five year old missing!!

[Midnight_Fairy]

wish I could help

 

[mumj18]

I am a lawyer.

What worries me is people basically convicting someone who hasn't been charged with anything, it's trial by media that could have a serious effect in a subsequent trial. It may be him, it may not be - but to say "no doubt about it" before a trial is, to me, a strange point of view.

It doesn't mean that your particular point of view is correct or more worthy, sorry. Everyone has an opinion. Noone here is on a jury or is conducting a trial, they're speculating. They're talking about the case because it's affecting them and upsetting them. Talking about it helps. This isn't a formal setting.

I find the input of a lawyer much more relevant than idle hear say and speculation which you have had alot of input.

Redhead has provided a true insight into what is likely going on.

No need

 

[// arcadia]

I am a lawyer.

What worries me is people basically convicting someone who hasn't been charged with anything, it's trial by media that could have a serious effect in a subsequent trial. It may be him, it may not be - but to say "no doubt about it" before a trial is, to me, a strange point of view.

It doesn't mean that your particular point of view is correct or more worthy, sorry. Everyone has an opinion. Noone here is on a jury or is conducting a trial, they're speculating. They're talking about the case because it's affecting them and upsetting them. Talking about it helps. This isn't a formal setting.

I find the input of a lawyer much more relevant than idle hear say and speculation which you have had alot of input.

Redhead has provided a true insight into what is likely going on.

No need to get rude I am more than entitiled to my opinion, as is Redhead. Unfortunately, she's not working on this case. Neither am I. So noone can truly say what's going on

Im not being rude its true. This thread is full of speculation about why this man did this or that. Imagine if it was your dad or brother who happened to have a bit of a hectic life and appear a bit of a 'loner' and he was hauled in on the basis of one 7 year olds witness.

Imagine that really they are innocent and this is going to devastate their life.

Until the man is charged we know nothing and im appreciative of redheads input and i do think it is very worthy because it is based on what is actually happening.

 

[baby D]

sorry girls at work and just trying to catch up -- whats this about removing doors?? Where?

 

[mumj18]

Was so hoping today would be the day

 

[mumj18]

I think it was doors of outbuildings at the house he was staying in. Someone else may know more.

 

[Jem_x3]

sorry girls at work and just trying to catch up -- whats this about removing doors?? Where?

They were removing doors at Mr. Bridger's home earlier, nothing was found x

 

[Samemka]

I just don't get it. It seems they haven't got anywhere at all. It's like she's literally just disappeared. It will be ten steps back if they find nothing by tonight and the only suspect they had is released because they have nothing on them. What will they do then?

We wouldn't know if they had found out anything. Until she is found that is their main priority so anything they do find out (aside from the involvement of another party etc) is really not relevant to the public. They can't go releasing everything they have found out or if this goes to trial he has an even weaker chance of a fair trial than he already has.

 

[Emma&Freya]

I generally thought she would be found last night

 

[Redhead84]

Anything that is released has to be carefully weighed up in terms of it's usefulness in helping the investigation and the public interest and the danger of seriously prejudicing a trial, which if they do will mean that the case will end before it's begun.

Police Officers will not be making these decisions - they are not sufficiently legally trained to make such judgements. Forces have solicitors who will give them a red or green light.

I reiterate it is immensely frustrating, but they are doing their best, and their searches will not be random - they will be based on credible leads. It may seem like they are getting nowhere - but unfortunately it's a pretty big area to search, with rain washing away any potential tracks and smells that may exist and if they are getting nothing from their only suspect it's simply very difficult to find a needle in a haystack.

 

[Emma&Freya]

Anything that is released has to be carefully weighed up in terms of it's usefulness in helping the investigation and the public interest and the danger of seriously prejudicing a trial, which if they do will mean that the case will end before it's begun.

Police Officers will not be making these decisions - they are not sufficiently legally trained to make such judgements. Forces have solicitors who will give them a red or green light.

I reiterate it is immensely frustrating, but they are doing their best, and their searches will not be random - they will be based on credible leads. It may seem like they are getting nowhere - but unfortunately it's a pretty big area to search, with rain washing away any potential tracks and smells that may exist and if they are getting nothing from their only suspect it's simply very difficult to find a needle in a haystack.

Readhead, if he is hiding something and it does come out he had something to do with it, what would happen then?

 

[Redhead84]

Anything that is released has to be carefully weighed up in terms of it's usefulness in helping the investigation and the public interest and the danger of seriously prejudicing a trial, which if they do will mean that the case will end before it's begun.

Police Officers will not be making these decisions - they are not sufficiently legally trained to make such judgements. Forces have solicitors who will give them a red or green light.

I reiterate it is immensely frustrating, but they are doing their best, and their searches will not be random - they will be based on credible leads. It may seem like they are getting nowhere - but unfortunately it's a pretty big area to search, with rain washing away any potential tracks and smells that may exist and if they are getting nothing from their only suspect it's simply very difficult to find a needle in a haystack.

Readhead, if he is hiding something and it does come out he had something to do with it, what would happen then?

Then he will be charged with either abduction/false imprisonment etc etc etc or her murder.

He isn't under any obligation to talk at all during a police interview, just the same as you or I. There is very little else that the Police can do other than continue to try and elicit information from him - if he does stay silent then an adverse inference can be drawn from it in Court but right now it is for the Police to gather enough evidence to charge whether he talks or not.

It is not for him to prove he didn't do it, it is for the Crown (the Police and the CPS) to prove that he did. If I was his solicitor I would most likely be advising him to say as little as possible, if anything at all.

 

[Emma&Freya]

Anything that is released has to be carefully weighed up in terms of it's usefulness in helping the investigation and the public interest and the danger of seriously prejudicing a trial, which if they do will mean that the case will end before it's begun.

Police Officers will not be making these decisions - they are not sufficiently legally trained to make such judgements. Forces have solicitors who will give them a red or green light.

I reiterate it is immensely frustrating, but they are doing their best, and their searches will not be random - they will be based on credible leads. It may seem like they are getting nowhere - but unfortunately it's a pretty big area to search, with rain washing away any potential tracks and smells that may exist and if they are getting nothing from their only suspect it's simply very difficult to find a needle in a haystack.

Readhead, if he is hiding something and it does come out he had something to do with it, what would happen then?

Then he will be charged with either abduction/false imprisonment etc etc etc or her murder.

He isn't under any obligation to talk at all during a police interview, just the same as you or I. There is very little else that the Police can do other than continue to try and elicit information from him - if he does stay silent then an adverse inference can be drawn from it in Court but right now it is for the Police to gather enough evidence to charge whether he talks or not.

It is not for him to prove he didn't do it, it is for the Crown (the Police and the CPS) to prove that he did. If I was his solicitor I would most likely be advising him to say as little as possible, if anything at all.

But why? If he was innocent would it not help? By staying quiet would it not be more like hes guilty?

 

[Harveysmum369]

Watching sky news...i really hope she is found xx

 

[Redhead84]

Sometimes when the Police are continuing to gather information it's best to wait and see all the evidence they are going to present before making a determination as to what to say or not say.

Most people talk too much in interviews, and as you cannot intervene and stop your client talking, it is best to err on the side of caution to start with. You can always advise your client then to make a full statement and story of events once evidence is presented but you cannot erase words already said.

 

[Quackquack99]

Redhead if he refuses to answer any questions to him surely that would not go in his favour. I understand legally he doesn't have to answer any questions but let's say he isn't, wouldn't that hinder the investigation. Also it is very strange for the police to release the suspects picture this early on, would you agree or disagree that the police are very certain they have the person they are looking for. I'm just curious

 

[mumoffive]

Read on the telegraph online..they are digging up the paving stones in the place he had been renting

 

[Redhead84]

Redhead if he refuses to answer any questions to him surely that would not go in his favour. I understand legally he doesn't have to answer any questions but let's say he isn't, wouldn't that hinder the investigation. Also it is very strange for the police to release the suspects picture this early on, would you agree or disagree that the police are very certain they have the person they are looking for. I'm just curious

We do not know what he is or is not saying in his interviews... he may very well be saying "I'm innocent, I know nothing about this".

This could be a lie, it could also be the truth. If it's the truth and he can't help the investigation, all he can do is continue to protest his innocence and hope that the Police believe him - in which case the Police are then hindering their own investigation.

The Police can be very one-track minded at times - my own OH was hauled in for an interview about a matter in July, he gave good and lucid explanations, and told the absolute truth, he was still called a liar repeatedly by the officer conducting the interview.

Re the photo - it's a big step to take, and one that is certainly a gamble. It is likely at it was released in order to try and get more information from the public and jog people's memories - however they'll have had to have good grounds before this to get authorisation to do so - certainly suggesting a prima facie case has been built around him and they need to fill in the blanks so to speak.

If they are wrong, a big lawsuit will be coming their way, but this is the chance they have to take sometimes to get the information they need.

A word of caution though: the Police have been known to be wrong before - the Jo Yates investigation was a mess to start with, and as I said earlier they were so convinced they had the right man in the investigation for the Yorkshire Ripper it allowed Peter Sutcliffe to carry on killing.

 

[mumj18]

V interesting.

Can't believe its another night of no news!

 

[baby D]

Your posts are so insightful redhead. Thank you!