Found Deceased UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London - Clapham Common area, 3 March 2021 *Arrests* #14

[BryterLayter]

No, unfortunately I didn’t screenshot it and have regretted this. I’m 99.9% sure I got a match but I think it’s odd that the accused‘s name would now be removed from that database. It would be a matter of public record, so I can’t see what reason there would be to remove the name. And also, wouldn’t him living there (or using a flat there from time to time when working unsociable shifts) prompt a more extensive search there?
If true, it does give rise to the fact he could have been living a different life away from the family home with much more freedoms and excuses not to be around.

Sorry just catching up with your post what was the match a possible address the accused stayed at in central London? Sounds interesting! Thanks!

 

[Joolz1975]

I wonder if what they’re actually investigating is his version of events.

Perhaps he explained his reason for placing her in the car (if indeed he did) was because he’d accidentally hit her.

Maybe what they’re doing is gathering evidence to rule out his excuse?

This would presume he’s talking, which I’m not sure he is. But in Libby Squires case for example, PR admitted to having Libby in his car but gave an excuse as to why she was there. Maybe WC has tried to offer a legitimate reason for needing to assist Sarah into his.

JMO

Accidentally run her over and panicked? Might be just enough to put a bit of doubt in the jury's minds if there is not much other evidence I suppose. Be interesting to see if this does come up in court.

 

[Gavin85]

The police officer that created the meme will get the sack surely?

 

[OrlandoJames]

The police officer that created the meme will get the sack surely?

Has it been established that the meme was created by a police officer, or just that it was shared by the 22-year-old probationary officer?

 

[Cloudybea]

That meme has been around for years, not sure if they altered it though, but I would be very surprised if they weren't dismissed.

 

[kittythehare]

I like the theory behind this. However, I think the timing is slightly out. LE shut off this and road and started forensic investigation at c3.50pm on the Tuesday. We are told he wasn’t arrested at his house until some time later that afternoon/evening (eyewitness reports vary, but I don’t recall seeing anything suggesting he had been spoken to by the police prior to at least c5pm on that same Tuesday)

IMO the police were acting on whatever they saw on the cctv and are trying to recreate or explain or find evidence to explain what they saw on the cctv (it might not been fully conclusive in terms of the 2 people being identifiable. But if they can demonstrate a link - physical evidence found/or dogs picking up scent then that at least gives LE some more information to work with. The only thing I have been wondering is whether there would have been enough time for LE to get items with WC scent on from his house and rush that up to the Poynders Road site? Not sure how efficient or otherwise investigations such as this can be. Plus there would need to approval (either from him or others in the investigation to do this. Maybe it wouldn’t be admissible evidence anyway - but is all to provide context to what the police are piecing together as what happened. And then knowing where to look for the additional info to support or disprove their theory. Absence of evidence isn’t proof it didn’t happen. But they didn’t attend that scene until nearly a week after the event. And although it hadn’t really rained in the meantime, it was several days).

A good scent dog will pick up a scent weeks after an event, no matter how contaminated the scene is.

 

[asyousay]

That meme has been around for years, not sure if they altered it though, but I would be very surprised if they weren't dismissed.

it has been specifically altered to fit some version of the crime. It’s quite detailed as I said I still have it on my phone. You can see where he has altered the original photo as you can see the whites where he has changed text on the image.


I am not one for sacking people willy nilly especially at the moment but it’s sick and crass and he shouldn’t be in this type of job if he thinks making light of a gruesome murder is funny. Also the fact it could very well give details away of how she was found which they are probably trying to keep quiet.

 

[OrlandoJames]

it has been specifically altered to fit some version of the crime. It’s quite detailed as I said I still have it on my phone. You can see where he has altered the original photo as you can see the whites where he has changed stuff on the image.

Again, do we know for a fact that the 22-year-old officer altered it himself, or just shared it?

 

[londoncat]

The police officer that created the meme will get the sack surely?

He absolutely should. This would be the kind of action that would send the messaging needed to that behaviour like this is unacceptable. However, I doubt it will happen.

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

He absolutely should. This would be the kind of action that would send the messaging needed to that behaviour like this is unacceptable. However, I doubt it will happen.

I don’t agree with what he did at all. I wonder how it got into the paper anyway. Depending on the individual involved, it could be the best learning experience of his life so far and turn him into a brilliant officer. Although it’s difficult to see how it wouldn’t follow him in his career forever.

 

[BellMat]

That meme is particularly awful when you consider the accused was previously a traffic officer in Kent police.

Just on that, I'm curious about what exactly a traffic officer does in the UK. What skills and knowledge are accrued on the job? It's perplexing that someone with this specific experience would allegedly commit a serious crime on a main road.

 

[Commoner]

I don’t agree with what he did at all. I wonder how it got into the paper anyway. Depending on the individual involved, it could be the best learning experience of his life so far and turn him into a brilliant officer. Although it’s difficult to see how it wouldn’t follow him in his career forever.

I think that the police statement that the probationary officer has been placed on limited duties is strongly suggestive that disciplinary action is underway. And JMO it will follow the set procedure to the letter, which might take a bit of time.

It's not relevant to the investigation into how Sarah came by her death

 

[kittythehare]

The meme has nothing to do with the case.
I'd be very interested in knowing who leaked it to the media , a deliberate act of sabotage in the present climate.
Perhaps that is where their investigation of the meme should centre?
It had been reported to senior officers, was being actioned, yet somebody saw fit to send the info to the gutter media.
Bizarre.

 

[Commoner]

That meme is particularly awful when you consider the accused was previously a traffic officer in Kent police.

Just on that, I'm curious about what exactly a traffic officer does in the UK. What skills and knowledge are accrued on the job? It's perplexing that someone with this specific experience would allegedly commit a serious crime on a main road.

Some info here:

Careers within the UK Police Force - Road Traffic Policing Unit

 

[CuriousObserver1]

He absolutely should. This would be the kind of action that would send the messaging needed to that behaviour like this is unacceptable. However, I doubt it will happen.

Given the profile of this case, that the accused is a police officer, given the Met are facing inquires which may reveal that the IE incidents were not dealt with properly/seriously enough in the lead up to this case (Sarah Everard suspect: Met faces inquiry over indecent exposure claim | UK news | The Guardian) - I think Cressida Dick will want to send a strong message that the probationer's behaviour in sharing such an insensitive image and one that reinforces the negative image of the police not taking assaults on women seriously enough, is not acceptable. It is kind of shocking that he would actually share that given the case and he was actually in place guarding an area related to the case - it shows such a lack of empathy and awareness for someone who wants to be a police officer, and that the Met has a lot of work to do if their trainees actually think that is something that is acceptable.

 

[Cloudybea]

Again, do we know for a fact that the 22-year-old officer altered it himself, or just shared it?

No, that will form part of their probe no doubt though. Personally even if they 'just' shared it, that is a serious lapse of judgement and unacceptable imo. But they will look into all of that, little point us speculating I guess.

 

[Babooshka]

Also the final part of the sequence of the meme suggests something awful ...and something only persons at the crime scene may know

 

[Sherlockhames]

This is an extremely astute observation.



We touched on this topic in the Libby discussions, but it is a safe bet under UK procedure he has said some things. Most likely in a written statement.

Just as a hypothetical example, let's say your car is tracked by CCTV cameras in a way that could harm your defence, but actually you were driving to the local McDonalds. You could elect to simply say nothing to explain that pre-trial. But under UK law reform about pre-trial statements, your reasons for being in the area might qualify as something that should have been reasonably disclosed.

So unlike the US, there are significant tactical reasons under UK procedure that might compel the accused to volunteer his movements pre-trial.

Failure to do so could lead to adverse comment from the judge.

The reason is that otherwise you can listen to the entire prosecution case, then announce you were going to McDonalds, but because it is months later, the Crown had no chance to check drive-thru CCTV etc

This is very common with alibi defences.

So I would guess you are correct. There is a good chance the accused has offered an account of his movements, such that he can rely upon that version at trial.

IIRC @Angleterre has significant expertise on this topic having conducted numerous pre-trial interviews.

02c, disclaimers etc

I think this is possibly true. Although I wonder whether they present the evidence they have in a certain way such that eg
An accused starts off no comment
Is shown evidence they were the last person with victim alive - asks what they were doing.
Accused tells their version of events;
Then accused is presented with new evidence in the same interview as to next steps that evidence shows deviate from accused’s version. Does the accused then have to change their story?

I am not suggesting that the accused has not been shown all the evidence - but that it is shown in a particular way - leaving the accused either having to tell a truthful version of events, confident there will be no evidence that could come to light that would contradict this. Or, they tell one version of events but subsequent evidence comes to light that contradicts this. The immense strain on any guilty defendant then comes from having to craft a version of events that are as close to the truth as possible without knowing which bits are likely to be disproved.
It might even be the case that more footage/evidence comes to light (unlikely at this stage) even after initial charges (requests for information still being made but I wonder whether the police by now will have tracked down all vehicles that went past at that time of night to check for possible further footage and have discounted that). But equally - going full no comment all the way prior to charge until seeing all the evidence presented and not having put on record an alternative chain of events would be damaging in court (I’ve sat on 2 juries and although it is amazing how often seemingly innocuous “facts” of events can be retold or misinterpreted by different eye-witnesses, but if the accused’s version of events looks entirely tailored to the evidence presented but wasn’t volunteered then it looks damaging. Not saying all innocent people “spill” and all guilty people “no comment. Just that the order of the interview process itself can be revealing if an accused gets stuck in a version of events that cannot be true.

Investigative interviewing

 

[OrlandoJames]

No, that will form part of their probe no doubt though. Personally even if they 'just' shared it, that is a serious lapse of judgement and unacceptable imo. But they will look into all of that, little point us speculating I guess.

I agree it was a huge lapse in judgment even if he just shared the meme. However, I also think that there is a difference between stupidly sharing something grossly insensitive and actually going out of your way to create something grossly insensitive.

 

[CuriousObserver1]

There's a dedicated thread for her case here: UK- Blessing Olusegun,21,body found on Bexhill Beach, unexplained death,18 Sept 2020 I desperately hope her mystery is answered. She was so young.

Very sad, I am sure the tone of the text messages to her boyfriend/family friend as to why she asked them to stay on the phone would be critical - was she worried for her safety walking alone, or was she sadly needing their emotional support as she knew she felt down