GUILTY UK - Tia Sharp, 12, New Addington, London, 3 Aug 2012 #3

[user484]

I am not blaming her death on their financial circumstances, or even on their lack of responsibility, in that they had her allegedly sleeping on the sofa as there were too few bedrooms for them all, which may have lead to her spending more and more time with her G'ma and her unsavoury partner - and that if I were TS parent, I would have given up my own room for her to sleep in.

The blame lies squarely with the perpetrator of the crime.

But by saying:

Perhaps if they had lived within their means and had only had the amount of children they could actually look after or afford/ house appropriately then poor TS would not be lying on a slab in a mortuary right now.

You are suggesting that TS's death is as a result of the circumstances they created. If you do believe that the blame lies with the perpetrator, as you say above, you might want to more careful with the way you word things.

 

[MobyBluff]

I wonder how many bedrooms the flat has. If it just has 2, then I guess the parents had one, and the young boys the other. Maybe they'd applied for a bigger house and were on the waiting list. Whatever, it means that Tia had no privacy at all, no place to call her own. Clothes in carrier bags? It's as if she were an unwanted 'extra'.

.....It's as if she were an unwanted 'extra'......if we are to believe any of the groundless rumours that were reported as rumours.....are we sleuthing here......?

I still don't believe they went to the fair to be seen as searching for Tia.....when the story was she went to Croydon Town Centre and there are PLENTY of other places that a missing child might decide to go. How would this little girl have known about the fair, or how to get there?

They went to the fair for an entirely different reason IMO

 

[Adorabella]

I wonder how many bedrooms the flat has. If it just has 2, then I guess the parents had one, and the young boys the other. Maybe they'd applied for a bigger house and were on the waiting list. Whatever, it means that Tia had no privacy at all, no place to call her own. Clothes in carrier bags? It's as if she were an unwanted 'extra'.

It doesn't bear thinking about. Like you, I was thinking it must be two bedrooms - one would be ridiculous and three would be utterly cruel.

 

[Adorabella]

But by saying:


You are suggesting that TS's death is as a result of the circumstances they created. If you do believe that the blame lies with the perpetrator, as you say above, you might want to more careful with the way you word things.

Actually, I chose my words with care - it seems that TS was (possibly) sleeping on a sofa in the living room with her clothing in carrier bags and that according to G'ma visited often because she saw it as a 'refuge.' A child who is happy and comfortable in their own home does not look for a refuge.

 

[Inge Jones]

It's not impossible that it was a 1-bedroom flat actually. They might have rented it or been allocated it when they were just a couple (maybe Tia was living with her gran at the time?) and then the little ones came along - still young enough to share the parents' room. Then it has been said Tia stopped seeing her gran for a period of time - perhaps she came back to live with her mother at this time - and there would simply have been no room in either the bedroom or the wardrobes/dressers to store her clothes, full as they were of baby gear and parental clothing.

It might have been worse. They might have said "sorry Tia we don't have room" and put her into care. And there are many who have reason to believe a child in care is no safer than they would be in a less than satisfactory parental home.

 

[deniseyolande]

Well that's the fault of the council for not rehousing them as they should have done. However, better organised parents would probably have given their daughter their room, and slept in the living room themselves. It makes more sense that way, since otherwise the girl has to wait until the adults go to bed before she can go to sleep herself.

How is it the fault of the council? Subsidized and/or free housing is a gift....there is also a housing shortage...Responsible and caring parents put the needs of their child 1st....they don't have their kid sleep on a couch and ship them out every weekend to grandma who is living with a known felon. They should of given up their room or have had all the kids sleep in one room, until they could secure a 3 bedroom flat...on there own or through the council.

 

[Lola]

This struck me from the same article:
"Had a deteriorating attendance record and began playing truant from school

Began struggling with schoolwork, with her attainment levels dropping"

Usually this kind of behaviour indicates trouble at home and/ or abuse.

It may just have been that TS was sleeping in the living room and may not have been able to get to sleep until the 'adults' went to bed but even so - in the same circumstances, my child would be in my room and I would have slept on the sofa. Poor, poor child.

So clearly warning signs were there - Churchill the Croydon journo has probably heard far more than he can print. It is so sad but also makes me really angry, this poor girl never had much of a chance.

 

[soozieqtips]

I still don't believe they went to the fair to be seen as searching for Tia.....when the story was she went to Croydon Town Centre and there are PLENTY of other places that a missing child might decide to go. How would this little girl have known about the fair, or how to get there?

They went to the fair for an entirely different reason IMO

Well, she was quite adept at travelling from place to place, as we know. The fair could have been advertised? When there's a fair at Mitcham, you see signs for it all over the place. I don't think it would have been hard for her to find out how to get there. But I think we already know that the fair story was made up so it's irrelevant.

 

[Adorabella]

It's not impossible that it was a 1-bedroom flat actually. They might have rented it or been allocated it when they were just a couple (maybe Tia was living with her gran at the time?) and then the little ones came along - still young enough to share the parents' room. Then it has been said Tia stopped seeing her gran for a period of time - perhaps she came back to live with her mother at this time - and there would simply have been no room in either the bedroom or the wardrobes/dressers to store her clothes, full as they were of baby gear and parental clothing.

It might have been worse. They might have said "sorry Tia we don't have room" and put her into care. And there are many who have reason to believe a child in care is no safer than they would be in a less than satisfactory parental home.

Based on the above scenario the more responsible option would be, rather than saying "sorry Tia we don't have any room" and putting her into care, that they didn't have two further children when they couldn't provide for them at that time!

 

[soozieqtips]

It's not impossible that it was a 1-bedroom flat actually. They might have rented it or been allocated it when they were just a couple (maybe Tia was living with her gran at the time?) and then the little ones came along - still young enough to share the parents' room. Then it has been said Tia stopped seeing her gran for a period of time - perhaps she came back to live with her mother at this time - and there would simply have been no room in either the bedroom or the wardrobes/dressers to store her clothes, full as they were of baby gear and parental clothing.

I wonder if Tia stopped seeing her gran at around the time her brothers were born. Her mum would have needed some help I would imagine and Tia would have been old enough to lend a helping hand. Yes, it was possibly a one-bedroom flat. Even if it was a 2-bed flat, one of the rooms might have been too small for 3 kids and all their belongings.

 

[MobyBluff]

Well, she was quite adept at travelling from place to place, as we know. The fair could have been advertised? When there's a fair at Mitcham, you see signs for it all over the place. I don't think it would have been hard for her to find out how to get there. But I think we already know that the fair story was made up so it's irrelevant.

It would be entirely irrelevant IF the fair story was made up. Very poignant if it turns out they were there...especially as nobody remembers being asked about a missing girl....

 

[MobyBluff]

Based on the above scenario the more responsible option would be, rather than saying "sorry Tia we don't have any room" and putting her into care, that they didn't have two further children when they couldn't provide for them at that time!

This is irrelevant to this thread really. We know that her family life wasn't what most would consider normal.

 

[soozieqtips]

It would be entirely irrelevant IF the fair story was made up. Very poignant if it turns out they were there...especially as nobody remembers being asked about a missing girl....

Yes, but you asked how she would have known about the fair and how she would have got there. Those were the questions I answered. I'm not working on a theory that anyone visited the fair in relation to searching for Tia. No one, not a single person remembers anyone asking about a missing child.

 

[Clio]

I still don't believe they went to the fair to be seen as searching for Tia.....when the story was she went to Croydon Town Centre and there are PLENTY of other places that a missing child might decide to go. How would this little girl have known about the fair, or how to get there?

They went to the fair for an entirely different reason IMO

I'm not even convinced they went to the fair at all. The fairground owners say they didn't. In the Thursday interview SH clearly states that "me and Chris" searched the fair and that they were there for a "good hour".

If they did go to the fair, why would the fair owners and security guard deny it?

If they didn't go to the fair, why would CS, if innocent, go along with the story?

Unless the fairground owners are mistaken and they really did go, and unless the first mention of the fairground search was in the Thursday interview, CS and possibly more family members, have some serious explaining to do IMHO.

 

[MobyBluff]

Yes, but you asked how she would have known about the fair and how she would have got there. Those were the questions I answered. I'm not working on a theory that anyone visited the fair in relation to searching for Tia. No one, not a single person remembers anyone asking about a missing child.

Being a local I can tell you that there are very few posters advertising any fair. The fair is not on a normal route Tia would take (between Merton and Croydon and Addington), and I doubt very very much she would know where Ashburton Park is anyway.

And nobody remembers anyone asking about a missing girl because they didn't go to the fair to pretend to be looking for her, so they didn't ask anyone, so why were they there?.....imo

 

[soozieqtips]

This is irrelevant to this thread really. We know that her family life wasn't what most would consider normal.

Why is it irrelevant? Her background is relevant to all this in my opinion. If it turns out Social Services had information that meant Tia was at risk, then surely her short life, how it was lived, and what sort (if any) nurturing she got, is relevant? The whole reason she stayed with Gran so much (and the other step-gran) is because her life at home appears to have been cramped and chaotic. Her home life is relevant.

I still don't think they visited the fair.

 

[Clio]

It would be entirely irrelevant IF the fair story was made up. Very poignant if it turns out they were there...especially as nobody remembers being asked about a missing girl...

Yes, but you asked how she would have known about the fair and how she would have got there. Those were the questions I answered. I'm not working on a theory that anyone visited the fair in relation to searching for Tia. No one, not a single person remembers anyone asking about a missing child.

Yes they do remember about being asked about a missing child. They said that on very late on Friday night, two women, between 25 and 30, came up and gave them some of the pictures and told them she had gone missing.

They don't however remember SH/CS

 

[Adorabella]

And nobody remembers anyone asking about a missing girl because they didn't go to the fair to pretend to be looking for her, so they didn't ask anyone, so why were they there?.....imo

If they had gone to the fair in any capacity, they have such easily recognisable faces that someone would definitely have noticed them..especially after those faces were then plastered all over the press 24 hours later.

What we don't yet know is whether G'ma did go along with the story or not and that may have been the turning point in the investigation. She may have kept quiet in front of the press and then spoken to a police officer. If all the pieces start falling into place that your partner may be responsible for the disappearance of your grand-daughter and he's then lying about it, he may also be capable of causing you great harm, too.

 

[MobyBluff]

I'm not even convinced they went to the fair at all. The fairground owners say they didn't. In the Thursday interview SH clearly states that "me and Chris" searched the fair and that they were there for a "good hour".

If they did go to the fair, why would the fair owners and security guard deny it?

Because they didn't really ask anyone, they were there for a different reason

If they didn't go to the fair, why would CS, if innocent, go along with the story?

Exactly, so they DID go to the fair

Unless the fairground owners are mistaken and they really did go, and unless the first mention of the fairground search was in the Thursday interview, CS and possibly more family members, have some serious explaining to do IMHO.

How did this this thread decide SH & CH didn't go to the funfair?

 

[MobyBluff]

Why is it irrelevant? Her background is relevant to all this in my opinion. If it turns out Social Services had information that meant Tia was at risk, then surely her short life, how it was lived, and what sort (if any) nurturing she got, is relevant? The whole reason she stayed with Gran so much (and the other step-gran) is because her life at home appears to have been cramped and chaotic. Her home life is relevant.

I still don't think they visited the fair.

OK, but how does knowing that her school work was suffering because she slept on the settee help solve this crime?