UK - Alesha MacPhail, 6, raped & murdered, Ardbeg, Isle of Bute, Scotland, 2 Jul 2018 -*arrest* #5

[AM12]

Thew court decided, with no evidence whatsoever, that the knife was used in the abduction. However this cunning killer who thinks he's so clever just placed the knife on the beach. You'd think, what with his super human weight lifting strength, that he would lob that thing to kingdom come. No, just placed it on the beach ready to be found.

Could have been dropped by mistake. Remember he has abducted and so presumably is carrying and subduing Alesha.
Possibly he left it to be found as a decoy as did not anticipate getting caught and matching it to a set from his house.
Perhaps he left it there another time

 

[AM12]

I

I mean wasn't the tide in at this point? He might've thrown it a little way but by the morning the tide was out and the knife was revealed. Anyway I don't think there was much cunning to what he did. I think this whole incident was a bit of a frenzy and remember he must've been quite drunk as well. There seems little organisation or clever attempts to hide the evidence. If he did actually go into Alesha's room rather than her coming downstairs then I think he just got quite lucky not waking anyone up.

If you think about the amount of car keys that get taken from peoples house its entirely plausible that a fit young 16 year old could abduct a 6 year old from a house without anyone noticing.

 

[AM12]

Is it known where on the beach it was found? Was it near the road or near the water (depending on the tide)? Is it likely to have been in an area that the 'shadowy figure' was walking?

Directly opposite from where Alesha was abducted

 

[kyndigs]

All this about who directed her to look at the CCTV etc, a girl had been raped and murdered on the island, literally 100 odd meters from the house, you have CCTV you go through it to see if you can see anything at all, that may help. There is no cover up or conspiracy here, also if it was requested that someone ask AC mom to check, It is most likely TM and RM seen missed calls from AC around that time and have made a point to check that line of inquiry, if my son went missing and I got unexpected missed calls at 2am i would be round at the door of that persons house asking why you called me did you see something???? anything???

 

[Eezer Goode]

Hmmm. The (she) you are talking about is an elderly neighbour who had recently lost her husband. She would have been interviewed by the police and called to give evidence. I'm pretty certain she would have found the whole thing (what she was giving evidence about, and being a witness in the high court) pretty unsettling,<modsnip>

That's for the experts to decide. However he has already been deemed fit for trial and if sound mind by the experts pre-trial.

I put (I think) because if it was a man or her and her husband other posters would argue that i can't even remember who gave evidence..etc..etc...etc. I come on line in the evening and am reading through tons of posts to catch up and don't have time to check for irrelevant details. Yes she is elderly and had recently lost her husband, thanks for reminding me.

I've shown the lady respect by:
1. Believing her.
2. Pointing out how brave she was to raise concerns with RM's dad about his behaviour and having the guts to testify to this in court as well as flagging up the fact that he was lying about his whereabouts.

I can't imagine how she must have felt hearing TM get the xxxx beaten out of her, especially if she was alone at the time.

Do you think other posters have shown her respect by dismissing her evidence?

 

[Sillybilly]

Thanks for answering. I just wondered if it was necessary to include this in a post as others seem to do?

Thanks for asking Ardoch.

Veteran members know that it is necessary to make it clear that what they are stating is opinion or theory (i.e. by using JMO, MOO, I think, I believe, etc). Otherwise if something is stated as fact (facts must be linked or be able to be linked), member opinion will surely get misconstrued downthread as fact.

Example, if someone states their opinion as "Mary had it in for Sally from the very beginning" without making it clear it is opinion, sure as guns someone will interpret that as fact because that is how it is stated. Many posts or threads later, someone will post it as fact and there will be numerous posts with members questioning and taking time trying to find the link to support something that doesn't exist. Had they simply been courteous enough to word their post accordingly, with something like "Oh, I think Mary had it in for Sally ..." that is fine, or "JMO, but I believe Mary had it in for Sally ..."

Please disregard the blanket disclaimers some members like to use or the advice of members who, for whatever reasons, choose not to post in accordance with Websleuths rules and policies.

If anyone needs clarification in this regard, please private message a Mod or Admin so we don't derail the thread with off-topic discussion.

 

[Kohl]

I think the bones of his defence was that if his DNA was on the body of Alesha, then he didn't put it there and the only other person with access to his DNA was TM. I think AC got drawn into a lot of speculation on the stand, re TM's possible motives etc. What he should have said was "I don't know how or why she did it."

 

[AM12]

Very good however what happened to the item of clothing that he was carrying?

He dumped it on the beach and it was found the next day

 

[AM12]

Sorry maybe I'm confused, I thought that the joggers and boxers were believed to have been washed up from his jumping off the pier a couple of days before. According to the Sun map they were found further up the coast. Why did he not use the nearest path at Creek Dr?

Because he was barefoot and the direct route is along High Rd

 

[Eezer Goode]

Could have been dropped by mistake. Remember he has abducted and so presumably is carrying and subduing Alesha.

Possible

Perhaps he left it there another time

Possible

Possibly he left it to be found as a decoy as did not anticipate getting caught and matching it to a set from his house.

Less likely but i suppose you couldn't rule it out.

Have you any idea how the court decided he had abducted AM from the house at knife-point? I've asked this question before <modsnip>

 

[Kohl]

When he was taken in for questioning he stated no comment (or something similiar) to any question and he wanted an attorney. He did not co-operate at all with questioning.

His solicitor most likely advised him to answer "No comment" - therefore the defence can sit it out to see what the case against AC is and how to play it.

He explained it as follows:

The first time he leaves the house was to meet TM. He returns and showers, but realises he doesn't have his phone so he leaves a second time to retrace his steps. He returns again and explains that he did so to get a torch because it was too dark to find his phone, then he leaves a third time with the torch.

I am very confused as to why the location of AC's phone, wasn't used as evidence by the prosecution. It is obviously a crucial piece of evidence. I can't imagine it was overlooked. Also, when AC leaves the house, for the third time, with the torch, he appears to be looking for something as he sets off with the torch turned on, as soon as he leaves the house.

 

[Truthseeker777]

abduction might refer to taking her from somewhere other than within the actual flat

 

[AM12]

Possible



Possible



Less likely but i suppose you couldn't rule it out.

Have you any idea how the court decided he had abducted AM from the house at knife-point? I've asked this question before <modsnip>

Court have decided she was abducted but have not seen anywhere specifically at knife point . Only that she was abducted and AC potentially carrying a knife for reasons known to himself.

 

[AM12]

His solicitor most likely advised him to answer "No comment" - therefore the defence can sit it out to see what the case against AC is and how to play it.


I am very confused as to why the location of AC's phone, wasn't used as evidence by the prosecution. It is obviously a crucial piece of evidence. I can't imagine it was overlooked. Also, when AC leaves the house, for the third time, with the torch, he appears to be looking for something as he sets off with the torch turned on, as soon as he leaves the house.

So is everyone as it is fabrication by AC.
He does not IMO look for anything when leaving the house

 

[Gardenista]

I am very confused as to why the location of AC's phone, wasn't used as evidence by the prosecution. It is obviously a crucial piece of evidence. I can't imagine it was overlooked. Also, when AC leaves the house, for the third time, with the torch, he appears to be looking for something as he sets off with the torch turned on, as soon as he leaves the house.

Not sure why it wasn't used by prosecution, but I am sure if it would have helped the defense, they would have brought it up. Maybe he didn't have locations activated on his phone?

 

[TaylorCallum]

I still want to see the CCTV footage of him leaving the house the first time. I don't know why it hasn't been released yet.

Also going back to The Times article earlier that was linked, it said his mum brought a dead kitten back to a neighbour and said it was hit by a car, which is possible although I guess we don't know. I'm sure it wasn't skinned because that would have been pretty obvious. I don't know how the leap went from a kitten dying from potential car injuries to him having skinned two cats and buried them in his back garden. That's quite a leap.

 

[Truthseeker777]

I still want to see the CCTV footage of him leaving the house the first time. I don't know why it hasn't been released yet.

Have you noticed how he just materializes out of thin air in the footage from the back of the house when he is leaving with his torch?

 

[TaylorCallum]

Have you noticed how he just materializes out of thin air in the footage from the back of the house when he is leaving with his torch?

Yes, I did notice that. There's a 3 second time jump. I don't know if the actual recording itself skipped, or if the video was edited.

 

[Kohl]

So is everyone as it is fabrication by AC.
He does not IMO look for anything when leaving the house

If it's a fabrication, surely an easy way to prove that would be to trace the location of the phone. The fact the prosecution didn't play that card, would suggest it didn't help the prosecution's case.

 

[Eezer Goode]

abduction might refer to taking her from somewhere other than within the actual flat

Court have decided she was abducted but have not seen anywhere specifically at knife point . Only that she was abducted and AC potentially carrying a knife for reasons known to himself.

From SKY news webpage immediately as verdict came in:
The 16-year-old boy, who cannot named because of his age, abducted Alesha at knifepoint from her bedroom at her grandparents' home on the Isle of Bute.


He then carried her half a mile to a woodland clearing on the Scottish holiday island, where she was raped and smothered to death.