GUILTY UK- Keeley Bunker, 20, Tamworth, 19th Sept 2019 *arrest*

[LouTennant]

I'm going to be interested to see how the prosecution interprets the CCTV footage, of the so called playing around footage. Keeley could have been been trying to get away but he kept pulling her back.

The whole thing does sound like a massive pack of lies. I believe he did place something in a bin , that was caught on CCTV. Even though he said he was just pretending to place something in the bin, I wonder what that item was? Was Keeley missing something?

Its does not sound like Wesley was probed to much today by his defence team, on how long he had his hands around her neck. I cant wait for the prosecution to get stuck in.

Murder accused tells court he 'accidentally' killed Keeley Bunker

 

[Kikixxxx]

I'm going to be interested to see how the prosecution interprets the CCTV footage, of the so called playing around footage. Keeley could have been been trying to get away but he kept pulling her back.

The whole thing does sound like a massive pack of lies. I believe he did place something in a bin , that was caught on CCTV. Even though he said he was just pretending to place something in the bin, I wonder what that item was? Was Keeley missing something?

Its does not sound like Wesley was probed to much today by his defence team, on how long he had his hands around her neck. I cant wait for the prosecution to get stuck in.

Murder accused tells court he 'accidentally' killed Keeley Bunker

me too, his defense is ridiculous. surely no sane jury would be remotely convinced, his account doesn't explain how she got a split up, why so much bruising was around her neck and face... and are we really buying his dog just happened to scratch his face shortly after he returned from 'accidentally' killing keeley? very convenient i must say.

i have faith in jacob hallam, i am sure he will tear this account apart.

i don't think keeleys phone has been found has it? in the backpack that was found by a dog walker, there was an ipad, a skirt, a top, makeup, perfume and some crisps. and theres been no analysis of keeleys phone or the gps movements of it, which leads me to think they didnt find it. perhaps it was her phone he threw away? also, no mention of her purse either, he might have took any money left inside it and disposed of the purse itself.... just thinking out loud now.

 

[Hoggle]

So much of his account doesn't make sense.

If she was interested why didn't they do it as his house where they were some twenty minutes earlier in the comfort of a bed? Face down in the mud isn't exactly the most likely position for your first sexual experience with a close friend. She had been chatting or been chatted up by Josh at the club earlier which Was had clumsily interrupted and they exchanged numbers so not a very likely set up for a hook up with a long term friend.

And the idea that she said or did nothing as he was leaning on her neck seems unbelievable. Why didn't he call an ambulance when he realised that she had lost consciousness, after all he claims he was having consensual sex with his long term friend - it could have been from anything in his perspective.
MOO.

 

[Kikixxxx]

exactly, i'm not buying they showed zero romantic interest in each other all through school, nights out together etc, but then suddenly decided they fancied each other on a walk home one night at 5am. that just doesn't happen does it? it would be more believable if we knew they had dated previously, or had some romantic history at some point, but as far as we are aware, they were only ever just friends.

i really don't know how it all came about though, did he just suddenly turn around and attack her as they walked through the park? or did it in fact start out as consensual. the latter sounds far fetched to me but i really have no idea. as much as i can't see that happening, i also can't see him suddenly deciding out of the blue to attack and rape and murder one of his closest friends either.

 

[Hoggle]

He did state she fell when he tried to get her to give him a piggy back which whilst ridiculous given their respective sizes could be an attempt to justify bringing her down from behind. I presume that statement was retracted but perhaps gives a bit of an insight into what actually happened

 

[Kikixxxx]

Asked how he knew she was dead, he said: “She wasn’t moving and I had my forehand over her neck. It must have been because of that.”

Streete admitted lying to a psychiatrist and to his own lawyers over his initial account of what happened.

He denies he has lied to the jury during his evidence.

Murder accused tells court he 'accidentally' killed Keeley Bunker

was she not wriggling/screaming/trying desperately to move his hands off her neck? he acts like she gave him no warning signs she was almost dying??? ridiculous...

 

[Hoggle]

Forehand? Hand or forearm?

Easily the most difficult part to comprehend is the total lack of Keeley not raising an objection to being suffocated and the continuation of that pressure for the following minute or so required to change lack of consciousness into death.

 

[Kasmeer]

Completely unbelieveable that she would not be struggling in any way on running out of air, strangulation/suffocation isn't something that happens by accident without any indication that it's happening. I find it rather unlikely that they'd suddenly want a consensual encounter after such time, in a muddy park, too, I mean I suppose unlikely things can happen, but in combination with such an unbelieveable story of how she died, I don't believe that bit either, especially given the several accusations from other girls about his inability to take "no" for an answer.

It sounds from the live reporting as though he's doing alright with the cross-examination, but I was going to say, if he's genuinely on the autistic spectrum, he could have trouble with that even if telling the truth (that's a big "if"). I'm on the spectrum and get in a right muddle under pressure; I've managed to say no instead of yes at the opticians before now, and agree to symptoms I didn't actually have at the doctors. If I was ever in court for anything I'd end up contradicting myself as soon as any questions were asked, to the point where I'd consider it wiser to just give a written statement and leave it at that. That said, if I did give evidence, my pre-prepared info would be accurate; I'd only get in a mess when pressure was applied. His isn't believeable to begin with so I probably didn't even need to type this for context.

 

[Kikixxxx]

Streete believed he was being treated unfairly compared to others involved in the case
Streete believed he was being treated unfairly compared to others involved in the case, including his pal Monique, when the police probe began.

The hearing was told he said to officers: “I’m being treated differently.”


Murder accused tells court he 'accidentally' killed Keeley Bunker

what a strange thing to say?

 

[Kikixxxx]

He claimed CCTV footage played earlier in the trial featuring the two near a park entrance had shown them "play-fighting".

Ms Brand asked: "Was Keeley trying to get away from you or run away from you?"

"No," Mr Streete replied, claiming it was after the footage was captured that they went back into the park and had sex.

"She started teasing me," he said.

Murder accused 'covered body with branches'

omg

 

[Hoggle]

i don't think keeleys phone has been found has it? in the backpack that was found by a dog walker, there was an ipad, a skirt, a top, makeup, perfume and some crisps. and theres been no analysis of keeleys phone or the gps movements of it, which leads me to think they didnt find it. perhaps it was her phone he threw away? also, no mention of her purse either, he might have took any money left inside it and disposed of the purse itself.... just thinking out loud now.

Apparently Keeley's phone was 'broke' so either she didn't have it on her or it was dead.

I don't know where her home is in relation to the park but I presume further up Masefield Drive bearing in mindthat's where Streete originally claimed he left her to continue walking. He stated that when they were walking to the rugby club they were no longer walking to her home. I do wonder if he had suggested smoking a joint which apparently they often did around the rugby club. That might explain going into the park from the East and his brief stop at home. Odd that they ended up round the front of the club where the CCTV was. Must have been doing a circle round to the top half. Quite amazing then that he carried her all the way to the South of the park. I'm still not sure what the relevance is of the CCTV showing him allegedly running past the Coton pub and why he denies it was him?

I'm also surprised he didn't attempt to reclothe her. He said he didn't as he had a lot on his mind but he presumably carried her like that to the deposition site in the South of the park. Plenty of risk of the leggings falling off? He had the wherewithall to remove her jacket because it was more visible but didn't pull up her black leggings which would have been perfect camouflage compared to bare skin. Quite undignified way to be left given the amount of times he returned to the spot...

 

[Kikixxxx]

I haven’t looked at the route they took actually, I’m curious where keeleys house is situated in relation to the route they took from Monique’s, does it look like they purposefully walked in the wrong direction or took a detour?

I wondered the exact same thing as to why he denied it was him running past the pub, it was mentioned in court previously that gps from his phone placed him at that area at the same time a ‘figure’ was captured running past on cctv. So why would he deny that was him? And what purpose does he have to lie about it? How would that change his account of the way things played out? Very strange.

I agree, the bare skin would have been visible so why not redress her? Strange way to have sex too, top pulled up and leggings pulled half way down, if it was conscensual, wouldn’t she have just taken them off? Or took one leg out or something, it would be difficult to have intercourse being restricted with her leggings still on.
I noticed he threw his jacket and her coat away, why did he throw his own though??? He washed the rest of his clothes when he got home. Including his shoes, so why not just wash his jacket instead of throwing it away?

 

[Kikixxxx]

I think you could be right about the joint, he says he went home to “be sick in his downstairs toilet” but why would he do that? Why not just be sick outside? It doesn’t make sense why he would stop at home, definitely could have been to grab some weed now you mention it...

 

[Kikixxxx]

Thinking out loud, but I wonder if he’d popped home, grabbed some weed, they walked to the park together, and then realised neither of them had a lighter or something so he ran home to grab one? And he didn’t want to admit that was him on the cctv as then he would have to admit he was going to grab a lighter. For some reason he doesn’t want to say he asked her to smoke some weed So he can’t admitt that was him running past the pub?

very strange hmmm

 

[Hoggle]

Thinking out loud, but I wonder if he’d popped home, grabbed some weed, they walked to the park together, and then realised neither of them had a lighter or something so he ran home to grab one? And he didn’t want to admit that was him on the cctv as then he would have to admit he was going to grab a lighter. For some reason he doesn’t want to say he asked her to smoke some weed So he can’t admitt that was him running past the pub?

very strange hmmm

The Coton arms seems to be north west of the park but his house is on St Austell close towards the South East of the park. The timing of the CCTV running figure seems to be after the event. Apparently his GPS puts him on Fontenaye road near the pub at 5.22. However he was at the deposition site in the South around 5ish. Whatever happened between them both seems to have happened between 4.30 and 5. I wonder why he left the park via the north west to go on the road? They had entered the park from the East (Elizabeth Dive) and hadn't exitted on the west side as far as we have been told. So it can't have been to look for his bank card as they hadn't come that way. Very odd.

Just checked:
" At 4.54am the phone was picked up in the vicinity of the park’s northern edge, near a parade of shops where a ‘figure’ was seen on CCTV running from the direction of the park".

So was he caught on CCTV twice? Running away at 4.54 then again at 5.22 or was that just badly worded (I.e where later a figure was seen on CCTV?)

 

[Kikixxxx]

i am soooo confused. i need to find a timeline of all the cctv sightings and when/where they were captured. hs anyone reported it this way?

its very strange, so he stayed in the area covering her body til gone 6am? i'm trying to establish the time of death...
if cctv captured him leaving the park, it should have captured him entering again too?

 

[Hoggle]

I haven't seen a timeline reported (would be helpful wouldn't it! ) so am taking all the times from the Birmingham live report page. It was said she was expected to have died by 4.58 (as that is when Wes' phone moved south). It says:

Mr Hallam says the evidence ‘suggests that Keeley was likely to have been dead by 4.58am at the latest and the defendant moved her body at about 5am, taking about an hour in total to hide it’

The jury is told the phone was picked up close to Fontenaye Road, just past the north part of Wigginton Park at around 5.23am, before it returned to the deposition site at around 5.30am and remained there until 5.54am.

So he was at the disposition site in the South for an hour (5 to 6) with a brief run up to the pub and back in the middle?

I too am puzzled about only being caught on CCTV going in one direction, unless badly reported

 

[Kikixxxx]

Streete denied that he and Ms Bunker went to Wigginton Park to smoke cannabis.The defendant also denied scratches to his face were caused by Keeley. He maintains they were caused by his dog.

Murder accused claims he 'accidentally' killed Keeley Bunker during sex

@Hoggle looks like the prosecutor is thinking the same as us
so.... why is he lying about it? what reason does he have to lie about going to the park with the intention of smoking weed together? it wouldn't change his 'account'. (that she died through consensual sex) so why lie??? its very odd.

 

[Hoggle]

Interesting. Maybe because going to the park was a diversion to her house and she only went to smoke not to have sex with him? Adds weight to their encounter being out of the blue. Agreed she could have changed her mind but he is arguing she was flirting and there was build up

 

[Kikixxxx]

courts adjourned for lunch, i wonder how long he'll stay on the stand? the prosecutor needs to wrap this up now imo, its getting tedious, we know he lied, he admits he lied, no one can really believe a word that comes out of his mouth + the evidence they do have is damning, so lets get a move on so the jury can find him guilty !!!!!