UK UK - Khasha Smith, 35, Edinburgh, 4 November 2023

[Bluebear15]

Anyone have any idea why they haven't named him?
I'm glad there's been a charge.

In Scotland the accused doesn't get named until they appear in court. We'll know on Monday.

 

[johnlair]

No news on the court case yet

 

[jiminy]

Man appears in court charged with murder of missing mum Khasha Smith

John Byrne, 39, appeared in court charged over the murder of missing mum-of-three Khasha Smith as well as an attempt to defeat the ends of justice.

www.dailyrecord.co.uk

 

[Truman1984]

Has anyone gleaned any information on this man over the past several months? I haven’t been able to find anything.

 

[foxy2000]

No, They keep asking the public for more information like they would know more than the guy they arrested.
There is no body so the police can come up with any scenario and this man, who knows he might be an addict or homeless. Police there usually go for "low hanging fruit", easy people they can pin it on cause they look the part no matter that there might not be a shred of real evidence. Cause she seemed to have some troubles when you read that eviction order. There was a man there with a knife and other stuff so to the police that is enough "evidence" especially when you can't give an alibi cause nobody knows when she disappeared. That is used against you then too. Juries hear that and they just convict. The idea that you actually need DNA & a body and some clear evidence without a doubt went the way of the Dodo long ago.

 

[jiminy]

What eviction order? Knife?

 

[Smccat]

What eviction order? Knife?

It’s about page 2 or 3 Jiminy - I re read it today
Edit to add for you
Post 67 on page 4

 

[jiminy]

It’s about page 2 or 3 Jiminy - I re read it today
Edit to add for you
Post 67 on page 4

I had somehow entirely missed that, thank you! It fills in some blanks for me.

 

[Ocalasunrise]

Has anyone gleaned any information on this man over the past several months? I haven’t been able to find anything.

Nothing at all. His name isn't uncommon but there are no obvious social media profiles, no immediately obvious news reports of previous arrests, convictions etc.

 

[Truman1984]

No, They keep asking the public for more information like they would know more than the guy they arrested.
There is no body so the police can come up with any scenario and this man, who knows he might be an addict or homeless. Police there usually go for "low hanging fruit", easy people they can pin it on cause they look the part no matter that there might not be a shred of real evidence. Cause she seemed to have some troubles when you read that eviction order. There was a man there with a knife and other stuff so to the police that is enough "evidence" especially when you can't give an alibi cause nobody knows when she disappeared. That is used against you then too. Juries hear that and they just convict. The idea that you actually need DNA & a body and some clear evidence without a doubt went the way of the Dodo long ago.

I tend to be more (naively?) optimistic about the police. However, it’s a good point. How can they charge someone for murder without a body? How are the public meant to know where a killer would hide her?
Would not the evidence that led to his arrest also give a clue as to her whereabouts??

Not sure but…

I’m telling you; I don’t normally follow cases like these, but this one has stayed with me since the beginning. There’s something about it.

 

[rosea85]

No, They keep asking the public for more information like they would know more than the guy they arrested.
There is no body so the police can come up with any scenario and this man, who knows he might be an addict or homeless. Police there usually go for "low hanging fruit", easy people they can pin it on cause they look the part no matter that there might not be a shred of real evidence. Cause she seemed to have some troubles when you read that eviction order. There was a man there with a knife and other stuff so to the police that is enough "evidence" especially when you can't give an alibi cause nobody knows when she disappeared. That is used against you then too. Juries hear that and they just convict. The idea that you actually need DNA & a body and some clear evidence without a doubt went the way of the Dodo long ago.

I think they are appealing for more information as maybe there are others involved? Others who may "rat" in time as circumstances/allegiances change.

I don't think no body means the police can "come up with any scenario" - surely that won't stand in court? I don't know what the evidence is but they must have some. I don't think it's common that cases get convicted without a shred of real evidence. The accused in the murder of Suzanne Pilley was convicted without there being a body.

 

[jiminy]

Margaret Fleming too, in recent years. They need a lot of circumstantial evidence to make a compelling case but it's perfectly possible.