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

[opalsqueak63]

I honestly don't think the police could intentionally fit someone up for a murder these days. In the 1970s - yes, definitely they could. They really have to follow PACE to the letter. Even if, say the police had the wrong man, that doesn't mean they are trying to fit him up. Why would they? Why not go after who really did it?

USA peeps- fitting someone up, incase you don't use that lingo means to frame someone.

 

[SapphireSteel]

I honestly don't think the police could intentionally fit someone up for a murder these days. In the 1970s - yes, definitely they could. They really have to follow PACE to the letter. Even if, say the police had the wrong man, that doesn't mean they are trying to fit him up. Why would they? Why not go after who really did it?

USA peeps- fitting someone up, incase you don't use that lingo means to frame someone.

It might not be the police who fitted him up...

:waitasec:

 

[opalsqueak63]

It might not be the police who fitted him up...

:waitasec:

Ahh -well that's a possibilty, I originally thought of that, but now that they have charged MB, they must have hard evidence, surely. They had better have it.......

 

[Clutchbag]

:

Why? :waitasec: We've only been told a fraction of what the police know, which is absolutely normal.

I'm saying nothing about your comment about Mr Bevan. :ziplip:

yes well dont, i saw a bitterness in him and an arrogance, so arrest me for thinking that

 

[Clutchbag]

You've spoken some of my thoughts. About the suspect that is, I have no opinion on the policeman's face, lol.

Then again, first impressions can be wrong. Who knows? He could be the next Colin Stagg, or the next Ian Huntley, its hard to say at this point.

I will eat my hat if he is the next huntley

 

[Clutchbag]

I honestly don't think the police could intentionally fit someone up for a murder these days. In the 1970s - yes, definitely they could. They really have to follow PACE to the letter. Even if, say the police had the wrong man, that doesn't mean they are trying to fit him up. Why would they? Why not go after who really did it?

USA peeps- fitting someone up, incase you don't use that lingo means to frame someone.

Jeffries was arrested onsuspicion of murder a coupleyears ago purleeese ok that wasnt fitting up but innocent people do get arrested with NO EVIDENCE

 

[Clutchbag]

It might not be the police who fitted him up...

:waitasec:

ooh thats conspiracyland though i have some sympathy with it ifMB was fitted up

 

[cluciano63]

Jeffries was arrested onsuspicion of murder a coupleyears ago purleeese ok that wasnt fitting up but innocent people do get arrested with NO EVIDENCE

And he was released without any charges. Very different from this case.

 

[Clutchbag]

Sorry, re my previous post - I am not saying that the police do not ever fit people up - I know for a fact that they do, as I've come across it first hand, twice, where people have been done up like a kipper.

What I mean is that I do not believe there is now scope within police operational procedure for a suspect to be fitted up and charged for murder, especially when the Crown Prosection Service were imbedded in this investigation, which they were in this case.

I hope you are right and especially if this man is innocent

 

[Clutchbag]

And he was released without any charges. Very different from this case.

only when the real culprit was found, didnt justify them arresting on suspicion of murder with NO EVIDENCE, it was totally pathetic

 

[Cherwell]

Jeffries was arrested onsuspicion of murder a coupleyears ago purleeese ok that wasnt fitting up but innocent people do get arrested with NO EVIDENCE

He was arrested, but not charged. He was not arrested without reason.
There was some potential evidence which had to be checked out, and as a keyholder he was an obvious suspect. He was innocent which is why he was not charged.

Where is your evidence that there was "no evidence"?

 

[Clutchbag]

He was arrested, but not charged. He was not arrested without reason.
There was some potential evidence which had to be checked out, and as a keyholder he was an obvious suspect. He was innocent which is why he was not charged.

ridiculous that a landlord just by having a key can be arrested on suspicion of murder just totally ridiculous

You provide the additional evidence if you think it was right he was arrested on suspicion of MURDER

besides I donthave to prove there was no evidence seeing as someone else was charged and convicted ergo there was no real evidence

 

[Cherwell]

ridiculous that a landlord just by having a key can be arrested on suspicion of murder just totally ridiculous

You provide the additional evidence if you think it was right he was arrested on suspicion of MURDER

If you go to the appropriate thread you will learn about it, but here it is off topic.

As for being arrested, it is not really a big deal. Lots of people are arrested for questioning, and are released without charge.

 

[Clutchbag]

WS is an law enforcement friendly-site, by the way, which means we don't assume or discuss LE "fitting people up" with charges, unless there is an investigation going on about a specific police department being accused of such things. Just saying.

Ooeer thats wonderful but it does happen you know, i think most posters are saying its possible not probable
it HAS happened in the past you know and incases like this i would imagine there is more pressure than other cases

 

[Clutchbag]

If you go to the appropriate thread you will learn about it, but here it is off topic.

As for being arrested, it is not really a big deal. Lots of people are arrested for questioning, and are released without charge.

not alot are arrested on suspicion of murder though and released

 

[raithjames]

Can I ask you all a question? I know lots of ppl on here seem to know a lot about a lot of cases so I was wondering how often is it that a person is named and you are not convinced they did it? I hope that makes sence? I remember the huntley case and suspecting him before he was arrested yet I don't get that feeling with this case I feel like someone is missing from the picture.

 

[MidwestMama]

Its supposed to protect the innocent from conviction. Evidence can usually take care of the guilty.

It actually does both, IMO. If innocent, then there isn't "bad info" in the press. If guilty, banning media talk protects them from losing the case over "tainting the jury" or some such thing.

 

[opalsqueak63]

WS is an law enforcement friendly-site, by the way, which means we don't assume or discuss LE "fitting people up" with charges, unless there is an investigation going on about a specific police department being accused of such things. Just saying.

In the light of your post I have deleted mine, but I can't seem, to delete where people have quoted it. I am a strong supporter of the police actually.

 

[MidwestMama]

My son was called as a witness a few years ago, he was 8yrs old. He never had to go to court though, he was in a special room, miles away, set up especially for children to be interviewed by police and give evidence via a video link...
This is done with specialist teams and social workers etc etc and the questions are asked very carefully, as far as I remember actually, the defence had to send questions in advance, then it was asked to my son whilst being filmed then this was presented to the court.
The only live bit was he had to speak to say his name and how old he was and was asked if he understood why he was a witness!! It was all done VERY carefully. For me the hard bit was only being able to watch from a room next door, they only let the police and social workers into the actual room while they give evidence.
This could well be different in other places but I would think it is done in a similar way.

That is so good to know! Thank you!

 

[Clutchbag]

Can I ask you all a question? I know lots of ppl on here seem to know a lot about a lot of cases so I was wondering how often is it that a person is named and you are not convinced they did it? I hope that makes sence? I remember the huntley case and suspecting him before he was arrested yet I don't get that feeling with this case I feel like someone is missing from the picture.

people have their own gut feelings about things, i never watched or followed huntley case, i watched the mccanns and my gut feeling was there was something not right with them, this case here, something not right and i think the man is innocent

Etawatched the louise woodward case on tv and thoight she was innocent, watched casey anthony and though guilty as sin, her evil little jumpstart lawyer got her off

Watched the knox case and the girl was a lying cow bit she got off too