DISGRACEFUL, woeful and inadequate.

Those were the words used at an inquest to describe how a boy of seven was looked after by those who should have loved him the most.

Even as Blake Fowler was lying dying on a living room floor, his stepfather Peter Meek’s first thoughts were not for the youngster, but for himself.

What followed was a series of lies in an attempt to cover up the fact that Blake should not have been in the care of Peter Meek, who was in breach of his bail conditions having been charged with assaulting Blake’s mother Sarah Spacagna several weeks earlier.

Despite a court ruling he was not to contact Sarah, the couple rekindled their relationship and moved in together “in secret” to Peter’s grandmother’s house in Cromarty Road, Lordshill, where Blake was to suffer a fatal head injury after apparently falling from a sofa.

What actually led to that injury on the afternoon of December 3, 2011, that resulted in a seven-year-old losing his life will probably never be known.

That was the finding of Southampton coroner Keith Wiseman who said that such was the “plethora of lies” that were given to police and medical staff surrounding how Blake came by his injuries, the exact cause of his death was uncertain.

In returning an open determination Mr Wiseman said there remained “considerable uncertainties” in accounts given by the people who were in charge of looking after the youngster.

It began when the first call was made by Peter Meek to raise the alarm – not to the emergency services, but to Sarah.

Evidence given during the inquest in Southampton yesterday heard that instead of calling an ambulance immediately, up to five minutes were lost while Peter Meek made a call to Blake’s mother with some suggestion that he didn’t want an ambulance to be called at all.

He also tried to lie about who he was to paramedics, beginning with pretending to be his brother Philip – who was also in the house at the time – which caused further confusion.

Commenting on that, Mr Wiseman said: “The obvious concern was that he was likely to be re-arrested for breaching his bail conditions.”

He described it as “a disgraceful failure to prioritise the needs of Blake”.

Evidence was also taken from pathologist Basil Purdue who carried out the post-mortem on Blake.

He said that the delay would not have affected Blake’s death due to the extent of the injuries already sustained.

Dr Purdue said that the injuries were consistent from a fall from a sofa on to a hard surface, like the concrete floor at the address which was covered with a thin carpet. He said that due to the lack of any obvious surface head injury to accompany the brain haemorrhage, it was difficult to be sure what exactly had caused it.

He said there were no other injuries that suggested he had been restrained or attacked in any way and that in some cases the severity of a head injury came down to “sheer luck”.

However, he did add that a forensic examination of the schoolboy revealed he had flakes of a white material which were identified as Artex from the ceiling in the room in his hair and on his lip. He added that there was no explanation about how they got there and that was a matter for the police investigation.

Blake was eventually taken to hospital but never recovered from his injuries and died the next day.

Both Peter and Philip Meek were arrested on suspicion of causing grievous bodily harm.

Giving evidence, Detective Inspector Linda Howard, who led the investigation into Blake's death, said the account given by Peter Meek was that he was in the kitchen preparing dinner while Blake was play fighting with his younger brother in the lounge using boxing gloves. Peter Meek told police how he heard a loud bang and when he saw Blake, the youngster told him he had been pushed off the sofa.

Shortly after that Blake became dizzy and started to lose consciousness, the officer explained.

That account changed in some of the details over the course of the ensuing investigation.

It was noted that Blake’s brother – the only person who was in the room at the time – did give several accounts of what had happened but due to his young age, and his obvious upset at what had happened that evidence was ruled as unreliable.

Following the police investigation and after discussion with the Crown Prosecution Service it was decided to release the pair without charge.

In summarising evidence, Mr Wiseman said he had taken into account the findings from a High Court hearing regarding care proceedings for Blake’s siblings, which examined the circumstances of the youngster’s death in detail.

The coroner said during that case the evidence had uncovered a “plethora of lies” told by those who were in charge of his care at the time of his death, and as a result Mr Wiseman said it was difficult to know with any certainty how exactly Blake had died.

He described how the evidence given to the high court had demonstrated parenting skills of the pair, who have matching tattoos dedicated to Blake’s memory, as “woeful”.

He added: “There was an inadequate and irresponsible way in which they (the children) were cared for and treated.”

Peter Meek, now 25, was not at yesterday’s hearing but Blake’s mother, who calls herself Sarah “best mummy” Spacagna on a social networking site, sat through the proceedings flanked by family members and occasionally wiping tears from her eyes. She left without commenting to the media.

Writing on a social networking site last night, Peter Meek said: “Glad the truth finally out there. Not happy about some of the lies but nowhopefully we can all move on.”