UK UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London - Clapham Common area, 3 March 2021 *Arrests* #7

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) said the investigation followed a conduct referral from the Metropolitan Police (MPS) in relation to two officers, received on Wednesday.


The watchdog said the referral was linked to another four, "all connected to the arrest of a serving MPS officer on suspicion of kidnap, murder and a separate allegation of indecent exposure".

In a statement, the IOPC said: "Our investigation will look at the actions of the MPS after police received a report on February 28 that a man had exposed himself at a fast food restaurant in South London.

"On Wednesday we determined that two conduct referrals relating to kidnap/murder and indecent exposure allegations against the arrested officer should remain under local investigation by the force.

BBM - two officers? What the hell! <modsnip: Do not mention or discuss rumors>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Am I reading this right, that two serving officers are being investigated? And the part about it being linked to four other referrals! What’s going on?!

"The IOPC’s investigation follows a conduct referral from the MPS in relation to two officers, received last night, which is linked to four other referrals.

Sarah suspect 'reported to cops over indecent exposure days before disappearance'
May relate to how they handled the incident reporting. Hope they didn’t brush it off/attempt to protect ‘one of their own’ JMO
 
He has also been arrested on suspicion of an indecent exposure involving another woman, and this is the incident that will be investigated by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).

The IOPC said in a statement: “The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has started an independent investigation into whether Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) officers responded appropriately to a report of indecent exposure.

“The IOPC’s investigation follows a conduct referral from the MPS in relation to two officers, received last night, which is linked to four other referrals. They are all connected to the arrest of a serving MPS officer on suspicion of kidnap, murder and a separate allegation of indecent exposure.
Sarah Everard suspect: Met faces inquiry over indecent exposure claim


The IOPC said that two referrals about the conduct of the arrested officer, who was held at his home in Deal on Tuesday, should remain under investigation by Scotland Yard.

A fifth mandatory referral is also being assessed after it emerged that the arrested officer had sustained a head injury in custody on Wednesday which required hospital treatment.

A Scotland Yard spokesman said: “Following the arrest of a police officer, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) made two referrals, one mandatory and one voluntary, to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).
Sarah Everard: Probe into police response to indecent exposure claim
 
Last edited:
Same story in Evening Standard. So EC has been released on bail and WC will be held in custody longer. Please ignore the upload at the bottom - it was accidental!

"Detectives have been granted more time to hold the officer in custody before making a decision on whether to charge him after an application to extend his detention was granted at Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court.

A woman aged in her 30s, who was arrested at the same time on suspicion of assisting an offender, has been released on bail to return to a police station on a date in mid-April."

Family of Sarah Everard pay tribute to ‘bright and beautiful’ daughter
 

Attachments

  • upload_2021-3-11_19-54-25.png
    upload_2021-3-11_19-54-25.png
    455.8 KB · Views: 71
Hi guys,

New member here. I've been dipping in and out of these threads, so sorry if I end up repeating anything that's already been stated..I've been scratching my head about how WC could have secured the trust of SE. It just doesn't make sense to me, the idea that someone as savvy and presumably street-wise as Sarah would have voluntarily entered the car of a stranger - even one who purported to be a police officer. I say this from the perspective of a street-savvy young woman who is of a similar age to Sarah and lives relatively close to Clapham. My initial thoughts were that there is no way in hell I would trust a lone man on a quiet street in pitch black dark, regardless of whether he had a police badge and looked like the real deal. I'm not sure I'm convinced by the theory that he approached her to question her about a potential Covid breach and what she was doing out on her own. It just seems too flimsy and unrealistic. This might have washed during the first lockdown, when rules were a lot more stringent, but not at this stage of a third lockdown. I reckon he was much more calculated than that and concocted a much more sinister plan to secure Sarah's trust. SE was clearly an intelligent young lady and I can only assume that she was paralysed with fear as a result of one of two possible scenarios. Naturally, when one's body goes into "fight or flight" mode, rational thinking will take a back seat as the instant need for self-preservation and safety takes over.

Here are my theories:

Scenario 1) he approached her with a seemingly innocuous query, e.g. maybe asking for directions, in a jovial and approachable manner. Looking at the pictures with his family, he definitely has the "big friendly giant" persona about him. The sort of friendly face you might see down the pub. He may have put her further at ease by telling a joke or two, to bide his time and further secure her trust. Or he may have shown his badge and claimed to have been looking for a missing person. Once she answered his query, I reckon he calmly took out a knife and told her to stay very quiet otherwise he would hurt her, before coaxing her into his car. Like any defenceless young woman in this situation, SE may have frozen in terror and acquiesced with his demand out of fear for her life.

Scenario 2) he approached her with his police badge, perhaps dressed in his London Met jacket or hat (do we have any confirmation of this yet?) to warn her that a dangerous man has been reported in the area, attempting to commit an attack on a lone woman. Naturally, like any young woman in this scenario, I probably wouldn't consider certain abnormalities of the situation e.g. no other police being present, as I'd be utterly terrified. He may have then lulled her into a false sense of security by reassuring her that his other colleagues were close by and looking for the offender, before offering to give her a lift home. Again, putting myself in the shoes of a petrified young woman on her own, the idea of a violent male on the prowl is the worst possible scenario I can conceive of, so being presented with the offer of a quick escape from the area by a police offer would offer me instant reassurance. Again, this is going on the theory that SE went into a state of panic, as anyone would on hearing this news, and her fight or flight defence had taken over her capacity to think rationally about the situation. This also has horrible echoes of the Libby/Reclowicz situation. A vulnerable and frightened young girl being approached by a seemingly friendly and trustworthy professional offering her a lift to safety.
It’s possible, but I personally think it happened extremely fast and he perhaps didn’t even say a word to her before his attack, presumably from behind.
 
it doesn't say if they knew it was him who had flashed on 28 Feb or whether they just had a description of a man who they did not know was him. If it is like a lot of flashers , do they really take those things that seriously ? do they have the resources to look into those in any great depth when there are numerous other serious crimes in London atm like the many stabbings?
 
Police watchdog probes Met officers response to indecent exposure claim against Sarah Everard murder suspect

The police watchdog has launched an independent investigation into whether Metropolitan Police officers responded appropriately to an allegation of indecent exposure made against the suspect held over Sarah Everard's disappearance.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) said the investigation followed a conduct referral from the Metropolitan Police (MPS) in relation to two officers, received on Wednesday.

The watchdog said the referral was linked to another four, "all connected to the arrest of a serving MPS officer on suspicion of kidnap, murder and a separate allegation of indecent exposure".

In a statement, the IOPC said: "Our investigation will look at the actions of the MPS after police received a report on February 28 that a man had exposed himself at a fast food restaurant in South London.

"On Wednesday we determined that two conduct referrals relating to kidnap/murder and indecent exposure allegations against the arrested officer should remain under local investigation by the force.

"We are still assessing a mandatory referral in relation to the actions of police after they received a report that Sarah Everard was missing."

The IOPC added a mandatory referral was received from the Met on Thursday in relation to police contact with the arrested officer who was treated in hospital after sustaining a head injury while in custody on Wednesday, which is being assessed to determine what further action may be required.

The Met Police said it had made a voluntary referral to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) “for a conduct matter in relation to the police investigation into the separate allegations of indecent exposure”, which is being investigated by the watchdog.

The force also made a mandatory referral to the IOPC over the “actions of police” after Sarah Everard was reported missing.

Another mandatory referral has been made by the force over the arrested man being taken to hospital for treatment to a head wound sustained in custody.

The Met said the suspect was “being monitored by CCTV and received immediate first aid” and they await the IOPC’s assessment.

The Met Police also confirmed it had made two referrals – one voluntary and one mandatory – to the IOPC “linked to the conduct of the officer arrested on suspicion of kidnap, murder and indecent exposure,” which are being investigated locally.

The force said it was “offering every assistance” to the IOPC.

 
I think re the sun article about 2 coppers - it might mean the copper who flashed (WC) and the copper who failed to act appropriately on the report rather than 2 coppers being investigated for flashing. Not sure about the 4 other referrals though.

My other thought - is there any possibility that fast food restaurant referred to is the cabin frequented by police that Sarah passed by on her route home??
 
Can anyone remember the night WC was arrested (I think that night) there was some drama somewhere in Vauxhall? A street was shut down or something. That's near the US Embassy.

If anyone has the specifics on this please post :)

Have been lurking but just joined to comment and this is my first post. A member called Mersault posted this on the night of the arrest about a street blocked off by LE in Oval (sorry don't know how to link this properly):
Fentiman Road is closed by police cordon and looks serious, two miles away - no suggestion that it’s linked though
 
The Metropolitan police is to face an investigation into whether it properly investigated a claim of indecent exposure involving the suspect in the alleged murder of Sarah Everard, days before the marketing executive disappeared.

PC Wayne Couzens has been arrested on suspicion of the kidnap and murder of Everard. He has also been arrested on suspicion of an indecent exposure involving another woman, and this is the incident that will be investigated by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).

The alleged indecent exposure happened on 28 February, at a fast food restaurant in south London.'

Sarah Everard suspect: Met faces inquiry over indecent exposure claim


Looks like some of you were right in thinking that the IE was a seperate incident prior to SE. I won't speculate on how the met handled the incident. I'm glad that they are at the very least looking in to what failings may have happened. Hopefully they can reform how they handle this in the future.
Good God!
What does this mean in plain English?
From your link
“The IOPC’s investigation follows a conduct referral from the MPS in relation to two officers, received last night, which is linked to four other referrals. They are all connected to the arrest of a serving MPS officer on suspicion of kidnap, murder and a separate allegation of indecent exposure.

“Our investigation will look at the actions of the MPS after police received a report on 28 February (2021) that a man had exposed himself at a fast food restaurant in south London.”



Topics
Reuse this content
 
Am I reading this right, that two serving officers are being investigated? And the part about it being linked to four other referrals! What’s going on?!

"The IOPC’s investigation follows a conduct referral from the MPS in relation to two officers, received last night, which is linked to four other referrals.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14310271/sarah-everard-police-wayne-couzens/

The other could be an officer who was tasked to assess/investigate the case.
 
I think his head banging is clear sign of how violent this man can be. He's a very sick individual !

I think this is a better explanation than suicide attempt although that is possible too. Given he has been caught when he probably did not think he would, the realisation of what that means to him/his family, if convicted of SE’s murder and given he is a police officer...the prospect of jail and how he will be treated is probably dawning on him, he has lost any control/power he had...everything is imploding, he is caged and on the other side of the bars than he usually would be and thinks he should be....I think the head banging is anger / frustration, especially if he is coming down too from any steroids if those were something he took.
 

“The IOPC’s investigation follows a conduct referral from the MPS in relation to two officers, received last night, which is linked to four other referrals”


So I take this to mean they are looking at the two officers who took the report or were supposed to investigate it, whether they handled it properly.. my opinion would be no due to the fact he was still working!! :mad: <modsnip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i'm also reading 2 officers from the above link....wow...whats happening. I'm stunned. what the hell gives these men the right to treat females this way.

looking on google that wooded area is rather large, could take some time to thoroughly search, if thats what the portable cabins are for
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
221
Guests online
299
Total visitors
520

Forum statistics

Threads
607,999
Messages
18,232,919
Members
234,269
Latest member
BarnabyBear
Back
Top