AN EAST Lancashire dad who attempted to poison himself and his four-year-old child has had an appeal against his conviction thrown out by a High Court Judge.

The man, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, was found guilty by a jury at Burnley Crown Court of attempting to administer a noxious substance so as to endanger life and cruelty to a person under the age of 16.

In June 2017 Judge Beverley Lunt deemed the man to be a dangerous offender and jailed him for four and a half years, with an extended licence period of two-and-a-half years. She also imposed a 10-year restraining order banning him from contacting his child or the child's mother.

During the appeal Mr Justice William Davis was told that the appellant's relationship with the child's mother broke down in May 2016. The child lived with his mother but the appellant still had contact with him.

Mr Davis was told: "Pursuant to that, on November, 3 2016, the appellant had his son, by then aged four, for the day. They did not return at the appointed time. The child's mother eventually managed to contact the appellant by telephone. She was not reassured. The appellant was crying and angry.

"He said he did not want anyone else bringing up his son. This was in the context of the child's mother apparently having a new partner.

"He subsequently sent a text saying: 'we are going'. That was the last the child's mother heard from the appellant. She had no idea where he was.

"At about 11.30 that same evening the appellant telephoned 999 asking for an ambulance. He said that he had tried to commit suicide with his son. He said he was not going through with it."

Police went to a car park just outside Colne where they found the appellant's car. They found evidence consistent with a suicide attempt.

The court was told that over the course of the next few hours the appellant told the police at the scene, the custody officer at the police station and various members of hospital staff that he had made a suicide attempt while the child was present in the car. He told a doctor at the hospital that he did not want his son to go back to the mother.

When interviewed at the police station he made no comment.

Investigation of his electronic devices showed that in the preceding week he had made internet searches in relation to the harmful effect of diesel fumes.

Mr Davis was told: "At trial, the appellant did not contest the essence of the prosecution case in terms of what he had said to the police, the custody officer and hospital staff. His case was that everything he had said was untrue. The child had never been in the car when the engine was running. The whole thing was an elaborate ruse or set up intended to draw attention to his various grievances. The jury clearly rejected that account."

In his appeal the man argued that elements of his defence were withheld from the jury, because Judge Lunt had not allowed him to raise allegations against his former partner to the effect that she had perverted the course of justice in different proceedings and that the police had acted in bad faith in some fashion. He also complained that there were photographs before the jury that bore the legend "abduction" and that he never got the chance to cross-examine the child's mother because her evidence had been agreed between the prosecution and defence.

Judge Davis rejected the appeal against the conviction and ruled that Judge Lunt had been right to deem the appellant dangerous.