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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you put SH's involvement aside for a moment and think about who else might/might not be involved then *IF* the visit to the fair didn't happen then it's very relevant when the story emerged, both to the rest of the family and to the police wouldn't you say?

DS must have a pretty solid alibi as his whereabouts have never been discussed. I wonder if he does live there at all though as nothing's been mentioned about him coming home on Thursday evening and he's not even mentioned for Friday so I guess he doesn't eat his meals in the house either.
 
The key person here is CS. She had to know if they went or not

which brings up how many scenarios there are either way

i think until the court case all we can do is guess, no doubt it will all come out at court.

and i think that court case may also be the deciding part of whether CS will be charged with murder or not.
 
which brings up how many scenarios there are either way

i think until the court case all we can do is guess, no doubt it will all come out at court.

and i think that court case may also be the deciding part of whether CS will be charged with murder or not.

True. I have to keep reminding myself that just because CS hasn't been charged with anything yet doesn't mean she won't be at a later date. Even if it's a lesser charge than murder.

Of course, they may have really gone to the fair on Friday in which case, I would have less suspicion about her.
 
that would depend, if CS and SH had said sometime friday that they had been there then he would just assume they had and corrected him.

but obviously DS isn't the sharpest tool in the box either or he would have picked up on it too but his facial expression didn't change at all.

Perhaps his facial expression didn't change at all because SH is always mixing up things?
 
True. I have to keep reminding myself that just because CS hasn't been charged with anything yet doesn't mean she won't be at a later date. Even if it's a lesser charge than murder.

Of course, they may have really gone to the fair on Friday in which case, I would have less suspicion about her.

even if they did both go, it could be that they had to be seen there to back up any story that they needed.

i'd be very surprised if she had nothing at all to do with this.
 
It wasn't just the shaking from nerves I was thinking about. If he's as heavy a drinker as the shop video shows then I'd expect him to have some sign of the DT's. He was slurring and mumbling quite a bit at times in the video so I wonder if he'd also had alcohol (mixed with some red bull to cover the smell!).

I don't think he necessarily drinks as much as he did that Friday on a regular basis. Perhaps too much is being made of any alcoholism problems based on a stress induced binge?
 
DS must have a pretty solid alibi as his whereabouts have never been discussed. I wonder if he does live there at all though as nothing's been mentioned about him coming home on Thursday evening and he's not even mentioned for Friday so I guess he doesn't eat his meals in the house either.

Is DS still supposed to be living with CS? I didn't think so but I might be wrong. DS had clearly heard about the funfair visit before the interview otherwise he couldn't have corrected SH. But I wasn't really meaning him as I say above.
 
Ew. :( Just watched the SH film clip for the second time and it's fascinating how it has two very distinct parts to it. Up until around 7 mins, when SH is left to tell his story without prompting or Q's for the most part, he is fluent and confident.

At around 7 mins when he realises that he has possibly messed up with the name of the fair and is then asked directly about his involvement in the situation, he starts getting jumbled, loses track of the right things to say, looks defiantly at the camera and starts dismissing his bad reputation as the reason why people think he might be responsible. Oddly DS prompts him with phrases and words that enable him to continue, including the 'everyone's got a shady past.'

Also, found the comment he made under his breath about what G'ma would do if she saw that all the lollies had been eaten very interesting, "....would go mad."

Fascinating and very uncomfortable viewing.
 
Is DS still supposed to be living with CS? I didn't think so but I might be wrong. DS had clearly heard about the funfair visit before the interview otherwise he couldn't have corrected SH. But I wasn't really meaning him as I say above.

in the 5 days before the interview ?

i'm betting he heard a ton of things said.
 
Ew. :( Just watched the SH film clip for the second time and it's fascinating how it has two very distinct parts to it. Up until around 7 mins, when SH is left to tell his story without prompting or Q's for the most part, he is fluent and confident.

At around 7 mins when he realises that he has possibly messed up with the name of the fair and is then asked directly about his involvement in the situation, he starts getting jumbled, loses track of the right things to say, looks defiantly at the camera and starts dismissing his bad reputation as the reason why people think he might be responsible. Oddly DS prompts him with phrases and words that enable him to continue, including the 'everyone's got a shady past.'

Also, found the comment he made under his breath about what G'ma would do if she saw that all the lollies had been eaten very interesting, "....would go mad."

Fascinating and very uncomfortable viewing.

yeah i loved the bit about "everybody having a shady past" , everybody he knows maybe lol, i don't have one, most of the people i know don't have one, some people i know do
 
You know, Adorabella, I really hadn't thought of it that way, but you might be onto something there...

DS wouldn't leave the mistake of Orpington uncorrected as it was factually incorrect. He was there supporting DS. It was simply the right thing to do.
 
Is DS still supposed to be living with CS? I didn't think so but I might be wrong. DS had clearly heard about the funfair visit before the interview otherwise he couldn't have corrected SH. But I wasn't really meaning him as I say above.

He was down on the electoral roll but then again so were Tia and CS's ex-hubby.

Ew. :( Just watched the SH film clip for the second time and it's fascinating how it has two very distinct parts to it. Up until around 7 mins, when SH is left to tell his story without prompting or Q's for the most part, he is fluent and confident.

At around 7 mins when he realises that he has possibly messed up with the name of the fair and is then asked directly about his involvement in the situation, he starts getting jumbled, loses track of the right things to say, looks defiantly at the camera and starts dismissing his bad reputation as the reason why people think he might be responsible. Oddly DS prompts him with phrases and words that enable him to continue, including the 'everyone's got a shady past.'

Also, found the comment he made under his breath about what G'ma would do if she saw that all the lollies had been eaten very interesting, "....would go mad."

Fascinating and very uncomfortable viewing.

He also blatantly lies at that point by saying "it was 10 years ago for god's sake". The machete incident was supposed to be in 2010 and the revelations came out on Wednesday. He didn't give that interview with Mark Williams Thomas until Thursday after he'd been interviewed by the police.
 
DS must have a pretty solid alibi as his whereabouts have never been discussed. I wonder if he does live there at all though as nothing's been mentioned about him coming home on Thursday evening and he's not even mentioned for Friday so I guess he doesn't eat his meals in the house either.

DH does not live in CS's house. He lives in New Addington I believe.
 
DS wouldn't leave the mistake of Orpington uncorrected as it was factually incorrect. He was there supporting DS. It was simply the right thing to do.

unless DS spoke to the Police after the interview with his own suspicions.

as no doubt DS would know that SH would know the difference between Orpington and Ashburton.
 
Finally got the sound fixed on my computer - this is the 1st time I've heard his voice. He looks down too much. He's 'living' his lie as he talks, he could repeat it verbatim.

Wow - I feel such a dummie now, believing him because of the myriad of details he crammed into that interview. All those little tidbits about sausage rolls and hoovering and having a ciggie, etc. And all the while she's rotting in the attic with his full knowledge. Too shocking.
 
yeah i loved the bit about "everybody having a shady past" , everybody he knows maybe lol, i don't have one, most of the people i know don't have one, some people i know do
I suppose that, like the moon, we all have our dark side, it's just that those don't necessarily involve past arrests for burglary, theft, selling crack cocaine, and the possession of a machete.
 
Of course, they may have really gone to the fair on Friday in which case, I would have less suspicion about her.

I would have more suspicion if she had gone to the fair. It appears she didn't ask anyone if they had seen TS. That would be unusual. I keep harping on about this, but SH has said he asked if Tia had been seen. And nobody remembers. Does this mean it's a complete lie and they didn't go to the fair. Would he tell this whopper in front of tv cameras and with CS present? Answer (however unintelligent some think he is) has to be NO. In my mind they went to the fair. But they didn't ask about TS. They went for another reason.
 
Finally got the sound fixed on my computer - this is the 1st time I've heard his voice. He looks down too much. He's 'living' his lie as he talks, he could repeat it verbatim.

Wow - I feel such a dummie now, believing him because of the myriad of details he crammed into that interview. All those little tidbits about sausage rolls and hoovering and having a ciggie, etc. And all the while she's rotting in the attic with his full knowledge. Too shocking.

I suspect a lot of the detail about the hoovering etc were true. He probably did do a lot of cleaning!
 
Ew. :( Just watched the SH film clip for the second time and it's fascinating how it has two very distinct parts to it. Up until around 7 mins, when SH is left to tell his story without prompting or Q's for the most part, he is fluent and confident.

At around 7 mins when he realises that he has possibly messed up with the name of the fair and is then asked directly about his involvement in the situation, he starts getting jumbled, loses track of the right things to say, looks defiantly at the camera and starts dismissing his bad reputation as the reason why people think he might be responsible. Oddly DS prompts him with phrases and words that enable him to continue, including the 'everyone's got a shady past.'

Also, found the comment he made under his breath about what G'ma would do if she saw that all the lollies had been eaten very interesting, "....would go mad."

Fascinating and very uncomfortable viewing.

Damn this post Adora.....I'm now going to have to watch the video again....and set my stopwatch. Arghhhhh!!!! ;-)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
174
Guests online
1,995
Total visitors
2,169

Forum statistics

Threads
602,888
Messages
18,148,453
Members
231,573
Latest member
SaltPetals
Back
Top