Re: Missing Tia Sharp

by TheTruthWillOut 13.08.12 19:02

Tony Bennett wrote:
DLinne8 wrote:New tweet from MWT - BRUISES TO TIA'S BODY
Is Mark Williams-Thomas aware of the sub-judice rules? - or have the police just released the official post-mortem results?

Seems to be officially released. Tony, do you know where people in the UK stand with the sub judice rule when discussing this or any UK case on an American based forum?

I read about it on out-law but can't make head nor tale of it.

by Nina 13.08.12 19:07

Surely any injuries that result in bruising take time, if only a short time for the bruises to appear, and bruising cannot appear after death, can it?

by uppatoffee 13.08.12 19:12

Apparently it can continue to occur for a short while after death.

by DLinne8 13.08.12 19:13

TheTruthWillOut wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
DLinne8 wrote:New tweet from MWT - BRUISES TO TIA'S BODY
Is Mark Williams-Thomas aware of the sub-judice rules? - or have the police just released the official post-mortem results?

Seems to be officially released. Tony, do you know where people in the UK stand with the sub judice rule when discussing this or any UK case on an American based forum?

I read about it on out-law but can't make head nor tale of it.

I think if the person who is commenting resides in the UK then it would be illegal for a forum not to moderate, wherever it was based in the world, as it would be accessible to UK residents. However, if it was blocked from the UK then probably anything could be said.

by TheTruthWillOut 13.08.12 19:24

DLinne8 wrote:
TheTruthWillOut wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
DLinne8 wrote:New tweet from MWT - BRUISES TO TIA'S BODY
Is Mark Williams-Thomas aware of the sub-judice rules? - or have the police just released the official post-mortem results?

Seems to be officially released. Tony, do you know where people in the UK stand with the sub judice rule when discussing this or any UK case on an American based forum?

I read about it on out-law but can't make head nor tale of it.

I think if the person who is commenting resides in the UK then it would be illegal for a forum not to moderate, wherever it was based in the world, as it would be accessible to UK residents. However, if it was blocked from the UK then probably anything could be said.

I see. It is a complete minefield though. For a layperson like me with limited knowledge of the law, I don't understand what I can/can't say to the point of not daring discussing it at all.

by DLinne8 13.08.12 19:31

TheTruthWillOut wrote:
DLinne8 wrote:
TheTruthWillOut wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
DLinne8 wrote:New tweet from MWT - BRUISES TO TIA'S BODY
Is Mark Williams-Thomas aware of the sub-judice rules? - or have the police just released the official post-mortem results?

Seems to be officially released. Tony, do you know where people in the UK stand with the sub judice rule when discussing this or any UK case on an American based forum?

I read about it on out-law but can't make head nor tale of it.

I think if the person who is commenting resides in the UK then it would be illegal for a forum not to moderate, wherever it was based in the world, as it would be accessible to UK residents. However, if it was blocked from the UK then probably anything could be said.

I see. It is a complete minefield though. For a layperson like me with limited knowledge of the law, I don't understand what I can/can't say to the point of not daring discussing it at all.

I know exactly how you feel. The laws of this land are becoming more and more restrictive generally.

by DLinne8 13.08.12 19:36

Our private discussions aren't censored. I have my email address in my profile.

by **Tony Bennett** 13.08.12 19:58

TheTruthWillOut wrote:
DLinne8 wrote:
TheTruthWillOut wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
DLinne8 wrote:New tweet from MWT - BRUISES TO TIA'S BODY
Is Mark Williams-Thomas aware of the sub-judice rules? - or have the police just released the official post-mortem results?

Seems to be officially released. Tony, do you know where people in the UK stand with the sub judice rule when discussing this or any UK case on an American based forum?

I read about it on out-law but can't make head nor tale of it.

I think if the person who is commenting resides in the UK then it would be illegal for a forum not to moderate, wherever it was based in the world, as it would be accessible to UK residents. However, if it was blocked from the UK then probably anything could be said.

I see. It is a complete minefield though. For a layperson like me with limited knowledge of the law, I don't understand what I can/can't say to the point of not daring discussing it at all.

The rule I think says that you must not publish anything that would create a 'substantial risk' that the accused would not receive a fair trial. Now, as happened with two newspapers, the Daily Mail and Daily Mirror, with a combined circualation of a about 4 million, and readership of 8 million, there were recently fined for 'contempt of court' because, in advance of a murder trial, they published the fact that the man [Levi Bellfield] had murdered other people. That was fairly serious, so they were punished.

Speculating about how Tia may have died, on a forum read by at most about 200 souls at any one time, does not seem to me to breach the 'sub judice' rule. It hardly creates a 'substantial risk' of influencing potential jurios.

But as 'candyfloss' says, we should exercise caution when discussing the circumstances of Tia's death

by Woof 13.08.12 20:16

I've just been reading today's posts so just sharing some overall thoughts.

It strikes me that Tia may well have been visiting Gran on weekends for a lot of her life. She seemed to have a different relationship with her gran than her two siblings did. From memory teenagers seem to switch from playing with dolls to womanhood overnight. Gran and mom may not have been as aware. And we don't know if Gran had intended working on Thursday or if it was last minute.

It's hard to know what the facts are. But it's still a possibility she was found in or near the neighbor's loft space. And if both houses had access then surely they'd have to take both owners in for questioning? It's hard to know if they'd have known the exact time of death when they arrested the neighbour so the witness statement may not have been the issue.

To me it seems unlikely that Gran had any knowledge or involvement. If she's the car driver it's hard to imagine her calling the police in under the circumstances. However that was my initial thought with another topical case and boy was I wrong..

by tiny 13.08.12 20:25

If the grandmother was a careworker then she would know what the scent of death smells like,so i cant believe she didnt notice it.

by TheTruthWillOut 13.08.12 20:31

Tony Bennett wrote:
TheTruthWillOut wrote:
DLinne8 wrote:
TheTruthWillOut wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
DLinne8 wrote:New tweet from MWT - BRUISES TO TIA'S BODY
Is Mark Williams-Thomas aware of the sub-judice rules? - or have the police just released the official post-mortem results?

Seems to be officially released. Tony, do you know where people in the UK stand with the sub judice rule when discussing this or any UK case on an American based forum?

I read about it on out-law but can't make head nor tale of it.

I think if the person who is commenting resides in the UK then it would be illegal for a forum not to moderate, wherever it was based in the world, as it would be accessible to UK residents. However, if it was blocked from the UK then probably anything could be said.

I see. It is a complete minefield though. For a layperson like me with limited knowledge of the law, I don't understand what I can/can't say to the point of not daring discussing it at all.
The rule I think says that you must not publish anything that would create a 'substantial risk' that the accused would not receive a fair trial. Now, as happened with two newspapers, the Daily Mail and Daily Mirror, with a combined circualation of a about 4 million, and readership of 8 million, there were recently fined for 'contempt of court' because, in advance of a murder trial, they published the fact that the man [Levi Bellfield] had murdered other people. That was fairly serious, so they were punished.

Speculating about how Tia may have died, on a forum read by at most about 200 souls at any one time, does not seem to me to breach the 'sub judice' rule. It hardly creates a 'substantial risk' of influencing potential jurios.

But as 'candyfloss' says, we should exercise caution when discussing the circumstances of Tia's death

Thanks Tony. Doesn't fill me with confidence though. For example: I could discuss a case without fear at Websleuths (a much bigger site) but say something here and get myself or the forum in trouble.

And this seems to come down to who the main purpose of this site is about (if you know what I mean)

The sub-judice rule seems to be aimed mainly at the press/media, but is selectively used against individuals/forums in "certain" cases.

Sorry if this is overstepping the mark.

by **Tony Bennett** 13.08.12 21:33

Key.103.co.uk is reporting this:

Stuart Hazell, the man charged with the murder of 12-year-old Tia Sharp, has appeared in court on the day it emerged the schoolgirl's body was found wrapped in a bedsheet inside a black bag.

by Guest 13.08.12 21:35

Tony Bennett wrote:Key.103.co.uk is reporting this:

Stuart Hazell, the man charged with the murder of 12-year-old Tia Sharp, has appeared in court on the day it emerged the schoolgirl's body was found wrapped in a bedsheet inside a black bag.

Yes, this is why I was wondering if the scent of death may not have been able to get out too readily - I thought they said she was also put into a rigid suitcase.

by **Tony Bennett** 13.08.12 22:09

Tony Bennett wrote:Key.103.co.uk is reporting this:

Stuart Hazell, the man charged with the murder of 12-year-old Tia Sharp, has appeared in court on the day it emerged the schoolgirl's body was found wrapped in a bedsheet inside a black bag.

...which reminded me of what Dr Russell O'Brien said happened on the evening of 3 May 2007, just before Madeleine McCann was reported missing. This was from his SECOND statement on 11 May 2007:

Around 21h25, taking advantage of a pause in the service of the first plate, the deponent left the restaurant with Matthew Oldfield to check on the children. He arrived at his apartment and immediately heard his daughter Evie crying and stayed in the apartment. He believes that Matthew Oldfield went to his apartment, and is not aware if he was going to also check on the McCann children and went to the deponent's apartment and asked him if he needed help.
- Matthew Oldfield returned to the restaurant, having told Jane Tanner that the deponent stayed behind with Evie O'Brien because she was crying.
- The truth is that after the crying, the deponent had to change all the sheets and his daughter's clothing as she had vomited.

Much later, he gave a convoluted, rambling account of how he had actually had to put all the clothes and sheets in a washing machine. If you believe his account:

* Evie was unwell before they all set off for an evening of wining and dining at the Tapas bar

* His partner Jane Tanner had gone to do a check at around 9.15pm, saw a bloke with mustard chinos walking purposefully and carrying a child wearing night clothes 'with a pinkish aspect'. She says she didn't hear her child crying

* No sooner had Jane Tanner returned to the Tapas bar (or say she says), her partner Russell O'Brien got up to do a check and Matt Oldfield said (words to this effect) "Why don't we go and do a check together?"

* Russell finds that his child has been sick and vomiting, and washes her, changes the bed sheets and puts the washing machine on. The couple were very lucky that Evie didn't choke to death. Matt Oldfield is on hand to say: "I'll go and tell Jane". Jane 'relieves' Russell, a matter Jane regarded very funny when she was interviewed by Leics Police in April 2008

* Though Jane Tanner saw a man carrying a child, and though on two ripped-out pages of Madeleine's activity sticker book Russell O'Brien wrote '9.20pm Jane sees many carrying a child', and though Madeleine was reported missing barely half-an-hour later, she did not think to tell the McCanns about what she had seen until 24 hours later (she thought it would upset them), and

* Ten days later Jane Tanner assured the police that she was sure the abductor was Robert Murat 'by the way he was walking' - but later changed her mind and said it wasn't him

by justathought 13.08.12 22:46

Tony Bennett wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:Key.103.co.uk is reporting this:

Stuart Hazell, the man charged with the murder of 12-year-old Tia Sharp, has appeared in court on the day it emerged the schoolgirl's body was found wrapped in a bedsheet inside a black bag.
...which reminded me of what Dr Russell O'Brien said happened on the evening of 3 May 2007, just before Madeleine McCann was reported missing. This was from his SECOND statement on 11 May 2007:

Around 21h25, taking advantage of a pause in the service of the first plate, the deponent left the restaurant with Matthew Oldfield to check on the children. He arrived at his apartment and immediately heard his daughter Evie crying and stayed in the apartment. He believes that Matthew Oldfield went to his apartment, and is not aware if he was going to also check on the McCann children and went to the deponent's apartment and asked him if he needed help.
- Matthew Oldfield returned to the restaurant, having told Jane Tanner that the deponent stayed behind with Evie O'Brien because she was crying.
- The truth is that after the crying, the deponent had to change all the sheets and his daughter's clothing as she had vomited.

Much later, he gave a convoluted, rambling account of how he had actually had to put all the clothes and sheets in a washing machine. If you believe his account:

* Evie was unwell before they all set off for an evening of wining and dining at the Tapas bar

* His partner Jane Tanner had gone to do a check at around 9.15pm, saw a bloke with mustard chinos walking purposefully and carrying a child wearing night clothes 'with a pinkish aspect'. She says she didn't hear her child crying

* No sooner had Jane Tanner returned to the Tapas bar (or say she says), her partner Russell O'Brien got up to do a check and Matt Oldfield said (words to this effect) "Why don't we go and do a check together?"

* Russell finds that his child has been sick and vomiting, and washes her, changes the bed sheets and puts the washing machine on. The couple were very lucky that Evie didn't choke to death. Matt Oldfield is on hand to say: "I'll go and tell Jane". Jane 'relieves' Russell, a matter Jane regarded very funny when she was interviewed by Leics Police in April 2008

* Though Jane Tanner saw a man carrying a child, and though on two ripped-out pages of Madeleine's activity sticker book Russell O'Brien wrote '9.20pm Jane sees many carrying a child', and though Madeleine was reported missing barely half-an-hour later, she did not think to tell the McCanns about what she had seen until 24 hours later (she thought it would upset them), and

* Ten days later Jane Tanner assured the police that she was sure the abductor was Robert Murat 'by the way he was walking' - but later changed her mind and said it wasn't him

Mr Bennett

Is there not question marks as to what happened to the twins cot covers.

by **Tony Bennett** 13.08.12 23:09

justathought wrote:Mr Bennett

Is there not question marks as to what happened to the twins cot covers.

Yes, I believe so.

All this also needs explaining:

Gerry McCann on 4 May (the day after Madeleine went missing) said: “Yesterday, Madeleine and and the twins were put to bed in their respective beds at 7.30pm”. Yet when the police arrived at about 11.00pm, they found a bed where Madeleine was supposed to have slept and two cots. Moreover, in a magazine interview in January 2008, Gerry McCann said: “On one bed the twins lay sleeping”.

by Woof 13.08.12 23:22

Tony Bennett wrote: - The truth is that after the crying, the deponent had to change all the sheets and his daughter's clothing as she had vomited.

JT gives a very convincing story about the creche workers who came by searching and gave a big wave and hello to the ailing Evie only there are no statements to back it up.

If it was you and you were so convinced you had witnessed your friend's daughter's abduction wouldn't you beg either Rachel or Diane or both to watch your kids while you found a search party to check out the area where you "witnessed" the abduction? After all, there were no problems all week when one needed to spend 3 to 4 hours while leaving the kids alone while dining at the Tapas.

by tuom 13.08.12 23:32

Knowingly Sick children left alone to vomit !, the poor child's body in bed sheets and in a black bin bag in a house for nearly a week ............... am I on a different planet or what ??? I am at a loss with this case .....

by justathought 13.08.12 23:46

Tony Bennett wrote:
justathought wrote:Mr Bennett

Is there not question marks as to what happened to the twins cot covers.
Yes, I believe so.

All this also needs explaining:

Gerry McCann on 4 May (the day after Madeleine went missing) said: “Yesterday, Madeleine and and the twins were put to bed in their respective beds at 7.30pm”. Yet when the police arrived at about 11.00pm, they found a bed where Madeleine was supposed to have slept and two cots. Moreover, in a magazine interview in January 2008, Gerry McCann said: “On one bed the twins lay sleeping”.

Mr Bennett

The positioning of the cots within the bedroom may also be significant as they would have acted as an obstacle to someone wanting to speedily exit the premises via the bedroom window

by **tigger** 14.08.12 6:50

Perhaps we should start a Bed and Cot topic. It's of interest because the McCanns seem to have lied about it. Having the cots in the room makes it more difficult for the abductor, so why? Plus what was one cot doing in the other bedroom on Wednesday.
Soon after 3/5 Gerry's blog reports that the twins are now sleeping in a bed. Why report this?

I'm interested because of the fuss they make about it. Yet they slip up frequently on the 'bed' word in interviews.

Then there is ROB washing sheets, no sheets in the cots - why should this be of any importance to them?

by uppatoffee 14.08.12 6:56

tigger wrote:Perhaps we should start a Bed and Cot topic. It's of interest because the McCanns seem to have lied about it. Having the cots in the room makes it more difficult for the abductor, so why? Plus what was one cot doing in the other bedroom on Wednesday.
Soon after 3/5 Gerry's blog reports that the twins are now sleeping in a bed. Why report this?

I'm interested because of the fuss they make about it. Yet they slip up frequently on the 'bed' word in interviews.

Then there is ROB washing sheets, no sheets in the cots - why should this be of any importance to them?

Why would there not be sheets in the cot? I would always put down a sheet in the bottom of a travel cot, otherwise it's very unhygienic and the baby would get all hot and sticky when sleeping. I used to take my own or use ones provided for adult beds but fold it up.

by **tigger** 14.08.12 7:04

uppatoffee wrote:
tigger wrote:Perhaps we should start a Bed and Cot topic. It's of interest because the McCanns seem to have lied about it. Having the cots in the room makes it more difficult for the abductor, so why? Plus what was one cot doing in the other bedroom on Wednesday.
Soon after 3/5 Gerry's blog reports that the twins are now sleeping in a bed. Why report this?

I'm interested because of the fuss they make about it. Yet they slip up frequently on the 'bed' word in interviews.

Then there is ROB washing sheets, no sheets in the cots - why should this be of any importance to them?

Why would there not be sheets in the cot? I would always put down a sheet in the bottom of a travel cot, otherwise it's very unhygienic and the baby would get all hot and sticky when sleeping. I used to take my own or use ones provided for adult beds but fold it up.

Amaral and possibly the GNR noticed this straight away.

by **PeterMac** 14.08.12 7:30

PeterMac wrote:I don't think, sadly that we need to speculate too much about what happened. It is all so dreadfully predictable.

And today - bruising on lower body. How did we know ?

by Cheshire Cat 14.08.12 7:49

Written in the Mail - By Iain Gordon - former Detective Inspector for Met Police

For all too often it appears common sense and a robust spirit of justice has been replaced by a slavish attachment to arbitrary procedures and political correctness. As a result, some investigations seem paralysed by bureaucracy and rule-bound anxiety.

But the difficulties of the job can be made worse by excessive caution. The needs of the investigation have to come first, not the sensitivities of the family — even one that is grieving.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2187930/Tia-Sharp-murder-Coppers-common-sense-I-despair-old-force-took-8-days-body.html#ixzz23V6MmcuH

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2187930/Tia-Sharp-murder-Coppers-common-sense-I-despair-old-force-took-8-days-body.html#ixzz23V6EqI2o

by **PeterMac** 14.08.12 7:55

Sun, this morning -"

"Tia's stepgran sobbed yesterday as she said: “You always think things like this happen to someone else.”
Devastated Angie Niles added: “You see stories about Madeleine McCann or James Bulger and you think it must be awful what the family are feeling."
Interesting juxtaposition. I don't think they will like Sun readers having those put in the same sentence. Even though it is about feelings, most Sun readers will not get beyond the first half of the sentence, and the inevitable link among the three cases will sink in.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4486189/Smothered-Tias-body-wrapped-in-black-bed-sheet.html