learned from Sally’s case, and that – even in her father’s death she seems to have been totally forgotten – brings me much sadness.
See more here substack.com
Bold emphasis added
Herader image: Simon Bruty / Allsport