She was a central character when it all happened so she would have been named during the trial anyway.I personally am disgusted that this (only just still a) child cannot be named but a presumably innocent person a couple of years older has been named by his defence.
She was a central character when it all happened so she would have been named during the trial anyway.
It has crossed my mind he's trying to inflict as much pain as possible on the family, for reasons I don't understand.I wonder if he is going to claim that "she" - the 19 year old GF - paid him or hired him to kidnap little Alesha. If there was any truth at all to his claims, if he had any substance of proof, she would have been arrested by now.
IMHO, he is blowing smoke and trying to smear someone's name. Maybe she rebuked his advances previously and taking Alesha was a payback to the 19 year old. Now, he is trying to get his revenge another way. Disgusting.
It has crossed my mind he's trying to inflict as much pain as possible on the family, for reasons I don't understand.
I just don't see this defence going anywhere.
He seems to have a massive grudge against them all. Perhaps it will come out in court why.It has crossed my mind he's trying to inflict as much pain as possible on the family, for reasons I don't understand.
I just don't see this defence going anywhere.
He's the accused, not her. Same way she is not a suspect.Named yes but, not as an accused child killer.