GUILTY UK - Kayleigh Haywood, 15, Ibstock, Leicestershire, 13 Nov 2015 - #2

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

JerricaBenton said:
There is a lot less interest in this case than Becky Watts, I wonder why that is?
Click to expand...

I don't know but I often wonder this myself. What makes one case grab the headlines (and our attention) more than another? I think, possibly, with Becky she was missing quite a few days, there was a cast of many, lots of social media and behaviour to study, the police released more information to the public, the appeals got increasingly desperate, so by the time she was found, chopped up, by a family member, we were hooked / gripped / disgusted / needed to vent.

Kayleigh was found relatively quickly after being reported missing (and after having a thread here), the arrests were swift, nobody has spoken out, we haven't had much to sleuth, we haven't seen as many tributes to Kayleigh whereas with Becky there were lots of photos and footage, loads of clues to her life and relationships. I think we "knew" Becky better. It's the same with India Chipchase, she hasn't got as much press despite being the usual media favourite stereotype of being beautiful and from a privileged background. Perhaps her family don't want to speak out, maybe that has a huge bearing on how far the media push it, I dunno.

It's an odd one, but it certainly seems from being here that some cases really take off and some just slow burn. We all want justice for Kayleigh (and I'm very sure we'll get it) as much as the next girl, but her story simply hasn't been sensationalised as much as Becky's. I doubt there'll be a book or movie either (barfs).
 
There's less media interest in the trial because the murderer has pleaded guilty.

It is unusual that he has forced a trial by pleading not guilty to one of the lesser charges. But that isn't going to make much difference except potentially to the case of LH, who was never charged with murder.
 
Agree with all that Cags, and I also wonder if the fact that they entered guilty pleas, to all except the false imprisonment, has made a difference.
 
Cherwell said:
There's less media interest in the trial because the murderer has pleaded guilty.

It is unusual that he has forced a trial by pleading not guilty to one of the lesser charges. But that isn't going to make much difference except potentially to the case of LH, who was never charged with murder.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Yes, guilty plea affects it too.

I'm on the fence until we hear SB's story, but if he exonerates LH (ie didn't see him have sex with or hurting Kayleigh AND he confirms LH was asleep when he raped and murdered Kayleigh) then it would seem on the face of it that they might both be telling the truth in what they've admitted to. We shall see.
 
Their evidence seems to be conflicting so far.

LH claims nothing happened between him and Kayleigh on the Friday night.
SB claims that LH said he slept with Kayleigh on the Friday night.

LH testimony stated that - about 10pm on the Saturday night, he went round to SBs and asked SB for a lift to the shops to go and get some more coke.
SB testimony is that he met Kayleigh on the Saturday night at about 7.30pm/8pm - at LHs house.
SB then goes on to say he only knew her about 4 hours as he left LHs house at midnight.
To me, this implies he was at the house ( LHs ) for those 4 hours.
 
With regard to news coverage, I am suprised there's not been more as it was national headlines in November (I remember it being Paris and then Kayleigh was the next story).

I think what Cherwell said makes sense though. Because they pleaded guilty, there's less to report or to sensationalise.
 
Alyce said:
Their evidence seems to be conflicting so far.

LH claims nothing happened between him and Kayleigh on the Friday night.
SB claims that LH said he slept with Kayleigh on the Friday night.

LH testimony stated that - about 10pm on the Saturday night, he went round to SBs and asked SB for a lift to the shops to go and get some more coke.
SB testimony is that he met Kayleigh on the Saturday night at about 7.30pm/8pm - at LHs house.
SB then goes on to say he only knew her about 4 hours as he left LHs house at midnight.
To me, this implies he was at the house ( LHs ) for those 4 hours.
Click to expand...

I might be wrong but I think what we've heard this morning from SB relates to the interview he gave police before he admitted rape and murder i.e. when he was still acting innocent and trying to wriggle out of it. I assume there will be revised details coming later as we know he was there at 3.
 
Alyce said:
Their evidence seems to be conflicting so far.

LH claims nothing happened between him and Kayleigh on the Friday night.
SB claims that LH said he slept with Kayleigh on the Friday night.
Click to expand...

Both of those things could be true though. Men often brag about sexual conquests that never actually took place. :mad:
 
So far from the updates it seems that in places SB "backs up" what LH said: that he was asleep and Kayleigh was gone when he woke up.

Just read that he admitted to raping her in the gravel car park. Poor girl :(
 
RainbowSkies said:
So far from the updates it seems that in places SB "backs up" what LH said: that he was asleep and Kayleigh was gone when he woke up.

Just read that he admitted to raping her in the gravel car park. Poor girl :(
Click to expand...


Yes, apart from SB saying that LH admitted sleeping with Kayleigh on the Friday night ( which may or may not be true ) he does otherwise seem to have backed up LHs story.
I dont completely believe LH and am still waiting to hear his explanation of how Kayleigh's shoes disappeared from his house.
 
Alyce said:
Yes, apart from SB saying that LH admitted sleeping with Kayleigh on the Friday night ( which may or may not be true ) he does otherwise seem to have backed up LHs story.
I dont completely believe LH and am still waiting to hear his explanation of how Kayleigh's shoes disappeared from his house.
Click to expand...

Yes there are still unanswered questions. I'm not decided either way with the false imprisonment yet. Like I say - there's still some questions or inconsistencies that I haven't been able to make up my mind.
 
Lh previously said he went to bed leaving kh asleep on the settee and for sb to let himself out.

Sb states that lh fell asleep on the settee. So surely at some point he woke up and went to bed. Surely he wondered where kh was then??
 
Pinkbutterfly said:
Lh previously said he went to bed leaving kh asleep on the settee and for sb to let himself out.

Sb states that lh fell asleep on the settee. So surely at some point he woke up and went to bed. Surely he wondered where kh was then??
Click to expand...


I think they are both lying - although there is probably a bit of truth mixed in with the lies.
 
ColourPurple said:
I can see where his SB's defence is going with this... they're arguing that if he admitted to rape and murder why on earth wouldn't he also admit to the lesser offence of false imprisonment too if he had done that too?

I was wondering the same TBH. Unless he's just admitting to what he knows they can definitely prove... or covering for LH.
Click to expand...

Definately. I also think he is just admitting to the stuff they can prove.
As to whether he is covering for LH, I am not sure. I cant see any reason why he would but it does seem as though the bulk of his evidence is confirming LHs statements.
I actually think that LH was more involved and something happened in the house, those injuries didnt come from nowhere.
 
Alyce said:
Definately. I also think he is just admitting to the stuff they can prove.
As to whether he is covering for LH, I am not sure. I cant see any reason why he would but it does seem as though the bulk of his evidence is confirming LHs statements.
I actually think that LH was more involved and something happened in the house, those injuries didnt come from nowhere.
Click to expand...

I agree, LH needs to clear any doubt that he was invovled in falsely imprisoning Kayleigh he needs to come clean, be completely honest and explain

A) what the scream and banging was around 10pm
B) why he was covered in injuries

And if he can't do that ... why can't he?
 
I keep wondering what the banging was. Was Kayleigh locked in a room and left banging on the door? Was there anything broken in the house? That kind of thing. It seems the police haven't said much about the state of the house, other than there being vomit in various places. And I read the defence claim Kayleigh's coat was on the sofa in one of the photographs. The reporting (or the case preparation) has been abysmal.
 
Till receipts recovered show that Beadman bought a £14 bottle of rum at a petrol station near his home at 10.48pm on the Saturday night he and Harlow spent with Kayleigh.
Click to expand...

Is it known whether LH was with him on this shopping trip? If so, it suggests that they may have left Kayleigh locked in the house, hence the shouting and banging which seems to have been around the same time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 98 more.
Total: 1,824 (members: 99, guests: 1,725)

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
1,725
Total visitors
1,824
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,541
Messages
18,188,429
Members
233,428
Latest member
Chris Giles
Back
Top