Missing Woman in London

[clapham_gull]

Did the young man who went missing in Hove over the weekend get a mention on this forum? He was found deceased yesterday, also very sad but looking like very different circumstances. It is interesting which cases catch the national eye, and which don't.

As the OP it caught my local eye.

 

[Starry]

that's a tragic update.

the policeman's name/photo is now all over the place. he likely is a wrong 'un but what happened to innocent until proven guilty.

 

[Badger Boy]

As the OP it caught my local eye.

And as it's the first story highlighted on the Sky News website, I think it's fair to say it's caught the national eye too.

 

[Seagull58]

A massive payout by the newspapers after being sued by Sonia Sutcliffe after being accused of ‘knowing’ her husbands secrets would suggest your statement is a tad inaccurate - maybe ?
On a slightly different tack Private eye got spanked heavily initially (£600k) for accusing her of making money out of it all. The Newspapers settled privately for their accusations btw.

I'm not suggesting either of them protected someone they knew was a murderer but Carr knowingly provided a false alibi. The Sutcliffe legal case was because Private Eye and others said she was attempting to benefit financially from his crimes, nothing to do with whether she knew or suspected he was the ripper, or whether she protected him.

"One other newspaper which formed part of her legal action, the News of the World did not settle. When the case came to court in December 1990, details emerged which demonstrated that she had benefitted financially from her husband's crimes. The jury found for the News of the World, and she was ordered to pay the legal costs of both sides in the case"

 

[clapham_gull]

that's a tragic update.

the policeman's name/photo is now all over the place.

That's social media for you, it doesn't take long (in many cases) to get a photograph now.

The press usually get a name very quickly. If a neighbours house has been raided by many policeman it doesn't take long for a journalist to find out who lives there.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

that's a tragic update.

the policeman's name/photo is now all over the place. he likely is a wrong 'un but what happened to innocent until proven guilty.

I suspect that as his garden is being dug up, & his car impounded for forensics, they've got some evidence. Enough to add to the suspicion charges, anyway.

 

[clapham_gull]

And as it's the first story highlighted on the Sky News website, I think it's fair to say it's caught the national eye too.

It has now yes. But it was a story in London on Friday.

 

[Bry Nylon]

What a bizarre turn of events.

Obviously, the person arrested has not been charged with anything yet you would think that a serving police officer of all people would realise that CCTV, ANPR, mobile phone records and modern forensics would make it near impossible to commit a crime like this, in this location, and remain undetected.

 

[The Fits]

EDIT.

No, I’ll not single out individuals, but talking about a murdered goal and saying “oh, it’s only because she’s white and blonde that we’re hearing about it” is pretty low.

Have a few words with yourselves.

You're missing the point I think.

 

[Bry Nylon]

That's social media for you, it doesn't take long (in many cases) to get a photograph now.

The press usually get a name very quickly. If a neighbours house has been raided by many policeman it doesn't take long for a journalist to find out who lives there.

Yup. His name and photo is now on lots of mainstream news websites that I've seen.

 

[Gwylan]

that's a tragic update.

the policeman's name/photo is now all over the place. he likely is a wrong 'un but what happened to innocent until proven guilty.

He's still innocent, he's not even been charged yet.

There are two reasons why people's names are made public. First, we have an open justice system where justice is done and is seen to be done. Sadly, there are many countries were people disappear and no-one knows what's happened to them,

Second, it's an opportunity for other people to come forward and say that they've been attacked/threatened by the accused. If names were secret, this wouldn't be an option for the police.

 

[Bombadier Botty]

Father of two, so many lives potentially ruined.

 

[Weststander]

It's odd full stop.

She came from a street not 15 minutes away from here and they were searching near a junction I often pass when walking to Abbeville Road if anyone knows the area.

People still milling around at that time of night, loads of traffic and well lit wide urban streets as someone has mentioned above.

Would have passed by a big Tescos, some smaller convenience shops and a Marks and Spencer food hall. All would have been busy as people are shopping before they close.

If "something" happened outside my road, I'd hear it as would many others.

Or an off duty copper (and pervert) offers to drive her home the rest of their journey. His occupation gaining her trust.

Several coppers have been jailed in recent years for rapes.

Murder takes it a stage further, to hide his identity.

 

[The Fifth Column]

You can always rely on the Met Police to yet again damage and erode the public trust in the Police by employing yet another wrongun. Other forces must be shaking their heads in dismay.

 

[blue-shifted]

He's still innocent, he's not even been charged yet.

There are two reasons why people's names are made public. First, we have an open justice system where justice is done and is seen to be done. Sadly, there are many countries were people disappear and no-one knows what's happened to them,

Second, it's an opportunity for other people to come forward and say that they've been attacked/threatened by the accused. If names were secret, this wouldn't be an option for the police.

Justice should be seen to be done yes. But not before they are even charged. Justice is only served at the point of conviction.

Other people may come forward alleging other crimes, but that doesn't affect whether the individual should be charged, tried or found guilty or not of these crimes. Jurors are specifically told to set other offences aside in their deliberations later down the line.

There surely has to be a balance here, peoples lives have been ruined because the press have published the life story of a suspect who then turns out to be totally innocent. This sad case isn't a good example, but I don't think people's names or details should be published at least until they are charged. There's an argument both ways for whether it should be until conviction.

 

[The Fits]

He's still innocent, he's not even been charged yet.

There are two reasons why people's names are made public. First, we have an open justice system where justice is done and is seen to be done. Sadly, there are many countries were people disappear and no-one knows what's happened to them,

Second, it's an opportunity for other people to come forward and say that they've been attacked/threatened by the accused. If names were secret, this wouldn't be an option for the police.

It's poor form to speculate, but I wonder whether the pace of all this, and the amount of exposure it's been given might be because of previous suspicion about the accused.

 

[The Fits]

Justice should be seen to be done yes. But not before they are even charged. Justice is only served at the point of conviction.

Other people may come forward alleging other crimes, but that doesn't affect whether the individual should be charged, tried or found guilty or not of these crimes. Jurors are specifically told to set other offences aside in their deliberations later down the line.

There surely has to be a balance here, peoples lives have been ruined because the press have published the life story of a suspect who then turns out to be totally innocent. This sad case isn't a good example, but I don't think people's names or details should be published at least until they are charged. There's an argument both ways for whether it should be until conviction.

There was that chap accused of the murder of Jo Yeates in Bristol who was basically portrayed as a psyco, weirdo, pedo oddball from the off.
Wasn't the murderer. Life ruined.

This seems a little more conclusive.

 

[Seagull58]

There was that chap accused of the murder of Jo Yeates in Bristol who was basically portrayed as a psyco, weirdo, pedo oddball from the off.
Wasn't the murderer. Life ruined.

This seems a little more conclusive.

Yes, that was despicable and he suffered for a period of time but I don't think his life was ruined long-term. He got, if I remember correctly, some serious financial compensation from the gutter press through the legal system.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Father of two, so many lives potentially ruined.

It's getting worse by the minute.

 

[blue-shifted]

There was that chap accused of the murder of Jo Yeates in Bristol who was basically portrayed as a psyco, weirdo, pedo oddball from the off.
Wasn't the murderer. Life ruined.

This seems a little more conclusive.

But that's not for us to say or know is it.

You and I don't know the facts of the case.

That's for the police, CPS and jury

You can't have a rule that if it's looking bad for the suspect you can release the details.

In the Jo Yeates case, the media treatment of the suspect was diabolical (to use the parlance of the day). Photos on the news slowing zooming in on his eyes. A trick designed to make the bloke look creepy

I don't want to go on about this too much as in this example and at this moment, thoughts should only be with the family of the victim. These are really conversations for another day

I just don't see that you or I have the right to know these details about the suspect at this stage