Deceased/Not Found UK - April Jones, 5, Machynlleth, Wales, 1 Oct 2012 #3 *M. Bridger guilty*

[Clio]

Mark Bridger in court over April Jones murder

No new info really but includes video report of today's court appearance

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-19905459#

 

[LittleMissContrary]

I think one of the most frustrating aspects of this case is the lack of verified facts, and the abundance of conflicting information.

A few examples:

April was at the parents night.
April was not at the parents night.
PJ and CJ returned from the parents night at 3:30
PJ and CJ did not return until roughly 6:30.
April had a swimming lesson roughly two hours before being abducted.
April was wearing her uniform when abducted.
April was not wearing her uniform when abducted.


I am wondering if the alleged perp initially asked both girls to get into the van.
I am also confused as to why the child playing with AJ when she was abducted did not immediately run to an adult. If she did, why was it that the police were not notified immediately?
I also have a few questions regarding the statements made by the girl who allegedly saw April getting into the van.
The statement which mentions the fact that it was cold and dark seems odd to me for a number of reasons. If it was so cold and dark, why were the children still playing outside? What did the fact that it was cold and dark have to do with her friend "begging" her not to get into the van? That does not make any sense unless the person in the van had suggested going somewhere or doing something that was perceived by the child to be something you don't do when it is cold and dark.
The word "begged or begging" seems like another strange thing to say. If MB was known to all the children in the area, given the fact that his children are part of the playgroup in the neighborhood, why would this girl have any reason to beg April not to get into the vehicle?
How good of a description of the driver can be given when AJ allegedly entered the vehicle from the right hand side of the vehicle, especially considering it was said to be dark outside? Did the driver of the vehicle pull up to the children on his side of the vehicle or from the other side? If it was the drivers side (assuming it was a left handed vehicle as stated, did April get into the back of the car?
I read the statement about AJ climbing into the van very strictly. If she had actually gotten into a four door SUV type vehicle, I would expect the witness would say that April hopped into the back seat of the vehicle or something along those lines.

Granted, the media has botched so many details(or it seems that way) that we may not have an accurate account of what was actually said and reported by the witness.

 

[Cherwell]

I also have a few questions regarding the statements made by the girl who allegedly saw April getting into the van.
The statement which mentions the fact that it was cold and dark seems odd to me for a number of reasons. If it was so cold and dark, why were the children still playing outside? What did the fact that it was cold and dark have to do with her friend "begging" her not to get into the van? That does not make any sense unless the person in the van had suggested going somewhere or doing something that was perceived by the child to be something you don't do when it is cold and dark.
The word "begged or begging" seems like another strange thing to say. If MB was known to all the children in the area, given the fact that his children are part of the playgroup in the neighborhood, why would this girl have any reason to beg April not to get into the vehicle?
How good of a description of the driver can be given when AJ allegedly entered the vehicle from the right hand side of the vehicle, especially considering it was said to be dark outside? Did the driver of the vehicle pull up to the children on his side of the vehicle or from the other side? If it was the drivers side (assuming it was a left handed vehicle as stated, did April get into the back of the car?
I read the statement about AJ climbing into the van very strictly. If she had actually gotten into a four door SUV type vehicle, I would expect the witness would say that April hopped into the back seat of the vehicle or something along those lines.

Granted, the media has botched so many details(or it seems that way) that we may not have an accurate account of what was actually said and reported by the witness.

We certainly don't. Much of what you quoted comes not from the little girl who was the witness, but is a paraphrase from another child's mother who was not present, and who turns out to be the ex-girlfriend of the man charged.

 

[opalsqueak63]

Nawr te... I would like to say two things, and then I'll be off...

Firstly, there was no report of a black bin bag. Initial reports stated 'black bag'. It has then been taken out of context and has somehow morphed into a 'black bin liner'. Perception or fabrication?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/959...-mother-after-police-open-murder-inquiry.html

Secondly, who was the last adult person to actually state that they saw the little girl. The 70-year-old neighbour? No. The parents? No. The manager at the leisure centre? Yes. All other reports are implied. Perception or fabrication?

Basically, we have to read things carefully. Discussions are based around perception, mostly. This is (likely) dangerous. For example, my husband spotted a small child wandering the day before yesterday (guestimated age of 5), and not in a built up area (i.e. away from houses). Did he stop and check if the child was lost? No. Why? Because he drives a light coloured van and owns a Land Rover. He was petrified at the propoect of what might happen if he had pulled up alongside this little tot. What has the world come to, if a caring father-of-three feels ill at ease at the prospect of helping someone else's precious child? It's sad.

Am I grumbling? Sorry, if I am.

Great post and it is tragic that your husband felt he couldn't stop - don't blame him in this climate

 

[Clutchbag]

I think one of the most frustrating aspects of this case is the lack of verified facts, and the abundance of conflicting information.

A few examples:

April was at the parents night.
April was not at the parents night.
PJ and CJ returned from the parents night at 3:30
PJ and CJ did not return until roughly 6:30.
April had a swimming lesson roughly two hours before being abducted.
April was wearing her uniform when abducted.
April was not wearing her uniform when abducted.


I am wondering if the alleged perp initially asked both girls to get into the van.
I am also confused as to why the child playing with AJ when she was abducted did not immediately run to an adult. If she did, why was it that the police were not notified immediately?
I also have a few questions regarding the statements made by the girl who allegedly saw April getting into the van.
The statement which mentions the fact that it was cold and dark seems odd to me for a number of reasons. If it was so cold and dark, why were the children still playing outside? What did the fact that it was cold and dark have to do with her friend "begging" her not to get into the van? That does not make any sense unless the person in the van had suggested going somewhere or doing something that was perceived by the child to be something you don't do when it is cold and dark.
The word "begged or begging" seems like another strange thing to say. If MB was known to all the children in the area, given the fact that his children are part of the playgroup in the neighborhood, why would this girl have any reason to beg April not to get into the vehicle?
How good of a description of the driver can be given when AJ allegedly entered the vehicle from the right hand side of the vehicle, especially considering it was said to be dark outside? Did the driver of the vehicle pull up to the children on his side of the vehicle or from the other side? If it was the drivers side (assuming it was a left handed vehicle as stated, did April get into the back of the car?
I read the statement about AJ climbing into the van very strictly. If she had actually gotten into a four door SUV type vehicle, I would expect the witness would say that April hopped into the back seat of the vehicle or something along those lines.

Granted, the media has botched so many details(or it seems that way) that we may not have an accurate account of what was actually said and reported by the witness.

the friend begging her not to get in suggests it was NOT someone known to all and trusted, but a person perhaps april knew, ie a postman or someone she knew like that,no im not accusing the postman btw

I am wondering why the mother and father or other members of the family has not said a word about all this, probably told by police i suppose

 

[Cappuccino]

the friend begging her not to get in suggests it was NOT someone known to all and trusted, but a person perhaps april knew, ie a postman or someone she knew like that,no im not accusing the postman btw

I am wondering why the mother and father or other members of the family has not said a word about all this

Ah, no not necessarily. The friend playing with her could have been begging her not to get in the car for a far more childish reason - ie, she didn't want to play out on her own in the cold and dark, and she didn't want to go home and go to bed either.

 

[Clutchbag]

:

Great post and it is tragic that your husband felt he couldn't stop - don't blame him in this climate

Scary but if asked the child what his name was could have rung police,not as if the child would have said he was trying abduct them if he wasnt

 

[Clutchbag]

Ah, no not necessarily. The friend playing with her could have been begging her not to get in the car for a far more childish reason - ie, she didn't want to play out on her own in the cold and dark, and she didn't want to go home and go to bed either.

thats such a sensible possibility, takes step back

 

[Cherwell]

I don't believe a seven-year-old child would use the word "beg" in relation to herself. Remember this is all filtered through, first, a woman who was not present, and second, a press reporter.

 

[Adorabella]

I think one of the most frustrating aspects of this case is the lack of verified facts, and the abundance of conflicting information.

A few examples:

April was at the parents night.
April was not at the parents night.
PJ and CJ returned from the parents night at 3:30
PJ and CJ did not return until roughly 6:30.
April had a swimming lesson roughly two hours before being abducted.
April was wearing her uniform when abducted.
April was not wearing her uniform when abducted.

Thanks for starting this list. Again, I think making a more comprehensive list of discrepancies will make some things clearer.

One thing that your post has brought up for me is: how many similar vehicles to the description (either light coloured van, or even the navy blue Discovery) that are RIGHT hand drive are also in the neighbourhood? Maybe the child witness was absolutely right and April did get in the driver's side, as perhaps she was pulled in by the driver? Or climbed on to 'their' lap?

April must have been familiar with numerous people who have vehicles that match the description that are RH drive. Any idea why those were ruled out?

 

[Cappuccino]

I don't believe a seven-year-old child would use the word "beg" in relation to herself. Remember this is all filtered through, first, a woman who was not present, and second, a press reporter.

That's true too. We're trying to decipher chinese whispers here.

The adults could be inferring that the child begged from the emphasis the child places on telling her friend not to get in the car - eg, I TOLD her not to, I really told her NOT to get in the car. Which in turn could mean she didn't beg at all, she just knows its very wrong to get in cars with strangers and is trying to get across to the adults that she did the right thing and warned her friend.

Not sure I've explained that very well. What I mean is that to a 7 year old's eyes when the police are called after your friend does something that you've been told never to do, it could look as if she might be in trouble. Hence the emphasis on how strongly she told her friend when being questioned by the nice police lady.

 

[SapphireSteel]

My take so far fwiw -

The crime scene may actually be his car, or somewhere in the countryside, possibly near that river.

I suspect they may not have the crime scene, only something which cannot be explained away, like they found her coat in his car or something...something he cannot explain. That plus the "left hand drive" ID of the vehicle would be enough to charge and probably convict him.

If indeed they "bashed down doors" it also implies hurry (otherwise they take their time, no one's going to stop them), and that they thought April may still be alive to be rescued, so I doubt they have pints of her blood or cadaverine or definitive proof she is dead at his hands. Again, no crime scene if he did it outdoors.

He cried during his first court appearance and sobbed when the murder charge was read out. This tells me he is most definitely not a psychopath and has remorse. The question is, what does he have remorse about?

In my humble opinion, he's as guilty as sin and will probably enter a plea that confirms that. We may never find out what exactly happened with April because he may never tell. He may be too ashamed.

Of course my opinion only, based on what we know now, which is not that much or (apparently) that accurate.

:cow:

 

[MidwestMama]

I am afraid that it could be much worse if the charges are contested, despite being via video. Although the judge will do his best to avoid the children getting upset, an aggressive defence barrister is likely to seize on matters such as the confusion about the colour of the vehicle and challenge the youngster with the suggestion that she was lying or is unreliable. "Do you know what a lie is?" is typical of the probing question likely to be asked. Young children can be very disturbed by hearing "the telly" seem to accuse them in person in this way.

It is a very great pity that the "main witness" is a seven-year old girl since I have little doubt that a defence barrister could be ruthless in trying to undermine her testimony. Juries may well see through this, but it risks being a truly horrible experience for the child/children concerned.

So true. So terrible for anyone who is innocently dragged into a case to have to face a rabid defense attorney, much less a child. Poor little tyke.

 

[cluciano63]

I am not sure about the UK, where sentences are lighter, but in the USA not many child killers seem to confess. It is the one crime that no one wants to admit to, for obvious reasons. JMO

Maybe in the UK, a confession would aid in sentencing? Not sure how that would work. Over here, they might confess if they want LWOP vs. DP.

 

[MidwestMama]

Indeed, but the whole point of the Courts system and CJS isn't about protecting the sensibilities of young children, it's about establishing innocence or guilt. The implications of getting the right or wrong answer out of the young witnesses are huge - either the loss of a man's liberty or that another search has to be made for the real killer. The members of the jury will make their own minds up about the reliability of the evidence from the child witness(es).

I agree that the child will have to be questioned. However, I hope the lawyer/barrister remembers it is a CHILD he is questioning. Sometimes in their quest for a not guilty decision they victimize the witnesses/victims all over again. Questions can be asked without adding undue additional trauma to the children.

 

[SapphireSteel]

So true. So terrible for anyone who is innocently dragged into a case to have to face a rabid defense attorney, much less a child. Poor little tyke.

Another difference of the court system.

The child won't have to do that. All they will do is tell what they saw in their own words and maybe answer one or two very simple questions put to them very kindly and calmly probably by the judge himself.

 

[MidwestMama]

He will have been advised by his lawyers to say nothing except to confirm that he understands the charges. Making a huge fuss in front of the judge would do him no good what so ever.

He has been charged. The media are not allowed to report anything which may prejudice a trial. There will be no hint of anything about what he's saying or doing printed now until the trial. You can't infer anything from the lack of press reports.

So does that mean that even if he were to shout in the courtroom "I MURDERED HER!" or even "I'M INNOCENT!" no one would be allowed to know that until trial?

 

[Carol70]

Hi there, long time lurker, first time post.

I'm curious as to how little April came to be in the vehicle? Did the driver hoot or call her to get her attention and she went over? Did she go over to the vehicle to greet the person because she knew and recognized him and then climbed in? Or did the driver stop his van right next to the girls where they were playing and she simply climbed in? I'm sorry if this has been discussed already but may have missed it?

 

[Clutchbag]

Thanks for starting this list. Again, I think making a more comprehensive list of discrepancies will make some things clearer.

One thing that your post has brought up for me is: how many similar vehicles to the description (either light coloured van, or even the navy blue Discovery) that are RIGHT hand drive are also in the neighbourhood? Maybe the child witness was absolutely right and April did get in the driver's side, as perhaps she was pulled in by the driver? Or climbed on to 'their' lap?

April must have been familiar with numerous people who have vehicles that match the description that are RH drive. Any idea why those were ruled out?

There wasnt any other suspect at least in public domain

 

[Cappuccino]

So does that mean that even if he were to shout in the courtroom "I MURDERED HER!" or even "I'M INNOCENT!" no one would be allowed to know that until trial?

He'd probably be charged with contempt of court. Then what you would read in the press would be something like, "Murder Suspect Faces Additional Charges".