Found Deceased UK - Lindsay Birbeck, 47, Accrington, 12 Aug 2019 *Arrest* #3

[jamjim]

"POLICE are appealing for information for a missing woman.

Lindsay Birbeck has not been seen since 2.30pm on Monday August 12, 2019, and her family are becoming increasingly worried as this is very out of character for her.

Ms Birbeck has been missing from Burnley Road, Accrington, however may have links to Burnley and Blackburn.

She is described as a White Female, 5 Foot 11 tall, Slim Build, Shoulder length dark hair, last seen wearing a blue and white striped jacket, black shirt and black leggings.


If anyone has any information with regards to her whereabouts please could you contact Lancashire Police on 101 Quoting LC-20190813-0016."

Appeal to find missing woman

Urgent appeal to find missing Lancashire woman

___

Thread #1 - Found Deceased - UK - Lindsay Birbeck, 47, Accrington, 12 Aug 2019 *Arrest*

 

[Doris777]

Usually cemetery gates are closed and sunset but not all do that.

Your right in your theory about him using one entrance and then changing it to another. He would have known exactly what was happening around the area as it was public knowledge what was happening every day.

Searches where more to the back end of the coppice near the mines.

Also big thing u have to remember is this was only a MISSING PERSON up until the day she was found dead. No one was thinking it was a murder, not even police. From the minute she went missing up until the minute she was found it was only a missing person, they didn't suspect foul play.

So that's why I think he was walking freely around and had her in the bin in broad daylight walking up and down Burnley rd.

Also I remember it being out there that either him or family would collect scrap metal in wheelie bins so to most it wouldn't look out of place.

 

[Kaykedi]

12:11
'Sexual activity not excluded'
Dr Naomi Carter said due to the level of decomposition of Lindsay Birbeck’s body a ‘lack of injuries would not exclude the possibility of sexual activity’.

Lindsay Birbeck murder trial at Preston Crown Court - updates

I'm not clear what this part of Dr Carter's statement means 'A lack of injuries would not exclude the possibility of sexual activity'

 

[HongKongPhooey]

I'm not clear what this part of Dr Carter's statement means 'A lack of injuries would not exclude the possibility of sexual activity'

My opinion. I think it means due to the decomposition (sorry!) it wasnt possible to detect some injuries but also that just because no injuries were found it doesn't mean that she wasnt assualted. Lots of negatives there which may sound confusing. They cant rule it out basically. Thats how I read it anyway.

 

[Doris777]

They won't have been able to tell if she's been raped basically. Because she's to badly decomposed. Not good really because was it a factor it what happened. Finding her naked tho..doesn't really look good. Why take her clothes off,?

 

[Kaykedi]

My opinion. I think it means due to the decomposition (sorry!) it wasnt possible to detect some injuries but also that just because no injuries were found it doesn't mean that she wasnt assualted. Lots of negatives there which may sound confusing. They cant rule it out basically. Thats how I read it anyway.

Thank you very much. Hate to ask this, but, may Dr Carter have been referring to no injuries in the 'intimate' area?

 

[Kaykedi]

They won't have been able to tell if she's been raped basically. Because she's to badly decomposed. Not good really because was it a factor it what happened. Finding her naked tho..doesn't really look good. Why take her clothes off,?

Thank you Doris. I agree, removing Lindsay's clothes makes one think that she was sexually assaulted. Or, perhaps someone wants it to appear that way? My apologies everyone, I've read too many books, and, watched too many movies!

 

[Doris777]

Usually cemetery gates are closed and sunset but not all do that.

Your right in your theory about him using one entrance and then changing it to another. He would have known exactly what was happening around the area as it was public knowledge what was happening every day.

Searches where more to the back end of the coppice near the mines.

Also big thing u have to remember is this was only a MISSING PERSON up until the day she was found dead. No one was thinking it was a murder, not even police. From the minute she went missing up until the minute she was found it was only a missing person, they didn't suspect foul play.

So that's why I think he was walking freely around and had her in the bin in broad daylight walking up and down Burnley rd.

Also I remember it being out there that either him or family would collect scrap metal in wheelie bins so to most it wouldn't look out of place.

Moo

 

[Doris777]

Thank you Doris. I agree, removing Lindsay's clothes makes one think that she was sexually assaulted. Or, perhaps someone wants it to appear that way? My apologies everyone, I've read too many books, and, watched too many movies!

It all looks suspicious like its all been over done like from a movie or sumet. The whole thing is just strange! It's definitely what u wouldn't call a "normal" murder case.

I'm the same. I've a very morbid curiosity. Love all crime documentaries and serial killer documentaries. I'm a strange one

 

[Kaykedi]

It all looks suspicious like its all been over done like from a movie or sumet. The whole this is just strange! It's definitely what u would call a "normal" murder case.

I'm the same. I've a very morbid curiosity. Love all crime documentaries and serial killer documentaries. I'm a strange one

I'm a strange one too!

 

[Mommysleuth11]

Didnt the police quickly issue a statement to say the released cctv of suspect was before he moved lyndsay.

From the BBC article (someone quoted above) it would appear thats not quite right. Says the footage is corner of whitewell road on 17th August. Strange.

 

[Doris777]

Didnt the police quickly issue a statement to say the released cctv of suspect was before he moved lyndsay.

From the BBC article (someone quoted above) it would appear thats not quite right. Says the footage is corner of whitewell road on 17th August. Strange.

I think the CCTV image of him pulling the bin was to find out who he was. I think it was the day her body was found or the day after. Because then it was a murder investigation. The CCTV was off Burnley rd across from the cemetery I think. Or the row of houses next to it.

The actual video it's self would have been when he was moving her body or doing the dry run.
I don't think the police said why or anything. They just said they need to speak to him. It was everyone else that said it must be him who killed her and used the bin to move her. Which unfortunately was true.

Moo

 

[Legally Bland]

Is anyone that knows the area able to mark on the map where exactly the plinths are?

Also, what was the actual status of the Whitaker's Arms from August 12-24th? Was it completely abandoned? Or was it being renovated at the time? - As in workmen were actually in and on the premises?

Thanks.

I don't know exactly where the plinths are, but my guess is something like this (it's basically a rectangular slab at the base of a wall).




خرائط ‪Google‬‏‏

It's a shame we aren't getting images/maps from the trial, other than the blue bin.

ETA: click pics to make them bigger.

 

[The Truth Is]

Didnt the police quickly issue a statement to say the released cctv of suspect was before he moved lyndsay.

From the BBC article (someone quoted above) it would appear thats not quite right. Says the footage is corner of whitewell road on 17th August. Strange.

On the day and night of the murder the suspect used the path down the side of the bungalows. He went up that way with the bin and also came back that way at 11.18pm without the bin, just the rucksack. However the missing person cctv of Lindsays last sighting was released the day after. What i think happened was, he saw this cctv of Lindsay and knew it was cctv from the bungalow, hence his reason for not using that path ever again. But in having to use the opposite path near the funeral directors i think he had to do a dry run and also he scratched the bin over some concrete.

 

[The Truth Is]

On the day and night of the murder the suspect used the path down the side of the bungalows. He went up that way with the bin and also came back that way at 11.18pm without the bin, just the rucksack. However the missing person cctv of Lindsays last sighting was released the day after. What i think happened was, he saw this cctv of Lindsay and knew it was cctv from the bungalow, hence his reason for not using that path ever again. But in having to use the opposite path near the funeral directors i think he had to do a dry run and also he scratched the bin over some concrete.

I might be wrong that he never used it again, but he certainly didnt bring the bin back down that way.

 

[Ann Blyth]

I am not in anyway experienced with law and court proceedings, so my question is, will the prosecution have to prove that the defendant is guilty of murder? In other words can he get off with it because there is some doubt, because of his story of a mysterious man? Or can the jury find him guilty because there is no proof of a mysterious man?

Alternatively can he be found guilty of a different charge because he moved and buried a dead person?

Yes, the prosecution have to prove the charges against the accused, the accused doesn’t have to prove anything, and it has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt against the accused.

he can only be found guilty of an alternative charge if the prosecution offer it as an alternative to the defence and jury.

 

[Bampot]

CCTV Timeline

the defendant was seen on CCTV walking up Burnley Road in Accrington at 2.27pm on August 12 and turned off into The Coppice.


At 6.19pm the defendant was seen on CCTV crossing over Burnley Road from the Whitakers Arms

The jury was told that the defendant was later seen on CCTV with a black rucksack heading back to the Coppice area and at 8.28pm was seen pulling a wheelie bin on Burnley Road

At 11.18pm the teenager left the area with the rucksack but no longer had the wheelie bin.

the defendant visited the area behind the Whitakers Arms off Burnley Road again on August 16 and was doing a 'dry run'

Burnley Road at 1.50pm on August 17 pulling a wheelie bin and it 'appeared to be heavy'.
Around 45 minutes later the teenager was seen pulling the wheelie bin down the side of the Whitakers Arms and across Burnley Road before entering the cemetery.
At 3.50pm he was seen leaving the cemetery without the blue wheelie bin.

 

[MusicalMonkey]

Yes, the prosecution have to prove the charges against the accused, the accused doesn’t have to prove anything, and it has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt against the accused.

he can only be found guilty of an alternative charge if the prosecution offer it as an alternative to the defence and jury.

It's a strange one really. As it makes you wonder how many murderers could have 'got off on technicalities' had they come up with a similarly far-fetched story.
Like much of the DNA evidence used to link victims with suspects could be explained away by admitting they moved the body, but they weren't the one that actually killed the victim.

I asked in a thread a few days ago if being 'deliberately vague' could be used as a solid defence. If the defendant doesn't have to explain exactly where he met 'The Hooded Man' and how he showed him where the body was located (which of course would reveal a potential murder location - according to the defendant at least).

I'm still amazed that the location of the murder has never been found - even over 6 months on. It would certainly suggest some 'case bungling', no?

 

[MusicalMonkey]

Just to clarify. When people here are referring to 'path between the bungalows' are you referring to the one between 354 and 356 Burnley Road?

 

[Ann Blyth]

It's a strange one really. As it makes you wonder how many murderers could have 'got off on technicalities' had they come up with the same far-fetched story.
Like much of the DNA evidence used to link victims with suspects could be explained away by admitting they moved the body, but they weren't the one that actually killed the victim.

I asked in a thread a few days ago if being 'deliberately vague' could be used as a solid defence. If the defendant doesn't have to explain exactly where he met 'The Hooded Man' and how he showed him where the body was located (which of course would reveal a potential murder location - according to the defendant at least).

I'm still amazed that the location of the murder has never been found - even over 6 months on. It would certainly suggest some 'case bungling', no?[/QUOTE