Deceased/Not Found UK - April Jones, 5, Machynlleth, Wales, 1 Oct 2012 #7 *M. Bridger guilty*

[Perodicticus potto]

That works the other way round too. Would people have been so willing to give him the benefit of the doubt if his mugshot had shown an ugly thuggish-looking man glaring into the camera?

I thought it did.

 

[Cherwell]

I thought it did.

I didn't fancy him either, but I've seen worse :wink:

 

[ScotAng]

I'm confused to why that would make a difference. The fact that someone has been charged with a crime doesn't necessarily mean their guilt can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt; that's what the trial is for. They are still presumed innocent, and observers should still be able to evaluate the evidence dispassionately and state their opinions without being accused of supporting criminals and/or crime.

I still maintain that the evidence reported in media accounts during the trial would not have been enough to eliminate all reasonable doubt from my mind as to Bridger's guilt on the specific charges against him. I also think that if this case had been less emotionally charged and media-driven -- if, for example, Bridger had been on trial for murdering a runaway Bengali teenager with facial piercings, rather than a photogenic little white girl from a well-spoken family -- expressing such doubt would have been a lot more socially acceptable.

Make a difference to what, do you mean where I referenced Cb's stance after he was charged? I think 'accused' is a pretty strong word to use. I would imagine most on a forum like this are aware of legalities pertaining to reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence till proven guilty, etc. Everything is open to interpretation and discussion, particularly with cases in the UK when anything relative to the case becomes sub judice as soon as a person has been charged. That's the beauty of forums like this, to do simply that, speculate and discuss bearing in mind UK law (if you're from UK, sorry if i'm stating the obvious). Though that was not the basis of my question to cb, I admit it does sort of read like that, and why I'm happy to 'explain', if you will.

BIB: My whole point actually, and exactly why I was as curious then (October) as I still am now, as to how passionately cb appeared to believe in him, and at least until quite recently was still not quite convinced he'd done it. It was because of this case I re-registered with w/s and if you were around the thread then, you'll remember how heated it all became in relation to that. I still read this thread but went back to another forum to discuss where it wasn't so heated. So there you are, simple curiosity, not accusation. Open to cb telling me to take a hike, naturally!

Being on that jury I wouldn't have had a doubt in my mind, not with the case as presented to them. But then having worked in High Court for a very large part of my life, could play a part in my thinking process.

Re image perception, you could turn that on it's head as regards MB's normal non-aggressive appearance. I'm aware people thought him handsome and, interestingly, the fact that he'd had a number of relationships implying he 'couldn't' be into little girls. Perception's a strange thing. If nothing else, I hope it raises flags for women everywhere to question exactly who they're bringing into their childrens' lives and homes. Well, we can hope.

 

[Clutchbag]

Scotang, what a much to do about nothng here, from the beginning I posted as I found dependant on the info in the papers, nothing for a very long time screamed at me this is a paedo child killer, his friends and colleagues spoke ok about him in general, we didnt know he had a criminal record and none of it was sexual anyway, or he beat up his ex, or that he viewed chld ,just that he was somethng of a drifter in his jobs and relationships and fathered lots of chldren,and liked his drink,the sheer lunacy that he would abduct a child in a place where he could beseen by others where he and his car was well known, a chiod he was related to as well, when the trial started alot of things came out, and even then, not everything, there was still in the middle of it the possibility his story might be true,despite some of his bizarre statements, once it had finished and he was convicted, things seemed alot different and kind of gelled with all the circumstantial evidence, thats it really, and no I dont support criminals, but the evidence had to be convincing to send a man to jail for life, that evidence in the trial wasnt without a certain doubt and thats what I thought it was all about, and there are plenty of stories about the wrong people sent to jail, but as I posted previously, common sense and or instinct do play a role as well, and on balance he was guilty, the other factor IMO is this was a case about a child killing, some would say better to not take the chance even if not convinced of the evidence rather than acquit and put other kids in danger

people here, all people have posted honestly throughout, yucant lambast anyone for that or suggest their thnking was wrong, anyway, bid you all goodbye been nice posting and reading, maybe see you around on some other case sometime x

 

[PADDYWHACK]

Make a difference to what, do you mean where I referenced Cb's stance after he was charged? I think 'accused' is a pretty strong word to use. I would imagine most on a forum like this are aware of legalities pertaining to reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence till proven guilty, etc. Everything is open to interpretation and discussion, particularly with cases in the UK when anything relative to the case becomes sub judice as soon as a person has been charged. That's the beauty of forums like this, to do simply that, speculate and discuss bearing in mind UK law (if you're from UK, sorry if i'm stating the obvious). Though that was not the basis of my question to cb, I admit it does sort of read like that, and why I'm happy to 'explain', if you will.

BIB: My whole point actually, and exactly why I was as curious then (October) as I still am now, as to how passionately cb appeared to believe in him, and at least until quite recently was still not quite convinced he'd done it. It was because of this case I re-registered with w/s and if you were around the thread then, you'll remember how heated it all became in relation to that. I still read this thread but went back to another forum to discuss where it wasn't so heated. So there you are, simple curiosity, not accusation. Open to cb telling me to take a hike, naturally!

Being on that jury I wouldn't have had a doubt in my mind, not with the case as presented to them. But then having worked in High Court for a very large part of my life, could play a part in my thinking process.

Re image perception, you could turn that on it's head as regards MB's normal non-aggressive appearance. I'm aware people thought him handsome and, interestingly, the fact that he'd had a number of relationships implying he 'couldn't' be into little girls. Perception's a strange thing. If nothing else, I hope it raises flags for women everywhere to question exactly who they're bringing into their childrens' lives and homes. Well, we can hope.

Very well said. I bowed out a while ago because I knew he was guilty. Thankfully he will never be released. People need to educate themselves that paedophiles look like ordinary members of the public. Paedophilia is a secret act, not a public thing. Men and women do not go around shouting what they are, sadly we have to wait for the victims to have the courage, or to lose their lives to reveal it.

 

[ann-other]

Very well said. I bowed out a while ago because I knew he was guilty. Thankfully he will never be released. People need to educate themselves that paedophiles look like ordinary members of the public. Paedophilia is a secret act, not a public thing. Men and women do not go around shouting what they are, sadly we have to wait for the victims to have the courage, or to lose their lives to reveal it.

Hi PADDYWACK I remember well and knew you decided to back out until the trial. Everything you said back then all made sense at the time even though some of us had doubts. I am glad to admit you were right all along.

 

[ScotAng]

Scotang, what a much to do about nothng here, from the beginning I posted as I found dependant on the info in the papers, nothing for a very long time screamed at me this is a paedo child killer, his friends and colleagues spoke ok about him in general, we didnt know he had a criminal record and none of it was sexual anyway, or he beat up his ex, or that he viewed chld ,just that he was somethng of a drifter in his jobs and relationships and fathered lots of chldren,and liked his drink,the sheer lunacy that he would abduct a child in a place where he could beseen by others where he and his car was well known, a chiod he was related to as well, when the trial started alot of things came out, and even then, not everything, there was still in the middle of it the possibility his story might be true,despite some of his bizarre statements, once it had finished and he was convicted, things seemed alot different and kind of gelled with all the circumstantial evidence, thats it really, and no I dont support criminals, but the evidence had to be convincing to send a man to jail for life, that evidence in the trial wasnt without a certain doubt and thats what I thought it was all about, and there are plenty of stories about the wrong people sent to jail, but as I posted previously, common sense and or instinct do play a role as well, and on balance he was guilty, the other factor IMO is this was a case about a child killing, some would say better to not take the chance even if not convinced of the evidence rather than acquit and put other kids in danger

people here, all people have posted honestly throughout, yucant lambast anyone for that or suggest their thnking was wrong, anyway, bid you all goodbye been nice posting and reading, maybe see you around on some other case sometime x

Clutchbag, you and I obviously interpret things very differently. I wasn't aware you would see it as a 'to do' since you're clearly outspoken, as am I. To ask why you were so 'pro' MB from the off to pretty much the end simply roused my curiousity, nothing more sinister than that. I'm sorry if you see that as me suggesting you 'support criminals'. I've just read Pp's reply to a portion of my post where s/he used those very words. :smile: My honest impression was you were/are intrinsically pro-defence. Many people are, it's hardly a fault, not to mention where would our judicial system be without defenders.

I'm totally not getting the 'lambasting' thing, nor where I'm suggesting anyone's thinking is wrong. However .... I asked, you answered and I respect your answer. Thanks for that.

I'm not sure if you used to venture into the Ramsey and/or McCann forum years ago, but your name rang a bell from somewhere when I came back in October. All the best, and I'm pretty sure most here will cross paths again at some point.

 

[Clutchbag]

No worries scotang x

 

[ScotAng]

Very well said. I bowed out a while ago because I knew he was guilty. Thankfully he will never be released. People need to educate themselves that paedophiles look like ordinary members of the public. Paedophilia is a secret act, not a public thing. Men and women do not go around shouting what they are, sadly we have to wait for the victims to have the courage, or to lose their lives to reveal it.

Hi Paddy, good to see you again!

Indeed. You are so right, sadly.

 

[Marymead]

Hi all. I haven't been contributing for some time, but have been here reading and observing all through this.
Neurotripsy, your contributions have been remarkable, thank you so much.
Paddy, I remember you well. As always the voice of knowledge and experience.
I hope I am wrong, but concern stays with me that this wasn't his first and only offence with a young child. Will they now investigate the possibility of other offences he could be connected with?

My only hope now is that for her family's sake one day some trace of April will be found.

 

[italianWSfan]

April’s last day
...in Mum and Dad's own words

...containing some beautiful pictures I haven't seen before and video interview with April's parents.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4950435/April-Joness-last-day-by-her-parents-Coral-and-Paul.html

I know where to hide a body
- Gruesome boast to pal
- Obsessed with murder
- Bridger's fantasy world

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4949022/Gruesome-April-Mark-Bridger-boast-I-know-where-to-hide-a-body.html

 

[italianWSfan]

Very interesting article with lots of new info:

Jail chaplain on moment Mark Bridger said he was '99% sure I put body in river': April's killer confessed to me - but if I was his priest I'd have stayed silent

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334480/April-Jones-Jail-chaplain-moment-Mark-Bridger-said-99-sure-I-body-river.html

Lots of gossip here, not really sure if to be taken as facts..?

Beast Mark Bridger beat up our pregnant Julie, his son and even the pet dog

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/404362/Beast-Mark-Bridger-beat-up-our-pregnant-Julie-his-son-and-even-the-pet-dog

And beautiful new photos of April at this link... You can clearly see that she was loved so much by her parents. Heartbreaking.

Coral and Paul open up album of treasured photos

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4951368/Coral-and-Paul-open-up-their-album-of-April.html

 

[marlywings]

A new thread is now open at the following link...

GUILTY UK (Wales) - April Jones,5,Machynlleth -Wales -01 Oct 2012 #7 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community