GUILTY UK - Tia Sharp, 12, New Addington, London, 3 Aug 2012 #4

[Alyce]

Certainly in the early days of the search, hope was expressed by police spokesmen that Tia would be found alive and well. I don't recall any such suggestion from police sources after the body was found, although I may have missed it of course.

I have found the following quote, but it is not clear ( full article link also attached ) whether this is a direct police quote, or just media speculation

Although Tia had clearly been dead for some time, officers have not been able to rule out that the schoolgirl was alive when colleagues first visited the council house in New Addington, near Croydon, South London, after she vanished a week earlier.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...heartbreak-death-baby-girl.html#ixzz24NN4C39L

 

[Skigh]

True. But he said her phone was 'broken', which I take to mean actually broken and not just flat. Was it broken in an argument? If Tia was still with her friend up until the time she left to go to East Croydon, then her friend would be of great interest to the police. Hope against hope that the friend's family don't put pressure on her to keep quiet for the sake of the 'community'. If Tia shared lots of stuff with her about her life (as young girls do with their friends) - then the friend might be the only one who can tell the police about what had been going on prior to her 'disappearance'. If her parents tell her to say she doesn't know anything, then I'm sure that's what she'll do, say nothing, or pretend Tia didn't talk to her about private stuff.

AS far as I can recollect he did not use the word broken, could have been not working, it was an ambiguous word which could have meant a number of problems -not charged-out of credit-had a fault.I know when I read it it came across to me as if it was a sudden problem and she only just realised as she was going out.

 

[Clio]

And here we have it, at least in part:



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...24-hour-watch-jail-death-threats-inmates.html

Yes but that's the Daily Mail's words not the exact quote from the Met. And as has been mentioned, they are talking about the first search, i.e the search of TS's bedroom which was not a full search.

I remember at the time thinking how typical it was of the Mail to run with such an attention grabbing headline with nothing to really back it up.

I agree with you that thisiscroydontoday fairground article was pulled, but in this case, I don't think anything's been pulled because the police have always said it was the body that should have been found in the second search, i.e. Sunday 2 hour search

 

[Clio]

I have found the following quote, but it is not clear ( full article link also attached ) whether this is a direct police quote, or just media speculation

Although Tia had clearly been dead for some time, officers have not been able to rule out that the schoolgirl was alive when colleagues first visited the council house in New Addington, near Croydon, South London, after she vanished a week earlier.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...heartbreak-death-baby-girl.html#ixzz24NN4C39L

See my reply to laserdisc above. The police did not say that - the Daily Mail did. The police have always said that it was the body that should have been found during the second (Sunday) search

 

[laserdisc10]

[/B]


After you posted this I am wondering what your motive is in questioning whether Tia could be alive during the police searches.

I'll tell you my 'motive'. It consists of responding to Clio's astonished response to my many posts questioning how police on one hand could speculate TS may have been alive when they conducted their initial search and on the other hand state that because decomposition was so advanced, identification could only be confirmed via dental records

Everything to satisfy your curiosity is there for your perusal within the thread today

Do we need 'motives' now before we post? It's been my impression we're simply airing opinions and engaging in debate

Do you find nothing unusual in simultaneous speculation on the part of police that (a) TS may have been alive during their first search and (b) decomposition was so advanced identification could only be ascertained via dental records ?

No? Well, let's put it this way: if TS was alive during the first search as has been speculated and/or at least has not been ruled out by police -- then how many days would that leave for decomposition to reach such advanced stage that dental records were required for identification? Six days?

 

[laserdisc10]

See my reply to laserdisc above. The police did not say that - the Daily Mail did. The police have always said that it was the body that should have been found during the second (Sunday) search

Excuse me, but can you provide a source to definitively confirm the police did not say that ? Alternatively, are you able to provide a source which will confirm that the Daily Mail were in error or guilty of invention when they published that police cannot rule out that TS may have been alive when they conducted their initial search

 

[Dion]

I think the £10 may be entirely fictitious.

I agree. If he had an extra £10 there is no way he would give it away, he would spend it on booze or cigarettes. This was just another one of his fantasy points while saying all he did for Tia - cooked for her, cleaned up after her, washed her clothes, gave her money, etc.

 

[Skigh]

I'll tell you my 'motive'. It consists of responding to Clio's astonished response to my many posts questioning how police on one hand could speculate TS may have been alive when they conducted their initial search and on the other hand state that because decomposition was so advanced, identification could only be confirmed via dental records

Everything to satisfy your curiosity is there for your perusal within the thread today

Do we need 'motives' now before we post? It's been my impression we're simply airing opinions and engaging in debate

Do you find nothing unusual in simultaneous speculation on the part of police that (a) TS may have been alive during their first search and (b) decomposition was so advanced identification could only be ascertained via dental records ?

No? Well, let's put it this way: if TS was alive during the first search as has been speculated and/or at least has not been ruled out by police -- then how many days would that leave for decomposition to reach such advanced stage that dental records were required for identification? Six days?

I think it was your reference to two other cases which made me ask .

Do you feel SH has been set up?

 

[Dion]

I had previously thought that the police did not do an actual “search” which would necessitate actually getting into the loft space itself, but had merely stuck their head through the hatch and eyeballed the place.

If it turns out that they did a proper search of the loft space, then IMO what they are actually apologising for, is not spotting the loose bricks (or whatever material separates the two houses). Because if they had done a real search, there is no way they could have missed the body.

This ties in with the arrest of the next door neigbour, assuming he is the owner of the house whose loft has access to the CS/SH household. If this theory is correct, then there is no way that CS didn’t know there was loft access to next door and with all the moving around taking place, she had to have known something was up, and that is why she was also arrested.

 

[deniseyolande]

If NS had some suspected involvement in knowing what had happened, would the police have issued a statement apologising for not discovering the body? I reckon she's clear, at least as far as the police are concerned.

I look at that apology by the police as a Public Relations move....I think grandma still has a lot of explaining to do to get her off the hook completely.

 

[laserdisc10]

Yes but that's the Daily Mail's words not the exact quote from the Met. And as has been mentioned, they are talking about the first search, i.e the search of TS's bedroom which was not a full search.

I remember at the time thinking how typical it was of the Mail to run with such an attention grabbing headline with nothing to really back it up.

I agree with you that thisiscroydontoday fairground article was pulled, but in this case, I don't think anything's been pulled because the police have always said it was the body that should have been found in the second search, i.e. Sunday 2 hour search

It matters not which search. It matters that police cannot rule out that TS was alive when they conducted their search/searches

We must have oranges compared with oranges. You've frequently sought for posters to provide you with definitive evidence. Yet you post your own opinions as if they are facts. I'm sure you'll see this if you scroll back through your posts

If you demand conclusive proof from others, surely you demand the same from yourself?

In any case, this entire issue arose when I questioned how police could say on one hand that TS may have been alive when they conducted their initial search (or second search, if that's the search you prefer) -- yet on the other hand police advised that decomposition was so advanced that dental records were necessary to formally identify the body

I've said 'initial search'. You seem to prefer 'secondary' search, which reduces the window for decomposition even more

The rate of decomposition within the week-long time frame has been my interest and my interest was piqued even more when I read that police feared TS may possibly have been alive when they conducted their initial search

If your interest is in absolving the police and using your own opinion as the last word on the topic as in your post: ' The police did not say that - the Daily Mail did ' without providing any substantiation for you comment other than you own opinion, then we're at cross purposes

 

[Clio]

Excuse me, but can you provide a source to definitively confirm the police did not say that ? Alternatively, are you able to provide a source which will confirm that the Daily Mail were in error or guilty of invention when they published that police cannot rule out that TS may have been alive when they conducted their initial search

Of course not, I can only say what I've already said. I have never seen a direct quote from the Met that states she may have been alive when the second search took place. Not even in the first reports.

I've seen media headlines and statements like officers believe but the direct quotes always said body and second search.

 

[josquin]

DN: "I know I am not her real dad, but I have been there since day dot. I have fed her and bathed her. I just want her home." Even five years ago she would have been a bit old for that!

 

[wfgodot]

<modsnip>

And does anyone have a link to information about just how long the police thought Tia might still be alive? Was the first search of the house really not done until "specialist dogs" entered the premises on Day Six, 08 August?

 

[laserdisc10]

Of course not, I can only say what I've already said. I have never seen a direct quote from the Met that states she may have been alive when the second search took place. Not even in the first reports.

I've seen media headlines and statements like officers believe but the direct quotes always said body and second search.

Ok, well it's good that you'e seen 'media headlines and statements like officers believe (that TS may have been alive during the initial search/es) and for me, if the searches referred to were even later in the day than the initial search I nominated, it therefore suggests the window for decomposition is even less than the approx. one week we've been basing so many of our theories on

A scroll back will reveal that the window for decomposition is what unsettles me, in addition to suggestions TS may have been alive early in the searches

As my posts reveal, I wondered why police would suggest she may have still been alive. I wondered what clues, evidence, etc. might have suggested that train of thought. I wondered (as my posts reveal) if plastic from the bin-liner may have been under TS's fingernails, for example. I wondered if stretch marks or scratches in the bin liner might have suggested TS struggled against the bin liner and sheet and thereby shown she was alive and not dead when placed in the attic

I also wondered (as revealed in my previous posts) how decomposition could be so advanced in what appeared (based on reported police statements) suspicions TS could still have been alive when initial search/es were conducted

At that point, you sought confirmation of police stating TS may still have been alive during the search/es and you appear to believe this would have applied to the second search

I attempted to provide confirmation of police suspicions that TS could still have been alive during initial search/es. Since then, the matter appears to have taken a life of its own, for some reason

So to clarify: my interest lay (while I posted the apparently 'controversial' queries) in the rapid decomposition, given that officially, TS died no sooner than Thursday evening and possibly, early the following week at the latest

Secondly, my interest lay in what possible physical evidence could have led police and maybe forensics to suspect TS may have been alive in the loft

 

[soozieqtips]

Of course not, I can only say what I've already said. I have never seen a direct quote from the Met that states she may have been alive when the second search took place. Not even in the first reports.

I've seen media headlines and statements like officers believe but the direct quotes always said body and second search.

There is no doubt though that they expected to find her 'alive and well' even after the initial search, because Neil Basu, the Borough Commander actually stated that more than once. It is one of the only cases (that I can remember) where a child goes missing for days (having spent her last night with an ex-convict) that the police didn't act worried.

They were searching bins and woodland while still stating they expected to find her 'alive and well'. It wasn't till around the 8th August that Basu said 'we are desperate to find her alive and well'. Going from the timeline of her 'disappearance' and his own words, he seemed to think she was still alive for at least the first few days - in which case she would have been alive during one or two of the searches.

 

[Cherwell]

So to clarify: my interest lay (while I posted the apparently 'controversial' queries) in the rapid decomposition, given that officially, TS died no sooner than Thursday evening and possibly, early the following week at the latest

As I posted earlier, decomposition may not have been the only factor that necessitated dental ID. I don't really want to dwell on all the possibilities, but have you considered, for example, that there might have been rats in the loft?

 

[Skigh]

There is no doubt though that they expected to find her 'alive and well' even after the initial search, because Neil Basu, the Borough Commander actually stated that more than once. It is one of the only cases (that I can remember) where a child goes missing for days (having spent her last night with an ex-convict) that the police didn't act worried.

They were searching bins and woodland while still stating they expected to find her 'alive and well'. It wasn't till around the 8th August that Basu said 'we are desperate to find her alive and well'. Going from the timeline of her 'disappearance' and his own words, he seemed to think she was still alive for at least the first few days - in which case she would have been alive during one or two of the searches.

I think the police really thought that this was a Shannon Matthews type of kidnap so did hope to find Tia alive.
The family solidarity and their changing stories could have been a factor in this.
Something obviously changed their view on this when they stepped up the number of officers searching the woods and used dogs to search the house on the Wednesday.I think by then they were looking for a body.

 

[laserdisc10]

As I posted earlier, decomposition may not have been the only factor that necessitated dental ID. I don't really want to dwell on all the possibilities, but have you considered, for example, that there might have been rats in the loft?

Yes. I've considered it and mentioned it in at least one previous post, although I described that aspect as 'vermin'

 

[soozieqtips]

I think the police really thought that this was a Shannon Matthews type of kidnap so did hope to find Tia alive.
The family solidarity and their changing stories could have been a factor in this.
Something obviously changed their view on this when they stepped up the number of officers searching the woods and used dogs to search the house on the Wednesday.I think by then they were looking for a body.

But if they thought it was simply a Shannon Matthews type of kidnap, why search bins and woodland? Shannon was found in a house. If the police seriously thought Tia had been kidnapped by the family for a ransom, why were they searching bins while saying at the same time 'we expect to find her alive and well?' - do you think they were just searching bins to show they were doing something? Maybe the reason they missed the body in the loft (if it was there) was because they assumed the family wouldn't 'kidnap' Tia and hide her at home, so maybe the search was a very brief one just to rule out the possibility?