Woman faked two births and received £30,000 in support from alleged father of non-existent children, judge rules

A woman faked the birth of two children and then received £30,000 in support from the alleged father in an 'elaborate campaign of deceit', a High Court judge has said.

The woman is said to have fabricated the 'cruel' story as revenge for the man allegedly abusing her and her son but may have also been motivated by fraud since she received a 'considerable amount of money' from the supposed father, a court heard.

The man, who cannot be identified and was referred to as John in legal proceedings, believed he had been with his partner, named Jane in court documents, throughout her first pregnancy and had felt what he believed to be her pregnant stomach.

He was not there for the supposed birth nor later saw the fictitious child as he had been arrested, but she sent him photographs and an ultrasound image, Mrs Justice Judd said in a written ruling.

When John was released and reconciled with Jane, she told him the baby was staying with a family member and that social workers said he was not allowed to see the child. 

After the birth of a supposed second baby and the woman reportedly claiming to have sold the pair for £500, the man, in his early 30s, applied to have parental responsibility for what he believed were his children. 

He only later learned the babies had been made up after the case was seen before a High Court in February, with the ruling published on Friday, where Mrs Justice Judd said it was most likely the children did not exist.

It was later revealed to the court that the woman was overweight and would not have been able to bear children as she was in her 50s and menopausal. 

A woman convinced her former partner she had given birth to two children and sold them for £500 in an 'elaborate campaign of deceit' [stock image of a baby]

Bank statements show Jane attended a tanning shop on the day she said she had given birth, the judge added. 

Jane later explained that a voice message she had sent the man's mother where a crying baby could be heard had been made by playing a YouTube video in the background.

The man said that in late 2022 his partner told him she was pregnant and said she became 'visibly pregnant' as time went on, with her stomach described as 'hard, like a pregnant stomach'.

Jane told the court she had always been big with a large stomach. 

In May 2023, when the baby was due, the couple had an argument and she called the police alleging assault, with John being arrested and held on remand for several months, the judge added.

Jane sent a message to John's stepfather saying the baby had been born and sent the man baby photos and regular messages about the child.

Mrs Justice Judd said: 'When the applicant was released from prison the relationship resumed, but he says the respondent told him the baby was with a family member.

'She said that the local authority had said he was not permitted to see her but she did show him lots of pictures of the baby.'

The couple, who met during the pandemic, resumed their relationship and Jane told John she was pregnant again and the baby was due in August 2024.

But the couple had an argument and split shortly before her supposed due date, and did not reconcile.

John's mother saw Jane who was described as 'visibly pregnant' and Jane later messaged her that the baby had been born.

Despite being estranged, John continued to send money to support Jane and the two children, believed to be around the value of £30,000 according to The Times, during which time she would send pictures and updates to him and his loved ones.

John eventually 'became very concerned about what had happened to the children' and applied in October 2024 to discover his children's whereabouts and try to claim parental responsibility.

Jane then filed a non-molestation order against John and alleged he had verbally, physically and sexually abused her.

During this time, Jane had supposedly told John that she had sold the two babies for £500, according to The Telegraph.

At the non-molestation order hearing, Jane's lawyer said she had no children with John. Jane said she had miscarried twice. 

Mrs Justice Judd said there was no evidence of births on the woman's phone and no records by local authority or police.

The judge said the case had left her with two 'extremely unlikely' and 'bizarre scenarios' but it was most likely that the woman had 'engaged in a campaign of deception lasting for about three years in order to make the applicant believe that he was going to be, then was, the father of children'.

The judge said: 'The behaviour was cruel, leading a man and his mother to believe they had children and grandchildren respectively.'