Discussion
SV8Predator said:
They've announced that they have been given 'more time' for questioning and have until 5pm on Friday to hold him.
Is this necessary?
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
s
t! we need more time for this!
Why not let him go and have him followed? Not by the Police, they have no professional capability that would let this be covert, but by a professional organisation? Is that not more likely that the repetitive questioning?
1) You don't know he's not saying anything to all questions. Is this necessary?
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
s
t! we need more time for this!Why not let him go and have him followed? Not by the Police, they have no professional capability that would let this be covert, but by a professional organisation? Is that not more likely that the repetitive questioning?
2) New evidence will be emerging all the time this most likely needs to be out he the suspect for a variety of reasons.
3) The police have no capability for covert surveillance? That's not true. They have vast covert capability. Private hire would be a legal nightmare.
4) If he is bailed the police have a duty of care to protect him from people who won't let due process take place so chances are he won't even be in the area to even do a fiction-style lead the cops to the body scenario.
La Liga said:
)
4) If he is bailed the police have a duty of care to protect him from people who won't let due process take place so chances are he won't even be in the area to even do a fiction-style lead the cops to the body scenario.
If its a body as opposed to a living being, why would he go near anyway?4) If he is bailed the police have a duty of care to protect him from people who won't let due process take place so chances are he won't even be in the area to even do a fiction-style lead the cops to the body scenario.
Breadvan72 said:
Threads like this make me worry about jury trial.
When at Belamsh Courts as a Juror, before anything was said, as we retired for a verdict, a woman juror said "I don't care if he's innocent or guilty, I will go with the majority, as I can get out quick to pick my kids up"If I were up in front of a jury I would worry as to the numbnuts who sit on them deciding my fate.
RtdRacer said:
Variomatic said:
mat777 said:
I gather from some news reports that this girl was playing on the street unsupervised.
In the dark, not all that close to the house,with cerebral palsy.
But none of that has anything at all to do with her disappearing (as it didn't with the McCanns) because, if it did, an awful lot of people would have to start re-thinking what being a "parent" means
final_edition said:
When at Belamsh Courts as a Juror, before anything was said, as we retired for a verdict, a woman juror said "I don't care if he's innocent or guilty, I will go with the majority, as I can get out quick to pick my kids up"
If I were up in front of a jury I would worry as to the numbnuts who sit on them deciding my fate.
Indeed. I'd rather be tried and have my jury made up of 3 well educated, well informed judges than 12 of my "peers"...If I were up in front of a jury I would worry as to the numbnuts who sit on them deciding my fate.
Lets be realistic here, unless this is another Shannon Matthewss type of situation the girl is long dead by now. The main job now is to find the body and make sure the right person is caught and locked up for the end of his/her days.
I also agree with some of the previous comments on here; there is far too much speculation in the media, the 24hr news channels are especially keen on padding out fact-light stories with conjecture. I can't see how it helps the investigation, search or the possibility of the accused getting a fair trial either.
I also agree with some of the previous comments on here; there is far too much speculation in the media, the 24hr news channels are especially keen on padding out fact-light stories with conjecture. I can't see how it helps the investigation, search or the possibility of the accused getting a fair trial either.
La Liga said:
SV8Predator said:
They've announced that they have been given 'more time' for questioning and have until 5pm on Friday to hold him.
Is this necessary?
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
st! we need more time for this!
Why not let him go and have him followed? Not by the Police, they have no professional capability that would let this be covert, but by a professional organisation? Is that not more likely that the repetitive questioning?
1) You don't know he's not saying anything to all questions. Is this necessary?
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
Question: "Do you know where she is?"
Answer: "No."
s
t! we need more time for this!Why not let him go and have him followed? Not by the Police, they have no professional capability that would let this be covert, but by a professional organisation? Is that not more likely that the repetitive questioning?
2) New evidence will be emerging all the time this most likely needs to be out he the suspect for a variety of reasons.
3) The police have no capability for covert surveillance? That's not true. They have vast covert capability. Private hire would be a legal nightmare.
4) If he is bailed the police have a duty of care to protect him from people who won't let due process take place so chances are he won't even be in the area to even do a fiction-style lead the cops to the body scenario.
Grenoble said:
final_edition said:
When at Belamsh Courts as a Juror, before anything was said, as we retired for a verdict, a woman juror said "I don't care if he's innocent or guilty, I will go with the majority, as I can get out quick to pick my kids up"
If I were up in front of a jury I would worry as to the numbnuts who sit on them deciding my fate.
Indeed. I'd rather be tried and have my jury made up of 3 well educated, well informed judges than 12 of my "peers"...If I were up in front of a jury I would worry as to the numbnuts who sit on them deciding my fate.
decadence said:
Problem is they are generally completely out of touch with reality, live a life of luxury and privilege and most likely have all their life. I'd rather not just have 3 judges deciding peoples fate thank you. Theres a balance to everything, not always perfect...but a balance of sorts.
Well we sort of agree - I'd like the option. 3 judges or 12 jury members.I was discussing this with a colleague yesterday (former mountain rescue) and he was explaining the processes that will be going on, he then explained that the Police will have strong reason to believe the chap probably has relations to the child or has been carrying out surveillance on her for some time, as he was going on giving his opinion and generally discussing it, I wondered if he knew her condition in detail...
Suddenly a light bulb came on, I wonder if the chap being in custody is a huge distraction i.e. he "snatched" the girl, walked her somewhere (to avoid detection), give her to another person (in a anonymous unidentified vehicle), he then obviously gets picked up, Police are now busy grilling their suspect and scanning the local area for a body when in reality the child could be whisked away hundreds or even thousands of miles away, making everyone look one way whilst going the other. If this group knew about her condition, she could very well be alive.
The reasoning behind someone doing this, or why the suspected would take the wrap eludes me, but it may very well be possible. Paedo network?
How can they release this chap with all the bad publicity hanging over his head? Id rather stay inside if I was him and being wrongly convicted.
Suddenly a light bulb came on, I wonder if the chap being in custody is a huge distraction i.e. he "snatched" the girl, walked her somewhere (to avoid detection), give her to another person (in a anonymous unidentified vehicle), he then obviously gets picked up, Police are now busy grilling their suspect and scanning the local area for a body when in reality the child could be whisked away hundreds or even thousands of miles away, making everyone look one way whilst going the other. If this group knew about her condition, she could very well be alive.
The reasoning behind someone doing this, or why the suspected would take the wrap eludes me, but it may very well be possible. Paedo network?
How can they release this chap with all the bad publicity hanging over his head? Id rather stay inside if I was him and being wrongly convicted.
daz3210 said:
rev-erend said:
The BBC or their source have not helped.
First it was a grey van, then a white van then a blue range rover.
And officially a blue Landrover Discovery if the person being questioned is the bloke that picked her up.First it was a grey van, then a white van then a blue range rover.
A light coloured, possibly (light) blue van or Land Rover. If a van possibly a Ford Connect type of vehicle.
The description was given by various young children who saw the incident from a distance in the evening when it was probably starting to get a bit dark.
From a distance at dusk the squared rear of a Discovery could look reasonably similar to the rear of a Connect or similar van. Possibly one of the kids parents had a Connect so they new what it looked like, or at least knew it wasn't a Transit for example.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff