UK - Alesha MacPhail, 6, raped & murdered, Ardbeg, Isle of Bute, Scotland, 2 Jul 2018 -teen arrested

[Alyce]

This we discussed this a few days ago and someone said that 9 minutes wasn't anywhere near long enough to get to the crime scene and back in 9 minutes BUT ... it's enough time to go and find your phone that you dropped during all your wall hopping?

Ah yes, that was me. But that was before the accused's mother gave evidence. Though you could be right, could have dropped phone by wall.

 

[Taskforce88]

Sorry, whzt do you mean?

Sorry I wasn't clear. I am wondering if others DNA would be present.

 

[Taskforce88]

I think he committed the crime and discarded his hoodie. Came home had quick shower. And then ran out barefoot and chucked away the rest of the clothes that were found. No idea what he went out looking for with the torch though.

Possibly looking for his phone?

 

[embro68]

At the start of the trial there was alot of talk about the accused having an obsessive type hatred for TM, based on his defence.
IMO it seems like an opportunist defence ie a female close to his age, who had access to Alesha and also quite likely TMs DNA was found on Alesha or her clothing given that they were staying in the same house, having goodnight cuddles etc.
Also- the idea of it being about cannibus, the accused contacted several other people attempting to get cannibus that night- told his friend he was going to get some. It defiently rings true that his intention was to get cannibus, he contacted RM and TM when he was still at home, at the same time as contacting other people. It is jumping the gun to assume that he contacted them to make sure they were asleep as has been suggested. As far as a disagreement over cannibus debt, or resentment about RM not selling to the accused goes- it doesn't add up at all - the disagreement occurred months prior and the accused was still buying cannibus from them threw his sister, so there isn't a glaringly obvious reason for resentment towards TM or RM.
I have been thinking about what his "trigger" was that night, and I don't think any one has mentioned this yet, but I feel it is significant what was said in his mother's statement about the accuseds sister leaving the party with his friends. It sounds like him and his sister were close - based on them smoking cannibus and her being friendly with his friends.
Just some of my thoughts

 

[stephaniejanes]

At the start of the trial there was alot of talk about the accused having an obsessive type hatred for TM, based on his defence.
IMO it seems like an opportunist defence ie a female close to his age, who had access to Alesha and also quite likely TMs DNA was found on Alesha or her clothing given that they were staying in the same house, having goodnight cuddles etc.
Also- the idea of it being about cannibus, the accused contacted several other people attempting to get cannibus that night- told his friend he was going to get some. It defiently rings true that his intention was to get cannibus, he contacted RM and TM when he was still at home, at the same time as contacting other people. It is jumping the gun to assume that he contacted them to make sure they were asleep as has been suggested. As far as a disagreement over cannibus debt, or resentment about RM not selling to the accused goes- it doesn't add up at all - the disagreement occurred months prior and the accused was still buying cannibus from them threw his sister, so there isn't a glaringly obvious reason for resentment towards TM or RM.
I have been thinking about what his "trigger" was that night, and I don't think any one has mentioned this yet, but I feel it is significant what was said in his mother's statement about the accuseds sister leaving the party with his friends. It sounds like him and his sister were close - based on them smoking cannibus and her being friendly with his friends.
Just some of my thoughts

I am inclined to agree, by all accounts he was angry and rage filled that evening. I think he took that rage and hate out on Alesha.

 

[bfin1995]

What a sad case. So very senseless. I want to hate the accused because I hate what he did to Alesha but in reality I just feel so very sad for him, his family and who the accused maybe could have been had he not done what he did. I know little about him but I do know I do not have a problem with him being held accountable for what he did. For all any of us know (given I believe he's guilty) this murder and rape was only just the beginning of more of the same acts down the road. I do not like him but, even though earlier I said "hang him and be done with him", I hope someday the accused admits his guilt, truly feels remorse, regrets what he did, develops a conscious etc. .....but sadly statistics do not really support that happening. I do believe he is psychopathic and a sociopath and even though he is only 16 years old I believe it may be best for all of society that he be remanded to a life sentence in prison without the possibility of ever getting out. I would support that sentence given the brutality inflicted upon the victim and the fact that the victim was robbed of her life. He does need to pay, no excuses allowed and no sympathy for him.

I keep rolling the timeframe around in my head. He had a party at his house with all his friends and within 2 hours of it being over had kidnapped a child he'd never met before to rape her! So senseless.

 

[wtiger]

So from what i am reading ...it would appear that we possibly have some collective question as to the level of premeditation here? (Assuming that the guilty party is in the dock)
If his intention when leaving his mothers house is to get cannabis...,then it must follow that he did not set out to rape and murder?
But this ignores one fact.....
He apparently took with him a knife.
This would not be required in order to buy cannabis.
And i assume that the badlands of rothesay would not require it for personal protection??
Which brings us back to.....
If he left the house with a knife...then what exactly did he set out to do?
Is it possible he set out to steal cannabis and took the knife as some backup
Im pretty sold on the idea that when he left his mothers house, i think his intentions (whatever they were) were not specifically the offence that was committed.
Surely IF this crime had been planned to any extent then would it not have been done a little more sophisticatedly than was the case?
The whole thing here screams "brain explosion" and his hamfisted attempts at covering up bear all the hallmarks of someone half stoned or drunk.

The question i have...and let us all be honest here is this:

If he was to stand up in court and admit to committing such a horrible offence whilst angry and drunk/stoned and not thinking straight. And that he was dreadfully sorry.......

Would anyone think any better of him?

I feel as though the revulsion over the nature of the act (rightly so) pretty much precludes any hope of an offender ever coming clean in cases such as this.
As a result i fear that as with so many of these crimes the upshot will be that the offender is locked up out of sight, "justice" supposedly served. BUT nobody is any the wiser as to why or the thought processes that led him there and most importantly we are no closer to being able to stop the next one BEFORE it happens.

So much about this case worthy of sensible debate in my opinion

 

[mrazda71]

Thoughts of the moment ...

I grew up in a small market town with around the same amount of people as live on Bute - just over 6,000. Although where I grew up wasn't an island surrounded by water, we were isolated by miles of countryside between us and the next village or town - 2 buses in and out a day and everyone knew everyone else even if only by sight and a head nod ... so .... I feel like I can pretty much appreciate the 'feel' of the islanders ...

I found it 'interesting' that Accused said to friends on snapchat that 'he'd get the blame (for Alesha) as the police were always blaming him for anything that happened in the area' ... where I grew up - if there was someone 'always' getting the blame for things ... it was USUALLY because they were always up to no good and at least 99% of the time the police blamed them cause it was them!

I'd love to know IF any of those times that the police 'blamed' him - he had convictions/official cautions for ...

 

[Edinlass]

Yes - the sister leaving with his friends certainly annoyed him. I wonder if he was arguing with his mum because he blamed her for allowing a 14 year old to leave with a group of older kids. Maybe he knows more what those kids get up to and felt it wasn’t appropriate for his sister to be with them.

That said he if he cared enough maybe he should of put his efforts into finding his sister and bringing her home. Sounds like he has a temper and lashes out when he doesn’t get his own way, this time on an innocent 6 year old. It makes me so mad, it really does. The world we live in when someone’s life means so little to a another human (he’s in humane in my eyes)

 

[LittleMystery]

At the start of the trial there was alot of talk about the accused having an obsessive type hatred for TM, based on his defence.
IMO it seems like an opportunist defence ie a female close to his age, who had access to Alesha and also quite likely TMs DNA was found on Alesha or her clothing given that they were staying in the same house, having goodnight cuddles etc.
Also- the idea of it being about cannibus, the accused contacted several other people attempting to get cannibus that night- told his friend he was going to get some. It defiently rings true that his intention was to get cannibus, he contacted RM and TM when he was still at home, at the same time as contacting other people. It is jumping the gun to assume that he contacted them to make sure they were asleep as has been suggested. As far as a disagreement over cannibus debt, or resentment about RM not selling to the accused goes- it doesn't add up at all - the disagreement occurred months prior and the accused was still buying cannibus from them threw his sister, so there isn't a glaringly obvious reason for resentment towards TM or RM.
I have been thinking about what his "trigger" was that night, and I don't think any one has mentioned this yet, but I feel it is significant what was said in his mother's statement about the accuseds sister leaving the party with his friends. It sounds like him and his sister were close - based on them smoking cannibus and her being friendly with his friends.
Just some of my thoughts

This is where I think there is gaps that we don’t know the answers too yet.

Why Alesha? Retaliation to a fall-out earlier in the year seems implausible. Teenagers are notoriously impulsive - it would be unlikely he would be able to sit on a plan for months and wait to carry it out. Also, had that been the case, I still think it would have been better planned. There wasn’t anything methodical about how he disposed of evidence - as others have mentioned, it was panicked. MOO is that he was breaking into the house for drugs and Alesha has been a temptation to him - especially if he already has a predilection to children.

He mentions that he always gets ‘blamed for stuff’. I wonder if he has previous for breaking and entering - this wouldn’t surprise me.

Why TM and not RM? Another gap is why TM seems to be his defence. Unless it’s entirely down to this condom story and his need to find away to explain away the DNA. He’s decided he is going with this and unfortunately for TM she was the person who fit into his fabrication better. Or is it something else? Infatuation, deeper connection, resentment towards her etc. Because realistically, if he was to try and frame anybody RM would have been the more believable option because in cases like this people always tend to look closer to home.

I wonder if we are going to hear more about the timeframe next week and RM and TM’s argument outside the night before. Because as far as we are aware TM has a solid alibi in RM that creates a giant hole in the defence. How can the defence create enough doubt that it was TM, if we’ve already been told she was in bed with RM?

All MOO.

 

[Legally Bland]

I keep rolling the timeframe around in my head. He had a party at his house with all his friends and within 2 hours of it being over had kidnapped a child he'd never met before to rape her! So senseless.

We only have his word that he never met Alesha:

He said he knew Mr MacPhail was in a relationship with Ms McLachlan but claimed he had never met Alesha, although he knew his dealer had a little girl.
Girlfriend of Alesha McPhail's father gives evidence in murder case | Daily Mail Online
​

I can think of scenarios where he is linked to Alesha, but it can't be reported as it would be identifying.

 

[Tortoise]

The cctv is the clincher for me. It doesn't matter if they can identify it as him or not.

It's the timing. He left home at 1.54 am. The cctv of Alesha being carried out of the shelter on the shoreline is at 2.27 am, which is 33 minutes later.

I'm not buying that within 33 minutes Toni was on the shoreline with Alesha, after they are supposed to have had conversation about her and Rab, sex, time to get cold and he gives her his top, and that's before she's told him to beat it, taken the condom and gone to take Alesha from her bed, and she's carrying Alesha's weight so her time for walking there is going to be slower.

 

[Alyce]

This is where I think there is gaps that we don’t know the answers too yet.

Why Alesha? Retaliation to a fall-out earlier in the year seems implausible. Teenagers are notoriously impulsive - it would be unlikely he would be able to sit on a plan for months and wait to carry it out. Also, had that been the case, I still think it would have been better planned. There wasn’t anything methodical about how he disposed of evidence - as others have mentioned, it was panicked. MOO is that he was breaking into the house for drugs and Alesha has been a temptation to him - especially if he already has a predilection to children.

He mentions that he always gets ‘blamed for stuff’. I wonder if he has previous for breaking and entering - this wouldn’t surprise me.

Why TM and not RM? Another gap is why TM seems to be his defence. Unless it’s entirely down to this condom story and his need to find away to explain away the DNA. He’s decided he is going with this and unfortunately for TM she was the person who fit into his fabrication better. Or is it something else? Infatuation, deeper connection, resentment towards her etc. Because realistically, if he was to try and frame anybody RM would have been the more believable option because in cases like this people always tend to look closer to home.

I wonder if we are going to hear more about the timeframe next week and RM and TM’s argument outside the night before. Because as far as we are aware TM has a solid alibi in RM that creates a giant hole in the defence. How can the defence create enough doubt that it was TM, if we’ve already been told she was in bed with RM?



All MOO.

Not that I think for one minute that TM had anything at all to do with this horrendous murder - but - the Defence could argue that if none of the household woke up when the accused took Alesha out of the house, then how could they actually know, 100% , who took her ?

 

[Taskforce88]

At the start of the trial there was alot of talk about the accused having an obsessive type hatred for TM, based on his defence.
IMO it seems like an opportunist defence ie a female close to his age, who had access to Alesha and also quite likely TMs DNA was found on Alesha or her clothing given that they were staying in the same house, having goodnight cuddles etc.
Also- the idea of it being about cannibus, the accused contacted several other people attempting to get cannibus that night- told his friend he was going to get some. It defiently rings true that his intention was to get cannibus, he contacted RM and TM when he was still at home, at the same time as contacting other people. It is jumping the gun to assume that he contacted them to make sure they were asleep as has been suggested. As far as a disagreement over cannibus debt, or resentment about RM not selling to the accused goes- it doesn't add up at all - the disagreement occurred months prior and the accused was still buying cannibus from them threw his sister, so there isn't a glaringly obvious reason for resentment towards TM or RM.
I have been thinking about what his "trigger" was that night, and I don't think any one has mentioned this yet, but I feel it is significant what was said in his mother's statement about the accuseds sister leaving the party with his friends. It sounds like him and his sister were close - based on them smoking cannibus and her being friendly with his friends.
Just some of my thoughts

The DNA of those with access to Alesha would have been found?

Not that I think for one minute that TM had anything at all to do with this horrendous murder - but - the Defence could argue that if none of the household woke up when the accused took Alesha out of the house, then how could they actually know, 100% , who took her ?

This is true

 

[Taskforce88]

Delete

 

[Crazy Mama]

So if someone was to place the condom contents in or on another person, that would also be contaminated by the person doing it, right? And there would also be spermicide present I assume? Jeez the world has gone mad.

 

[Edinlass]

Not that I think for one minute that TM had anything at all to do with this horrendous murder - but - the Defence could argue that if none of the household woke up when the accused took Alesha out of the house, then how could they actually know, 100% , who took her ?

I think DNA / forensics at the end of the prosecutions case on Monday / Tuesday will honestly blow anything about TMs involvement out of the water. I believe that.

 

[mrazda71]

The cctv is the clincher for me. It doesn't matter if they can identify it as him or not.

It's the timing. He left home at 1.54 am. The cctv of Alesha being carried out of the shelter on the shoreline is at 2.27 am, which is 33 minutes later.

I'm not buying that within 33 minutes Toni was on the shoreline with Alesha, after they are supposed to have had conversation about her and Rab, sex, time to get cold and he gives her his top, and that's before she's told him to beat it, taken the condom and gone to take Alesha from her bed, and she's carrying Alesha's weight so her time for walking there is going to be slower.

Absolutely spot on!

 

[neteditor]

Morning sleuthers.

I'm not quoting posts here because there are too many that mention this, but I wanted to respond to the post about being glad we're not on the jury as we're so heavily swayed towards his guilt.

And I refer to my earlier post about the format of trials. And my experience of sitting in hundreds of crown court trials in England while I was a reporter.

Almost ALWAYS, during the prosecution phase of a trial, you'd be thinking the defendant is banged to rights. That's the job of the prosecution, after all, to persuade everyone the defendant is guilty. If you weren't completely swayed towards a guilty verdict during the prosecution phase, there's something wrong!

Then the defence case starts and you might start to be convinced of a not guilty verdict. Again, this is the job of the defence. And as I said before, this is why the defence always goes last, so their persuasions are clearest in the minds of the jury.

I cannot even say how many times I've gone from thinking someone is guilty to thinking they are innocent while watching trials. (Probably 90% of cases I've seen or thereabouts). And then the jury goes out and you've not a clue how to predict their verdict.

It's also probably worth considering that journalists tend towards the most dramatic / newsworthy in their reporting so we as the non-attending public are only hearing what they choose to report, which will always be the most inflammatory evidence.

I hope this helps, especially anyone not as familiar with following trials as closely as we do here. We're only biased towards the prosecution right now because that is the job of a good prosecutor (with or without a solid case). I can't predict what the defence will say or how persuasive their evidence will be at this point and I don't think any of us can. Right now it does seem highly unlikely they can successfully refute what we have heard, but they don't need to, they just need to create enough doubt for a "Not Proven" verdict (which is a lot less doubt than needed for a not guilty).

 

[wtiger]

Excellent post!