Deceased/Not Found UK - April Jones, 5, Machynlleth, Wales, 1 Oct 2012 #2 *M. Bridger guilty*

[cluciano63]

In the case of Ayla Reynolds here in USA, she has been missing for 10 months and police are still searching the river on and off, even as recently as this past week I believe, on the chance she may have been put there. She was younger than April. So perhaps a small body would not always surface, or would be more liable to be caught up on something in the water. I am not sure, but I know when the water level change, they tend to search again.

 

[Inge Jones]

This is a bit gruesome but if the body had been dumped in the river and somehow made it past the estuary and out to sea, what would be likely to happen then? Would it float, or be under the surface. I don't understand tides and sea movement well. What direction would it be likely to take and where wouldit be expected to wash up, eventually?

Or, is there no chance of it flowing into the sea?

Most bodies that get into the sea in non-shark areas from near the coast get back to a shore eventually, but it can be some weeks. I am not so sure about ones that get into the sea miles out, like falling overboard a cruise ship.

 

[jaldy80]

I don't think I'm going to like not knowing more about this guys background. No public records to review, nothing until the trial...only rumors or rumours. Anyone close more or less won't reveal much as they have been asked to so the evidence is preserved for the trial....gar

I hope to hear in the morning that April has been found. It's 4:10 am in Wales.

It's entirely possible that there have been reporting restrictions placed on the media regarding MB's past from the very start of this thing. He could have a past and we just don't know about it.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

http://www.lep.co.uk/news/local/troll-arrested-over-april-posting-1-5002096

Sunday 7 October 2012
By David Coates
Published on Sunday 7 October 2012 12:46

These "Troll" arrests are now getting out of hand now in the UK. This one IMO is a stupid guy that probably read the sick "joke" that the infamous stand up comic Frankie Boyle recently made about Madeleine McCann.

His lawyer will probably ask why Mr Boyle hasn't been arrested. I hate double standards even more than the sick jokes.

 

[michellemarls]

'April Jones is in the arms of Jesus': town gathers to pray for lost girl


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...Jesus-town-gathers-to-pray-for-lost-girl.html

 

[Inge Jones]

It's entirely possible that there have been reporting restrictions placed on the media regarding MB's past. He could have a past and we just don't know about it.

Reporting restrictions are always placed on the media after someone has been charged. It then becomes sub judice and nothing may be published that could prejudice a trial in any way, or the publisher can find themselves with a prison sentence for contempt of court. This is even binding on phone-in radio shows - they must not allow callers to discuss the case either.

From here until the trial opens, we won't get anything in the media except if they find her body (death is always a public fact, but post mortem results are not, in the UK) and then we may get some coverage of the funeral.

 

[imamaze]

I've removed the discussion about what we think the police have told Mr. and Mrs. Jones and if they believe April is still alive or not or why they think either after my warnings last night to move on.

Please alert if you feel a post is against TOS and don't respond. If you have questions you can pm me or any Mod, we're happy to help.


I put up a couple warnings last night to move on from this discussion, we don't want pages and pages of this. That is not what this case is about. Its about finding April and how tragic and heartbreaking it is that this has happened.

Thanks.

Ima

 

[jigzy]

Jmo, but I have every confidence in what the LE have said and done to date. They have worked around the clock with locals to sympathetically manage, and keep safe, a huge amount of members of the public who want to be involved with the active search, as well as coordinating great numbers of trained volunteers. They have spoken regularly with the media to keep updating the public, thanking people, and appealing for witnesses. They have released only info that could help move the investigation further on, as would be expected. they have done everything right, imo.
On the other hand the media are putting a distasteful 'spin' on the current situation. The link below (the quote near the end of the article) is just one example of the media seeking out and quoting disbelieving members of the community who are clearly not party to what the police have told the family. On tv we see interviews with people who appear to love the sound of their own voice. This small town with a big heart mantra is wearing thin for me. It seems the only people being interviewed currently are those who say they won't rest until the little angel is brought home to her family, the word body seems anathema. As much as I dislike Kay Burley's technique, she is the only journo not pussyfooting around the reality of WHAT THE LE HAVE TOLD US. A very sad and tragic case all round. Jmo.


http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/350567

 

[jaldy80]

Reporting restrictions are always placed on the media after someone has been charged. It then becomes sub judice and nothing may be published that could prejudice a trial in any way, or the publisher can find themselves with a prison sentence for contempt of court. This is even binding on phone-in radio shows - they must not allow callers to discuss the case either.

From here until the trial opens, we won't get anything in the media except if they find her body (death is always a public fact, but post mortem results are not, in the UK) and then we may get some coverage of the funeral.

I am aware of that. I was talking about from the beginning of this whole sorry affair in general. People have commented on the fact that there has been nothing brought up about any possible previous convictions etc.

 

[Clio]

It's entirely possible that there have been reporting restrictions placed on the media regarding MB's past. He could have a past and we just don't know about it.

Media can't print anything now he's been charged. Do you mean before he was charged? It's usually the press who name a suspect under arrest. LE don't name them until they are charged. In this case LE confirmed it was MB who was under arrest, issued pictures etc etc. That's highly unusual to say the least.

If the arrested person has a "past" of somesort the media would normally dig it out and print it as long as the person hasn't yet been charged. Of course, it's possible that nothing was printed because there was nothing of interest found. However, because LE took the very unusual approach of naming him, they may well have asked the media not to print certain things so it's not impossible that he has a "past" and we don't know.

 

[jigzy]

It's entirely possible that there have been reporting restrictions placed on the media regarding MB's past from the very start of this thing. He could have a past and we just don't know about it.

Yes indeed

 

[cluciano63]

I don't understand why in UK, etc. the legal system thinks that if people hear anything at all about a crime, that they will be unable to render a fair verdict when the time comes. I am not enthralled with USA system, but verdicts are given everyday based on evidence presented in court, no matter how much has been published about the crime beforehand. The law is very clear that only what they hear in court can be considered, and there are enough acquittals to show that this is taken very seriously.

 

[bijoux]

Reporting restrictions are always placed on the media after someone has been charged. It then becomes sub judice and nothing may be published that could prejudice a trial in any way.

True, but isn't it possible witnesses, or anyone questioned by LE from the outset were told not to talk to the press. Not much has been revealed about MB at all, good or bad.
I still think what's on his computer will tell the tale.

 

[natty01]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-19863300

about the increase in search teams

 

[Saturn]

'April Jones is in the arms of Jesus':

I heard this part of the church service on the news, do we know who spoke those words, I thought maybe the mother - anyhow, was driving at the time, it made my eyes leak.

 

[Inge Jones]

True, but isn't it possible witnesses, or anyone questioned by LE from the outset were told not to talk to the press. Not much has been revealed about MB at all, good or bad.
I still think what's on his computer will tell the tale.

Well the press are also open to being sued by the suspect if they have blackened his character and he is then released without charge. I don't think they want another Chris Jefferies anway. Also no one wants a possible child killer to get off because his lawyers were able to argue that he can't get a fair trial due to media coverage - they could try that even if the coverage had not fallen within the reach of sub-judice rules.

BTW in the UK not all households have a computer. He didn't strike me as being the type of person who would have been interested in computers. He may have something like a blackberry or iphone, but the data on them is relatively superficial and not stored long.

 

[natty01]

I heard this part of the church service on the news, do we know who spoke those words, I thought maybe the mother - anyhow, was driving at the time, it made my eyes leak.

i just read an article that the parents didnt attend the service

rev kathleen rogers said in the arms of jesus , made me cry too

 

[Sarahlou]

I don't understand why in UK, etc. the legal system thinks that if people hear anything at all about a crime, that they will be unable to render a fair verdict when the time comes. I am not enthralled with USA system, but verdicts are given everyday based on evidence presented in court, no matter how much has been published about the crime beforehand. The law is very clear that only what they hear in court can be considered, and there are enough acquittals to show that this is taken very seriously.

I think it's best if most details are only given in court, as much as my nosey self would like to hear them beforehand. I think a lot of people do make up their minds by certain things they hear and would find it hard to ignore that. JMO.

 

[jigzy]

I really don't know how Jesus is relevant other than to the vicar as it comes with the job choice, but all the multitudes who turned out for church today don't go there each week for sure. Jmo (as someone who does not believe in a personal god)

Maybe a more non specific meeting of faith might have been more appropriate. Again, jmo.

 

[Saturn]

I'm not a religious person, but the image of April being scooped up in the arms of Jesus, and in my head this was the benevolent picture of Jesus (with warm background glow) from my old books (approx 40+ years ago).

I questioned myself as to why I don't believe, and was thinking about this as I popped outside for a smoke, when a sparrow landed at my feet - did not seem scared, and bounced around, all the time I was walking around.

Then had a murky recollection of sparrows in the bible: found this "Jesus referred to this practice when He used the sparrow to illustrate the love of God for the persecuted"

From this website http://ww2.netnitco.net/~legend01/sparrow.htm

Sorry, I sound like a religious nut trying to convert everyone - just found that scenario so poignant.

Coincidence?