Found Deceased UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London - Clapham Common area, 3 March 2021 *Arrests* #13

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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm sorry if these questions have been covered but a couple of things I was wondering.

In the 'Daily Mail' last night when it said they had found a gold bracelet it also said they are still trying to find SE's phone. Why will they want the phone, will they think she could have videoed something etc?

Secondly in various news at the beginning it said SE was speaking to her boyfriend for 15 minutes and then the phone's battery either run out or the phone was switched off. What didn't seem clear to me was whether she was still on the phone with boyfriend when phone went dead or if the conversation had finished before it went dead. Just if she was still on the phone surely he would have heard something before it went dead.
 
I'm sorry if these questions have been covered but a couple of things I was wondering.

In the 'Daily Mail' last night when it said they had found a gold bracelet it also said they are still trying to find SE's phone. Why will they want the phone, will they think she could have videoed something etc?

Secondly in various news at the beginning it said SE was speaking to her boyfriend for 15 minutes and then the phone's battery either run out or the phone was switched off. What didn't seem clear to me was whether she was still on the phone with boyfriend when phone went dead or if the conversation had finished before it went dead. Just if she was still on the phone surely he would have heard something before it went dead.
 
wens67 said:
I'm sorry if these questions have been covered but a couple of things I was wondering.

In the 'Daily Mail' last night when it said they had found a gold bracelet it also said they are still trying to find SE's phone. Why will they want the phone, will they think she could have videoed something etc?

Secondly in various news at the beginning it said SE was speaking to her boyfriend for 15 minutes and then the phone's battery either run out or the phone was switched off. What didn't seem clear to me was whether she was still on the phone with boyfriend when phone went dead or if the conversation had finished before it went dead. Just if she was still on the phone surely he would have heard something before it went dead.
Click to expand...


I am positive that the phone call ended naturally and that I have read that somewhere.


iPhone battery’s are made to last a day from my personal experience even with browsing the internet and I find it hard to believe she would of done that walk knowing her battery was gonna die incase of a situation like with what happened.


Moo
 
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Assuming the timelines for his shift pattern as given in the magistrates court were correct (they will be) and complete (they did only state he started the 12 hour overnight shift at 7pm on the 2nd) he'd have finished and even allowing for then going to the armoury and to his locker, the accused would have had over 12 hours on 3rd which is currently unaccounted for.

IMO that must be a line of inquiry, but it's one about which nothing has been said.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Talking generally - RE arresting a spouse on suspicion of assisting an offender - that wouldn’t be very hard to find grounds in a case such as this. It’s often used as a tactic early on in a suspects questioning to try and get the partner to open up and throw the suspect under the bus - especially when they realise they could be going to jail for something their partner has done, and makes them much less likely to find time and means to corroborate a story or alibi.
 
wens67 said:
I'm sorry if these questions have been covered but a couple of things I was wondering.

In the 'Daily Mail' last night when it said they had found a gold bracelet it also said they are still trying to find SE's phone. Why will they want the phone, will they think she could have videoed something etc?

Secondly in various news at the beginning it said SE was speaking to her boyfriend for 15 minutes and then the phone's battery either run out or the phone was switched off. What didn't seem clear to me was whether she was still on the phone with boyfriend when phone went dead or if the conversation had finished before it went dead. Just if she was still on the phone surely he would have heard something before it went dead.
Click to expand...

I think you've answered your own question there :) Presumably to see what is on the phone. Also maybe for dna/fingerprints etc as evidence. MOO. We don't know how long after the call ended she was abducted but it's reported that the call had ended. The timeline has the links

UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London, Clapham, 3rd Mar 2021 - TIMELINE *NO DISCUSSION*
 
Commoner said:
Assuming the timelines for his shift pattern as given in the magistrates court were correct (they will be) and complete (they did only state he started the 12 hour overnight shift at 7pm on the 2nd) he'd have finished and even allowing for then going to the armoury and to his locker, the accused would have had over 12 hours on 3rd which is currently unaccounted for.

IMO that must be a line of inquiry, but it's one about which nothing has been said.
Click to expand...

did he not do a later relief shift between 2pm and 8pm?
 
Hi again! Regarding whether prior offences can be included at trial, there is a whole body of law regarding this and this will be argued by the defence and prosecution in front of the judge prior to the commencement of the trial itself. It is called bad character evidence. The key point is "the prejudicial effects cannot outweigh the probative value". The length of time between the crime which is being tried and the offence for which the defendant received a conviction is one issue, as is the similarity. I guess in the Libby Squires case it was decided that the IE and other offences had a bearing on Libby's case, being sexually motivated and very close in time, rather than something that happened years ago. There are also "7 gateways" which allow bad character evidence to be introduced. One of these is if the defendant or his barrister disparage the character of the victim or other defendants/ witnesses. I noticed in the Joanna Yeates trial that the defence barrister was being overly careful not to say anything negative about JY and as it turned out they had found snuff videos on Tabak's computer and had they said anything disparaging about JY I'm sure this could have been introduced to the trial.

Anyway, hope that's not too off topic or boring! <modsnip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
On Tuesday, Couzens will make his first appearance at the Old Bailey.

He is expected to appear in court by video link from custody before Judge Mark Lucraft QC, the Recorder of London, from 10am.

During the hearing, the judge is expected to set a timetable for the case.

Ms Everard’s last known movements have been aired previously in court.

She had visited a friend in the Clapham Junction area on March 3 and left at around 9pm to make the two-and-a-half-mile journey home.

She called her boyfriend for around 14 minutes and there was no activity on her mobile phone after that.

Ms Everard was captured alone on CCTV at 9.15pm and again 9.28pm, and was later caught on the camera of a marked police car at 9.32pm.

At around 9.35pm, a bus camera captured two figures on Poynders Road and a white Vauxhall Astra with its hazard lights flashing.

Another bus camera captured the same car with both front doors open.

The registration of the vehicle, later confirmed to be a car hired in Dover, Kent, was caught and tracked by police as it left London towards Kent.
Sarah Everard: Police officer due in court accused of kidnap and murder
 
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

I have a faint recollection that notorious defendants can be tried under alias, so the jurors on that case aren't clouded by publicity from a high profile case. Reporting restrictions would be in place until after the verdict (or indeed verdicts, if there is more than one other case to try)

IANAL, so JMR (just my recollection). Does anyone know if this really is a possibility?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Commoner said:
I have a faint recollection that notorious defendants can be tried under alias, so the jurors on that case aren't clouded by publicity from a high profile case. Reporting restrictions would be in place until after the verdict (or indeed verdicts, if there is more than one other case to try)

IANAL, so JMR (just my recollection). Does anyone know if this really is a possibility?
Click to expand...

This just happened in the Grace Millane case where the accused had name suppression. The reason was so as not to compromise a second rape trial that happened after the murder trial.

He wasn't tried under an alias, but his name could not be reported.
 
wens67 said:
I'm sorry if these questions have been covered but a couple of things I was wondering.

In the 'Daily Mail' last night when it said they had found a gold bracelet it also said they are still trying to find SE's phone. Why will they want the phone, will they think she could have videoed something etc?

Secondly in various news at the beginning it said SE was speaking to her boyfriend for 15 minutes and then the phone's battery either run out or the phone was switched off. What didn't seem clear to me was whether she was still on the phone with boyfriend when phone went dead or if the conversation had finished before it went dead. Just if she was still on the phone surely he would have heard something before it went dead.
Click to expand...

Re the phone, perhaps simply because it’s missing. Police will make the public aware to look out for it because it contains so much about the owner. I really wonder where it is - WC obviously got rid of it somewhere. Phones are so hard to destroy.

I think the boyfriend would have alerted LE sooner had their conversation been interrupted with anything suspicious. If the battery was running out, I’m sure she would’ve told him - and he would’ve told police this.
 
Stella123 said:
According to BBC

"He is expected to appear before the Recorder of London in courtroom 10 of the Old Bailey at 10:00 GMT."

Which sounds to me like an actual appearance. Given the gravity of the situation I would think it is more likely it is an actual appearance. JMO. The mention of a videolink appearance was a rumour I believe. MOO

Sarah Everard: Met Police officer Wayne Couzens due at Old Bailey
Click to expand...

IIRC, a poster on a previous thread said that the defendant would be there is person but most/all other relevant people would be by video link
 
Commoner said:
IIRC, a poster on a previous thread said that the defendant would be there is person but most/all other relevant people would be by video link
Click to expand...

Interesting! I guess we'd better look out for photos of vans arriving at the Old Bailey then.
 
Commoner said:
I have a faint recollection that notorious defendants can be tried under alias, so the jurors on that case aren't clouded by publicity from a high profile case. Reporting restrictions would be in place until after the verdict (or indeed verdicts, if there is more than one other case to try)

IANAL, so JMR (just my recollection). Does anyone know if this really is a possibility?
Click to expand...

I can't see it happening. There have been many high profile murder cases like this one where that has not occurred so cant see a scenario where he would be tried under an alias.

The trials of Ian Huntley, Mark Bridger, Steve Wright were all really high profile and reported on.
 
Commoner said:
I have a faint recollection that notorious defendants can be tried under alias, so the jurors on that case aren't clouded by publicity from a high profile case. Reporting restrictions would be in place until after the verdict (or indeed verdicts, if there is more than one other case to try)

IANAL, so JMR (just my recollection). Does anyone know if this really is a possibility?
Click to expand...

Aliases were used for Baby P’s abusers when they were subsequently prosecuted for another offence


“A second trial took place in April 2009, when Connelly and Barker, under aliases, faced charges related to the rape of a two-year-old girl. The girl was also on Haringey's child protection register. Barker was found guilty of rape, while Connelly was found not guilty of child cruelty charges.[20] Their defence lawyers argued that this second trial was nearly undermined by bloggers publishing information linking them to the death of Peter, which could have prejudiced the jury.[21]”
Death of Baby P

Slightly different as had already been found guilty of something, but demonstrates aliases can be used
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 151 more.
Total: 649 (members: 152, guests: 497)

Online statistics

Members online
152
Guests online
497
Total visitors
649
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,987
Messages
18,196,518
Members
233,689
Latest member
leahruss
Back
Top