She could have used his toilet though, or a pub toilet. Why the park? There are more options than that very risky one.[/QUOTE
Deleted
She could have used his toilet though, or a pub toilet. Why the park? There are more options than that very risky one.[/QUOTE
Deleted
There look to be public toilets at the entrance to the park, in the car park. Doubt they would be open at that hour, but are there any pubs nearby that are open after midnight on a weekday?She could have used his toilet though, or a pub toilet. Why the park? There are more options than that very risky one.
I'm would go in my own back garden if I was a stone's throw away,There look to be public toilets at the entrance to the park, in the car park. Doubt they would be open at that hour, but are there any pubs nearby that are open after midnight on a weekday?
I have a suspicion it's also a tactical move to unsettle his over confidence ..... SNIP .... and he is there of his own free will in a way he chose to refuse bail application so why would an innocent man chose to stay he would want to get out away from criminals and the looks he must get and fight to show his innocence. So LE will not look a gift horse in the mouth and carry on meticulously building a case with the knowledge he can't hurt anyone else so urgency will help the rush and chances of mistakes.
Haworth Arms shuts at midnight on a Thursday I remember rightly. Gardeners which is other end of Haworth Street on Cottingham Road shuts at 12:30am on Thursday.There look to be public toilets at the entrance to the park, in the car park. Doubt they would be open at that hour, but are there any pubs nearby that are open after midnight on a weekday?
In fairness I understand and accept your way of viewing it, however I am going to stick to my view on matters, he may have been advised by solicitors etc and we can say the advice was to not apply but i can beg to differ, he could have told him to apply but thats not out for us public to know, there's only one person who could decide to apply and if he was advised not too he didn't have nothing to lose asking so it seems like a moot point he could apply then weigh up all choices. But by instructing his solicitor not to apply he chose to stay. He made a choice regardless of having slim chance he chose no chance.IMO I think this statement is misleading. I very much doubt he is there of his own free will and chose to refuse a bail application.
His solicitor would have been advised by the police on this matter, and the accused usually would follow his solicitor's instructions on the chances of being allowed bail - and whether to apply or not.
I'm not privvy to what has gone on of course, but feel the assumption you state is not correct as this would not have been a 'personal choice'.
I might be wrong but I think I remember his mother saying they could not afford the money needed for bail.
I think she said £2,000.
In fairness I understand and accept your way of viewing it, however I am going to stick to my view on matters, he may have been advised by solicitors etc and we can say the advice was to not apply but i can beg to differ, he could have told him to apply but thats not out for us public to know, there's only one person who could decide to apply and if he was advised not too he didn't have nothing to lose asking so it seems like a moot point he could apply then weigh up all choices. But by instructing his solicitor not to apply he chose to stay. He made a choice regardless of having slim chance he chose no chance.
One also has to take into account other factors such as his house not being available to him, risk of being attacked since the media identified him, and possible domestic problems. So it doesn't leave him much choice in practical terms.If his solicitor was told by the police they would challenge bail and there was therefore no point in applying, this imo cannot be interpreted as this POI had a choice in the matter.
IMO once charged one's personal choices are very much diminished.
One also has to take into account other factors such as his house not being available to him, risk of being attacked since the media identified him, and possible domestic problems. So it doesn't leave him much choice in practical terms.
If his solicitor was told by the police they would challenge bail and there was therefore no point in applying, this imo cannot be interpreted as this POI had a choice in the matter.
Sorry who should I have quoted?Can I just say it is helpful if one quotes the post they are replying to, thanks.
I absolutely respect your right to your own opinion of course, as I hope you respect mine.
If his solicitor was told by the police they would challenge bail and there was therefore no point in applying, this imo cannot be interpreted as this POI had a choice in the matter.
IMO once charged one's personal choices are very much diminished.
The police can release in bail after charge - did they not say that he was refused bail as he was a flight risk?Yes I understand all that Cherwell of course. I was attempting to raise the legal point of this POI deciding for himself to be remanded.
The police can release in bail after charge - did they not say that he was refused bail as he was a flight risk?
He can also make bail applications at his Court appearances - but has not done so. I guess what Cherwell says is right - where would he go to and given the issues involved his defence team might have advise him he was better off not outside!
home to his young wife and very young children would be most innocent men's first choice, and I'm sure he would have been allocated accommodation, as he is not to blame for his house being sealed, the point I was making is by law have the choice to apply or not he chose not, and while everyone is welcome to their own opinion, I am sorry you feel mislead by my wording but it's the only way I could legally say why LE have the luxury of time to carry on investigation.The police can release in bail after charge - did they not say that he was refused bail as he was a flight risk?
He can also make bail applications at his Court appearances - but has not done so. I guess what Cherwell says is right - where would he go to and given the issues involved his defence team might have advise him he was better off not outside!
I saw it quoted in the Grimsby Telegraph, I’ll find the link but I’m sure it said another 2-3 tides (rather than hours) and she’d be goneIt was quoted from someone with knowledge of the Tides/currents in msm that had Libby not been found near Spurn Point she would have been lost to the sea in only about 3 hours.
lBut surely he still has a choice there Jessie? The police can say to his solicitor ‘listen we’re going to oppose bail’ they could even go as far as to say ‘it’s pointless you trying because we will request it be denied and the judge will agree with us’ - but it’s not their decision. So his solicitor has to present all options to PR.
Let’s say he told PR ‘if we apply for bail, the police are going to strongly oppose it’, if you found yourself in that position, what would you do? It’s not a police decision, the judge gets to decide, so I personally would say ‘hey, I have nothing to lose! Request I get bailed!’.
That said, in PRs situation with my house boarded up, wife and kids gone and a public lynch mob failing to grasp the law of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ ... I think I’d stay put. His solicitor could even have explained to him ‘look Pawel, the police want you banged up, we’ve got little to no chance of getting you out’, but it would still be PRs ultimate choice as to what he does with that information.