April Jones. Search to end + Mark Bridger trial starts today 29/4/2013

the latest claim is that she was injured, but not dead in the back of his car, but he did not seek medical attention.
(Hence no cadaverine, but in any event it only develops after a some time.)
Clean up operation in the house, blood spots, . . .
Chilling parallels.

"I can't really remember" is a classic and almost NEVER works. Juries have their uses, and seeing through guff like that is not difficult for most people.
His own lawyer excepted, of course.
And of course Carter-Ruck, Max Clifford, and Clarence Mitchell, who are also excepted on professional grounds.

There is a possibility of how he could have disposed of a body, if he had a few hours and evidence suggests bone fragments. It's a horrid theory so please PM and I'll answer later.

PeterMac wrote:the latest claim is that she was injured, but not dead in the back of his car, but he did not seek medical attention.
(Hence no cadaverine, but in any event it only develops after a some time.)
Clean up operation in the house, blood spots, . . .
Chilling parallels.

"I can't really remember" is a classic and almost NEVER works. Juries have their uses, and seeing through guff like that is not difficult for most people.
His own lawyer excepted, of course.
And of course Carter-Ruck, Max Clifford, and Clarence Mitchell, who are also excepted on professional grounds.

MC has already admitted to seeing through the "guff", more or less, the bottom line for all of the above is £ signs.

Oh dear poor little kid , i read news 5mins ago and felt sick.no i cant understand how the search went on for all those months either ?cant say more its too horrible .joyce1938

They would have to carry on searching - can you imagine if parts of a childs body were found by the Public? This case is similar to that of Catherine Gowing near me.

They knew what had happened to her straight away, but they STILL had to go out and look for body parts. Some they found and some they didnt.

But 7-month long search just for parts; and they found absolutely nothing?

littlepixie wrote:They would have to carry on searching - can you imagine if parts of a childs body were found by the Public? This case is similar to that of Catherine Gowing near me. They knew what had happened to her straight away, but they STILL had to go out and look for body parts. Some they found and some they didnt.

Quite. But a combination of dismemberment and fire can be very quick.
Interesting that we have only now been told that they found bone and blood traces.
I wonder if the regular apologists will insist it was coconut shell, or if they are going to keep silent on this one.

PeterMac wrote:

littlepixie wrote:They would have to carry on searching - can you imagine if parts of a childs body were found by the Public? This case is similar to that of Catherine Gowing near me. They knew what had happened to her straight away, but they STILL had to go out and look for body parts. Some they found and some they didnt.

Quite. But a combination of dismemberment and fire can be very quick.
Interesting that we have only now been told that they found bone and blood traces.
I wonder if the regular apologists will insist it was coconut shell, or if they are going to keep silent on this one.

By those methods there will be very little, if at all, left to find, yet the Police spent 7-month long on the search which went on right up to the trial.

You would think blood and bone traces supported by forensics analysis reports are damning and irrefutable and convictable, and there wasn't any need to deploy dog on the water search as they did.

Also, I thought normally dogs are used when no traces of death are evidenced - it's a way to detect death using dog.
If death is already evidenced and supported by traces left behind, how usual is it to use cadaverine detection dog to recover remains? Its all so freaky, especially report about the juvenile human skull found in the ashes, as who could that possibly belongs to? Gruesome!

Latest from BBC website:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22353735

I hope they put him in prison and not on his own either. What terrible things to hear for the family.

How like Huntley he looked right at the start and now we find he's just the same, excuses, accidents and never his fault.

One question, Would aprils parents know any of this or would it be new to them.

It's very strange, Tiny. Until very recently her parents were quoted as saying that they still believed she was alive and would come home. That suggests that the police hadn't told them anything.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:It's very strange, Tiny. Until very recently her parents were quoted as saying that they still believed she was alive and would come home. That suggests that the police hadn't told them anything.

yes very strange

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:It's very strange, Tiny. Until very recently her parents were quoted as saying that they still believed she was alive and would come home. That suggests that the police hadn't told them anything.

I assume the police were very careful how they handled this, for the two following reasons:

It sounds like it was a very tight knit community, with various children from Bridgers complicated liasons. I imagine restricted information was necessary to stop children being bullied or local feuds and dust ups breaking out and things like that.

Secondly, it was such a high profile case and the internet being what it is, restricted information would be necessary to find a jury to hear the facts with a relatively clear slate.

Even if the parents did know the facts they were probably advised to give out a certain message.

The problem with the internet is that things go round like chinese whispers, and as our Dr says, it's difficult to know what is true and what is not.

I'm sure the police will have kept April's parents informed of what they had found, and advicing them not to say anything, Police will have made sure they wre prepared mentaly for what they would hear at the trail.

If the blood and bone traces found at his home are confirmed by forensics lab as definitely that of April I can see how he's going to get off just by denying because the compelling evidence speaks for itself.

aiyoyo wrote:If the blood and bone traces found at his home are confirmed by forensics lab as definitely that of April I can see how he's going to get off just by denying because the compelling evidence speaks for itself.

He might try the McDefence - Forensic scientists are notoriously unreliable

I fear that might well the case here - that his lawyer will be using McDefence style argument.

Evidence of traces of blood and bone fragment as reported would suggest a brutal disposal of the gruesome and bloodily messy kind that would leave blood traces everywhere on his person and in his home and possessions, that would require chemical to clean away. Any burning down of the ******* would take days and would stink out the whole village. At the hasty speed of his arrest, time was not on his side - at least not for the burning, nor for disposal of body parts outside of his premises without using vehicle. I stand corrected, but far as I know, no evidence was had from his vehicle, nothing reported anyway.

I still say the prolonged search does not tally with the blood and bone fragment snippets put out at the moment. If death was apparent from the get go supported by forensic testings, and the Police knew she died and how she might have been disposed then the erratic search using dogs was incomprehensible, IMO anyway. The pattern and method of the search suggests the Police hadn't a clue what they were looking for. Unless there is a different explanation for the traces of blood and bone fragment but the Police have not given us their theory on how those traces ended up in his home.

aiyoyo wrote:. SNIPPED IN PLACES Evidence of traces of blood and bone fragment as reported would suggest a brutal disposal of the gruesome and bloodily messy kind that would leave blood traces everywhere on his person and in his home and possessions, that would require chemical to clean away. Any burning down of the ******* would take days and would stink out the whole village. At the hasty speed of his arrest, time was not on his side - at least not for the burning, nor for disposal of body parts outside of his premises without using vehicle. I stand corrected, but far as I know, no evidence was had from his vehicle, nothing reported anyway.

Not necessarily quite right.
1
Tiny set of individual bones in a wood burner stove - police reported the house was very hot when they went in, and smelled of cleaner / bleach.
I have a wood burner and with the flue and the ash box open it roars and shakes, and gets to almost white heat. Any nails left in the wood end up twisted. The ash remains are powder, not cinders. Clothing and cloths or kitchen paper would simply disappear. A crematorium does not smell (usually) and is quite quick, and that is for a whole adult.
2
He was seen coming back off the hills with a black bag.
Foxes, badgers, crows, ravens will take small pieces of food, and leave no trace.

I am not of course talking about any case in particular, just hypothesising in general. We need to be careful

I have a wood-burner and have many a time burnt a chicken frame or left over food. You're right, it burns to white heat and there is virtually nothing left.

I was at Mold Crown Court today to visit the council offices there. It was so sad seeing the car with the pink ribbon parked next to mine and all the press vehicles.

I also felt very angry imagining the suspect was in the building in front of me. Even though I have faith, I still felt anger.

It must take a special sort of person to be a Police Officer PeterMac. I would find it very difficult to be in the same room as someone like Bridger.

PeterMac wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:. SNIPPED IN PLACES Evidence of traces of blood and bone fragment as reported would suggest a brutal disposal of the gruesome and bloodily messy kind that would leave blood traces everywhere on his person and in his home and possessions, that would require chemical to clean away. Any burning down of the ******* would take days and would stink out the whole village. At the hasty speed of his arrest, time was not on his side - at least not for the burning, nor for disposal of body parts outside of his premises without using vehicle. I stand corrected, but far as I know, no evidence was had from his vehicle, nothing reported anyway.

Not necessarily quite right.
1
Tiny set of individual bones in a wood burner stove - police reported the house was very hot when they went in, and smelled of cleaner / bleach.
I have a wood burner and with the flue and the ash box open it roars and shakes, and gets to almost white heat. Any nails left in the wood end up twisted. The ash remains are powder, not cinders. Clothing and cloths or kitchen paper would simply disappear. A crematorium does not smell (usually) and is quite quick, and that is for a whole adult.
2
He was seen coming back off the hills with a black bag.
Foxes, badgers, crows, ravens will take small pieces of food, and leave no trace.

I am not of course talking about any case in particular, just hypothesising in general. We need to be careful

He was also seen with a black bag near the river, which was probably why the police spent so long checking along the river and in the water, but maybe it had already been swept out to sea by then.

PeterMac wrote:
I have a wood burner and with the flue and the ash box open it roars and shakes, and gets to almost white heat. Any nails left in the wood end up twisted. The ash remains are powder, not cinders. Clothing and cloths or kitchen paper would simply disappear. A crematorium does not smell (usually) and is quite quick, and that is for a whole adult.
2
He was seen coming back off the hills with a black bag.
Foxes, badgers, crows, ravens will take small pieces of food, and leave no trace.

I am not of course talking about any case in particular, just hypothesising in general. We need to be careful

OMG, why didn't I think of wood burner....I know of those kinds...(shudder...)
I am also aware purpose built crematorium does it within minutes and is smell proof.
Thanks for reminding me to be careful.

Generally speaking people who went to great length to make a body disappear into thin air without trace is evil beyond belief.
We know of another infamous case where the little body just vanished without trace, and the parents claimed they "knew" what happened with the mum claiming she was there when it happened, but they have not cooperated with Police nor will they ever fessed up.

Just goes to show it pays to be middle-class with connections and ability to amass money at quick speed. And look what money can buy (especially other people's money) - it can buy lawyers and PR who will sell their soul to the devil just for 30 pieces of silver.

I dont believe any lawyers would work pro-bono without monetary motive...pro-bono is just the bait...

I don't want to be rude or shocking anyone.
And there's no proof that what I'm saying has any relation with the present case.
I just know that butchers can very quickly chop up an animal, especially a small one, say a lamb.
I also know, that if one puts fresh meat out in the open in a wild environment, it won't take more than a couple of hours to have been devoured completely. What with foxes, badgers, rats, and the likes.
Bones will also be devoured and bones will also burn in a hot fire, yet will leave small traces of the original material. DNA evidence may be difficult to extract from that.
Any blood a butcher may have spilt during his work may have been contaminated. And DNA analysis, if any, may be inconclusive.

Châtelaine wrote:I don't want to be rude or shocking anyone.
And there's no proof that what I'm saying has any relation with the present case.
I just know that butchers can very quickly chop up an animal, especially a small one, say a lamb.
I also know, that if one puts fresh meat out in the open in a wild environment, it won't take more than a couple of hours to have been devoured completely. What with foxes, badgers, rats, and the likes.
Bones will also be devoured and bones will also burn in a hot fire, yet will leave small traces of the original material. DNA evidence may be difficult to extract from that.
Any blood a butcher may have spilt during his work may have been contaminated. And DNA analysis, if any, may be inconclusive.

Didn't he also have a dog ?

At one stage in another topic 'pig' was discussed.
I was shocked to learn that hungry pigs would devour just about anything, including things with embedded bones, and do a clean job of it leaving no trace.

Not sure whether dog can do as clean a job as pig. Generally I thought dog can't and won't grind down bone.

Châtelaine wrote:I don't want to be rude or shocking anyone.
And there's no proof that what I'm saying has any relation with the present case.
I just know that butchers can very quickly chop up an animal, especially a small one, say a lamb.
I also know, that if one puts fresh meat out in the open in a wild environment, it won't take more than a couple of hours to have been devoured completely. What with foxes, badgers, rats, and the likes.
Bones will also be devoured and bones will also burn in a hot fire, yet will leave small traces of the original material. DNA evidence may be difficult to extract from that.
Any blood a butcher may have spilt during his work may have been contaminated. And DNA analysis, if any, may be inconclusive.

I do think he worked as a butcher at one time. sure I heard it mentioned or am I wrong ? Anyway he has admitted to seeing and being with her, I don't think he will come out smelling of roses now but wonder what his defense team has to say about the bones and blood found in his house.

aiyoyo wrote: [...] Not sure whether dog can do as clean a job as pig. Generally I thought dog can't and won't grind down bone.

***
Who told you that?

I could tell you stories about dogs and bones ...

Châtelaine wrote:

aiyoyo wrote: [...] Not sure whether dog can do as clean a job as pig. Generally I thought dog can't and won't grind down bone.

***
Who told you that? I could tell you stories about dogs and bones ...

My dogs will eat a complete ham bone a foot long and with a two inch head of femur in about half an hour. One each.

In any event the bone was discovered in the stove, and he had a boning knife which was also in the stove, half burned.
He worked at an abattoir.
Shocking to contemplate, but tells the jury what they need to know.
Under the circumstances it is hardly likely that he will make a full and frank confession.

Not looking good for him anyway; not after he'd admitted she's dead because his car ran over her, and that amnesia has suddenly seized up his memory that he couldn't remember anything after that.

Either he's to be medically examined for any underlying mental problem or there is no explanation for his bizzare story.

Looks like Bridger and his legal team will push for 'the diminished responsibilty' angle. Absolute tripe, he knew what he was doing and he knows what happened to April, IMO of course.