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

[soozieqtips]

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.

I was referring to Hazell's account of his visit to the fair, and no one remembers him asking about Tia.

 

[MobyBluff]

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.

Have you ever been to a fair? Do they really look that memorable?

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.

I'm saying she knew very well what had happened and went to the fair for a different reason, or at least I'm throwing that idea up again

 

[soozieqtips]

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

How does you suggesting you've heard 'rumours' about the case help solve the crime? It doesn't. Point is we're just discussing.

 

[Adorabella]

I'm saying she knew very well what had happened and went to the fair for a different reason, or at least I'm throwing that idea up again

And I am saying that perhaps she didn't and that that was the turning point in the investigation. You saying it a million times doesn't change it from a thought to a reality.

Yes, I have been to a fair, in fact, I have been to many, although not recently and so now cannot call to mind what people looked like that long ago but apparently according to you they all looked like SH and G'ma.

However, if I went to the fair the day before a massive police hunt was on a for a local missing girl, I might recall seeing one of the people involved who's face was suddenly plastered across TV and newspapers - especially when he is quite striking in looks and height.

I guess we will find out.

 

[MobyBluff]

How does you suggesting you've heard 'rumours' about the case help solve the crime? It doesn't. Point is we're just discussing.

I agree with your comment, saying I've heard rumours doesn't help solve anything. I was merely trying to give the impression that there's no smoke without fire....and there is a shed load of smoke, even on the ground closer to the crime scene than we are. And I apologise for that.

Point is I thought we should be discussing ideas of what may of happened? Not the rights and wrong of sufficient bedrooms and the current social housing issues or whether it's right or wrong to have more children when you can;t afford them.

 

[Clio]

I was referring to Hazell's account of his visit to the fair, and no one remembers him asking about Tia.

Ok but that's not what you said. You said

No one, not a single person remembers anyone asking about a missing child

I was just pointing out that wasn't the case. They did remember two women handing out posters of TS very late on Friday but they didn't remember SH/CS

 

[MobyBluff]

And I am saying that perhaps she didn't and that that was the turning point in the investigation. You saying it a million times doesn't change it from a thought to a reality.

Yes, I have been to a fair, in fact, I have been to many, although not recently and so now cannot call to mind what people looked like that long ago but apparently according to you they all looked like SH and G'ma.

However, if I went to the fair the day before a massive police hunt was on a for a local missing girl, I might recall seeing one of the people involved who's face was suddenly plastered across TV and newspapers - especially when he is quite striking in looks and height. I doubt you would, your brain would have noticed thousands of people and not have taken in his far from striking looks

I guess we will find out.

IMO


I guess we will

 

[soozieqtips]

Ok but that's not what you said. You said

All along I have only referred to Hazell's account of the funfair visit, but should have made it clearer that's whose account I was still referring to.

By the way, when I posted that Tia allegedly had bruising to the body, you replied that 'we don't know that, do we?' - so I, and a couple of others posted some links.

Did you see them?

 

[MobyBluff]

All along I have only referred to Hazell's account of the funfair visit, but should have made it clearer that's whose account I was still referring to.

By the way, when I posted that Tia allegedly had bruising to the body, you replied that 'we don't know that, do we?' - so I, and a couple of others posted some links.

Did you see them?

Yes I saw them. I should have said thanks.

 

[accidental-zen]

Moby, I do sincerely wish you'd never posted about your 'shady rumours' - perhaps I'm just too easily irritated, but it's been under my skin ever since and driving me ever-so-slightly bonkers! The 'shall I post a few theories...?' approach hasn't helped, either! Damn you, Moby, you terrible tease! *wink*

(In my defense, there is just so much about this story that makes no sense frm the outside that I think it's natural to want access to any informatio that might provide someanswers. Every time I see Tia's poor, sweet face in my mind I could weep... I am so glad that my own 10 year old DD is with me, and safe and happy.... )

 

[Adorabella]

Moby - on what grounds do you doubt I would have noticed seeing SH? You have absolutely no idea about me and I am getting fed up of you trying to be right at the expense of others being wrong (and at times quite rudely) - without any proof.

We are all on here making suggestions. Some may be proved to be right and some wrong - there is no prize at the end of this.

And, yes - SH is striking IMO - I don't know anyone at all that looks like him, so to me he would stand out from the crowd but perhaps not to you.

 

[MobyBluff]

Moby, I do sincerely wish you'd never posted about your 'shady rumours' - perhaps I'm just too easily irritated, but it's been under my skin ever since and driving me ever-so-slightly bonkers! The 'shall I post a few theories...?' approach hasn't helped, either! Damn you, Moby, you terrible tease! *wink*

Me too, I've had nothing but grief!!!!

 

[MobyBluff]

Moby - on what grounds do you doubt I would have noticed seeing SH? You have absolutely no idea about me and I am getting fed up of you trying to be right at the expense of others being wrong (and at times quite rudely) - without any proof.

I have no proof of anything, and as I don't have the facts I can't see how I can be right. However I can most certainly be wrong, if I've missed something! Rude? I hope not. I guess it's how you "read" my comments

We are all on here making suggestions. Some may be proved to be right and some wrong - there is no prize at the end of this.

That's a shame!

And, yes - SH is striking IMO - I don't know anyone at all that looks like him, so to me he would stand out from the crowd but perhaps not to you.

If I saw SH or CS today I would definitely remember seeing them if asked tomorrow. If I'd seen them at a fair before their pictures were splashed over the press I can't believe I would be able to confirm I'd seen them, unless I'd had a conversation with them or seen them having a fight or similar. But to be honest I pay so little attention to anything I couldn't tell you who wasn't in the office today!

 

[josie1986]

Maybe we should all take a step back and re group before it ends up a slinging match and the mods close the thread.

We are only posting theories and no one is right or wrong until details are formally released.

And rumors are a bad idea,I'm sure it's in the T&S about the rules of posting them.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Clio]

All along I have only referred to Hazell's account of the funfair visit, but should have made it clearer that's whose account I was still referring to.

By the way, when I posted that Tia allegedly had bruising to the body, you replied that 'we don't know that, do we?' - so I, and a couple of others posted some links.

Did you see them?

Yes thanks - just been to look again. If you take the BBC report as the more responsible version they say

BBC Home Affairs Correspondent Danny Shaw said: "It is understood there was bruising to her body."

Forgive me for being somewhat cynical of media reports but to me that doesn't mean it's 100% true. Given the amount of mis-reporting and "attention grabbing" stuff that's printed, I am somewhat sceptical of believing all that is written.

Even if it is true, we don't know at this point where on her "lower body" the bruising is or at what point it occurred. She was a child - children get bruises.

 

[MobyBluff]

Yes thanks - just been to look again. If you take the BBC report as the more responsible version they say

BBC Home Affairs Correspondent Danny Shaw said: "It is understood there was bruising to her body."

I think we can trust the BBC more than anyone else too, and they say "It is understood" not "we believe" or even "we understand". It sounds like they're not sure there was any bruising.

I don't know anything about pathology, but if the decomposition was so bad that they had to identify using dental records would bruises be visible? Or perhaps they can "see" bruises through a study of the tissue?

Are we likely to hear the results of these biopsy tests they are awaiting before the trial?

 

[RedOwl]

I think we can trust the BBC more than anyone else too, and they say "It is understood" not "we believe" or even "we understand". It sounds like they're not sure there was any bruising.

I don't know anything about pathology, but if the decomposition was so bad that they had to identify using dental records would bruises be visible? Or perhaps they can "see" bruises through a study of the tissue?

Are we likely to hear the results of these biopsy tests they are awaiting before the trial?

That's what I was wondering too.

 

[Lacyanna]

Agreed with those who suggest to take a step back and regroup. The name of this website really says it all. Websleuths. We are all here doing the same thing, which means we are effectively a "team". Within the rules of this website we are here to:

Think out loud
Trouble-shoot
Construct theories
Ask each other questions
Question theories
Realize we may have gotten something wrong, and start over (that's not only OK-it's the lovely bit about human nature)


If you look at some of the other larger cases here on the site, you will see the same sorts of things going on. There is no right or wrong when you are trying to come up with your theory of what happened. As a matter-of-fact, I once took a really amazing course in teams who do troubleshooting. One of the practices was to gather as a small team, put a huge piece of paper up on the wall, and allow each person to blurt out what ideas they had. The more random and less pre-planned the better!

When we get to the end of this case, these threads will be that big piece of paper and we will surely find that each person had "something". Some things will be ruled out, and others may be exactly right on!

That's what I love about Websleuths! One other reason is the fact that I moved to England nearly 4 years ago from California and have yet to make many new friends. I am finding this forum absolutely perfect for having conversations and learning more about others.

:seeya:

 

[kaos]

I think we can trust the BBC more than anyone else too, and they say "It is understood" not "we believe" or even "we understand". It sounds like they're not sure there was any bruising.

I don't know anything about pathology, but if the decomposition was so bad that they had to identify using dental records would bruises be visible? Or perhaps they can "see" bruises through a study of the tissue?

Are we likely to hear the results of these biopsy tests they are awaiting before the trial?

I'm sure the report says her arms and legs weren't in the hard suitcase type item her body was found in so maybe it's possible that they could see bruising on the lower body either because

1) the exposed limbs weren't as decomposed as the part that was in the bag, then wrapped in the sheet or

2) the part that was in the sheet was more protected and her arms and legs suffered more decomposition.


If they haven't been able to give a cause of death as yet then that suggests the upper part of her body was more decomposed though.

 

[Clio]

I think we can trust the BBC more than anyone else too, and they say "It is understood" not "we believe" or even "we understand". It sounds like they're not sure there was any bruising.

I don't know anything about pathology, but if the decomposition was so bad that they had to identify using dental records would bruises be visible? Or perhaps they can "see" bruises through a study of the tissue?

Are we likely to hear the results of these biopsy tests they are awaiting before the trial?

I also thought that decomposition might make it hard to identify bruising but I'm not a pathologist so I don't know either.

If the tests come back with something that allows them to state cause of death then I imagine we will hear what the cause of death was before the trial. It might not be anytime soon though - tests can take a while.