Found Deceased UK - Lindsay Birbeck, 47, Accrington, 12 Aug 2019 *Arrest* #3

[Angleterre]

A

It came about after the first interview, where I'm sure it became blindingly obvious there was no real evidence pinning him to the actual murder.

Obviously solicitors cannot lie for you, but I don't think it's a huge stretch really to assume the hooded man story has been born out of the realisation that there is nothing definitively tying him to the murder.

In putting him into a statement the onus is now on the prosecution to prove the man doesn't exist, a much harder prospect that just proving the defendant did it.

I can get on board with certain things being covered up by others way after the fact, but I don't at all think anyone knew prior to her body being found.

I'm also a bit wary of the descriptions of the defendant. He comes across as very timid, vulnerable and easily manipulated. But I also get the impression he lacks empathy, is unable to recognise the severity of his actions, and I don't personally think he cares that much, either about her death, getting caught, the trial. Any of it. But that is of course moo from what I've read of the trial updates so far.

I think that you are spot on with some of these observations

 

[Dcflag]

I must be honest and say that respect your opinion and experience regarding the ‘grassing’ on each other but that is not my experience and I have had plenty of it when dealing as an investigator ,with the travelling community for a myriad of offences, wether that be petty crime or serious crime and the same goes for many of my colleagues.

With regard to your comment about the Police not searching RM house before he handed himself in, this is a genuine question by the way because I wasn’t fully following the case at that time, do you know if the Police had the legal power to search his home ? And even if they did and as you assert, they missed an opportunity ( which if that’s the case then I agree with you), the Police would have only been allowed under their search powers, to search the bedroom of RM and the communal areas . Otherwise they would not have the power to search the rest of the house unless the owner of the property agreed and was in attendance as an appropriate adult because of his age . So in terms of legal power you have a search conducted under the issue of a Magistrates warrant - but what for ? It’s not under the misuse of drugs act or the theft act or anything under a specific power . And if they did need to search under a Magistrate’s warrant then I would say that they obviously didn’t have enough to detain him at that time otherwise they would have used powers under PACE ( Police and Criminal Evidence act 1984). These two powers would be (prior to the introduction of the serious and organised crime and police act 2005 which more or less replicated the powers under PACE ) S32 to search the place where the arrested person was at the time of or immediately prior to the time of his or her arrest or S18 to search the place where the arrested person resides once the person has been arrested and lodged at the police station or to search a premises that they reside at prior to taking the offender to the police station but after arrest .
So taking all of that into account, I am not sure it would have made a huge difference depending upon at what stage the Police knew RM was believed to be responsible for an arrestable offence and tried but failed to locate him as opposed to if they knew it was him but made no effort to locate him and awaited his attendance at the police station voluntarily- the latter I find very hard to believe bearing in mind that this is a high profile murder investigation . So where do you feel that they dropped the ball with the search? And again , I am asking out of genuine interest.
With regards to your comment about the defences introduction of a third party and how this has clouded ( my words of interpretation) the jury and left room for reasonable doubt, even if they had not have introduced this , there was and is/are a ton of issues around reasonable doubt and it’s up to the Prosecution to prove beyond ALL reasonable doubt that RM did in fact murder LB . To my mind, they have not done so, not even close to doing so , therefore even if this 3rd person was not brought into the equation, the jury would still have to find him not guilty ( on the evidence that I have heard presented so far ) because the prosecution have not proven that he did in fact murder LB. So personally, I do not think it’s clever at all - I feel it is of no real consequence because the fact of the matter is that it cannot be proven that RM is responsible.
I do agree that there’s a good possibility of him Re offending and presenting a danger to the public because he clearly does know if a third person was involved, who that was . And if he did in fact act alone then he is more educated than anybody so far is giving him credit for because the scene of the crime has not been able to be identified and that takes some doing . However, conversely, if he is as educationally challenged as we are led to believe and if his very limited in his speech and social skills then that in itself is concerning in my opinion because that is just as much a danger because he may have no real comprehension of what he has done and the consequences of his actions ( I don’t believe this to be the case but I am playing devils advocate here and looking at it from both sides).
Ultimately, I do agree that unless the Prosecutor bring forth any further evidence to tie RM to the murder of LB then I do believe and agree with you that he will be found not guilty. And as I commented upon earlier in this thread, without sounding critical of my fellow Police colleagues and Detectives, personally I would have approached this prosecution in a totally different way. But then the benefit of hindsight Is a wonderful thing .

Unfortunately I'm on my phone so I may miss points you asked me specifically, so just nudge me if I do miss anything!

You are correct in that, at the time he handed himself in there was no grounds the police could have gotten a warrant or searched his property. I feel like there just has to be balls dropped somewhere for there to be no recoverable items, no recoverable murder site. As you say, as it stands he is an apparently intellectually compromised teenager. Could this really be a result of his own sheer luck?

I still also think the third party was a good defence strategy. I've never seen people more determined to shoehorn a third party into a small window of time, and even suggest this person attempted dismemberment, than I did from the moment that statement was released.

That doesn't mean I think without it he would've been found guilty, the evidence is very circumstantial and ultimately doesn't prove he murdered her, but it certainly hasn't hurt the defence case at all.

Lastly re travellers, I just think people are people. I appreciate the... Stereotype but I think it's wrong to ultimately perpetuate that.

I always enjoy your posts angleterre

 

[Dcflag]

A

Although it can be questioned as being ethical , in this situation, it’s not beyond the realms of probability that the defence solicitor has not posed the following questions to RM during their legal representation meeting prior to the police interview...
1. Did you murder LB
RM - no
2. Well you were found in possession or witnessed being with or in the area of where LB was found. Could it be that someone asked you to hide her body ?
RM - yes
3. Ok could it be the case that they said to you that they would take you to where you needed to pick the body Up from and tell you that you needed to take her to the ( deposition site) ?
RM - yes
4. And could it be that they told you that if you did this for them that they would give you a lot of money?
RM - yes
5. And could it be that the way for you to collect the money from them was to meet them afterwards in the same place they told you to Collect the body from ?
RM -yes
I am not saying that this is what happened and that this is how the wording of the prepared statement came about. But I am merely suggesting that it is a possible way that the prepared statement came about from somebody who is described as not being able to hold such a convincing conversation with a third party. Do you understand where I am coming from? All MOO

This is exactly what I was thinking when mentioning an appropriate adult - and why it would be very interesting to see who that appropriate adult was, and even the interview techniques used given his learning difficulties/low iq.

 

[MusicalMonkey]

A

Although it can be questioned as being ethical , in this situation, it’s not beyond the realms of probability that the defence solicitor has not posed the following questions to RM during their legal representation meeting prior to the police interview...
1. Did you murder LB
RM - no
2. Well you were found in possession or witnessed being with or in the area of where LB was found. Could it be that someone asked you to hide her body ?
RM - yes
3. Ok could it be the case that they said to you that they would take you to where you needed to pick the body Up from and tell you that you needed to take her to the ( deposition site) ?
RM - yes
4. And could it be that they told you that if you did this for them that they would give you a lot of money?
RM - yes
5. And could it be that the way for you to collect the money from them was to meet them afterwards in the same place they told you to Collect the body from ?
RM -yes
I am not saying that this is what happened and that this is how the wording of the prepared statement came about. But I am merely suggesting that it is a possible way that the prepared statement came about from somebody who is described as not being able to hold such a convincing conversation with a third party. Do you understand where I am coming from? All MOO

I get where you're coming from with this.

Though, if it was The solicitor that questioned the defendant for the statement then they must have coaxed their own story out of the him in some way by what questions they asked.

For example, it's almost 100% certain that after your posted question

2. Could it be that someone asked you to hide her body? - yes

That anyone that genuinely wanted to get to the truth would logically ask as the next question, Something like.


3. Did you know this person?

(*I don't think there is anyone here that believes the 'hooded stranger' story. It just defies belief beyond reason).

It's possibly more likely that the defendant has been pre-told 'his' story and has stuck to it rigidly.

On a related note? Why isn't he taking the stand. As he can seemingly clearly understand complex questions and answer with yes or no, so . . . . . .

 

[Ann Blyth]

I get where you're coming from with this.

Though, if it was The solicitor that questioned the defendant for the statement then they must have coaxed their own story out of the him in some way by what questions they asked.

For example, it's almost 100% certain that after your posted question

2. Could it be that someone asked you to hide her body? - yes

That anyone that genuinely wanted to get to the truth would logically ask as the next question, Something like.


3. Did you know this person?

(*I don't think there is anyone here that believes the 'hooded stranger' story. It just defies belief beyond reason).

It's possibly more likely that the defendant has been pre-told 'his' story and has stuck to it rigidly.

On a related note? Why isn't he taking the stand. As he can seemingly clearly understand complex questions and answer with yes or no, so . . . . . .

I agree, and think he will not take the stand and give live evidence because he is too worried about giving evidence, that he may it all up when giving evidence. It could be that his counsel avoids putting him in the stand, or that he has been told not to take the stand by someone else.

 

[Angleterre]

Unfortunately I'm on my phone so I may miss points you asked me specifically, so just nudge me if I do miss anything!

You are correct in that, at the time he handed himself in there was no grounds the police could have gotten a warrant or searched his property. I feel like there just has to be balls dropped somewhere for there to be no recoverable items, no recoverable murder site. As you say, as it stands he is an apparently intellectually compromised teenager. Could this really be a result of his own sheer luck?

I still also think the third party was a good defence strategy. I've never seen people more determined to shoehorn a third party into a small window of time, and even suggest this person attempted dismemberment, than I did from the moment that statement was released.

That doesn't mean I think without it he would've been found guilty, the evidence is very circumstantial and ultimately doesn't prove he murdered her, but it certainly hasn't hurt the defence case at all.

Lastly re travellers, I just think people are people. I appreciate the... Stereotype but I think it's wrong to ultimately perpetuate that.

I always enjoy your posts angleterre

Thank you for your kind words and for taking the time to reply
It’s certainly a strange case and I am struggling not to say something that I shouldn’t if you know what I mean... maybe after the verdict I will articulate some thoughts

 

[MusicalMonkey]

A

I have a question for you.

Some here have brought up the possibility that the victim's phone and keys (and presumably the FitBit too) were taken to the 'traveller site' by the defendant, and disposed of by family members at some stage.
Given what you claim to know about digital forensics and the possibility of phones being tracked when turned off. Do you think a massive opportunity has been lost there?

I presume a phone that's off can't be tracked if it's gone through a crusher or even lies at the bottom of a lake, or is buried several feet underground.

 

[Angleterre]

Yes but by asking if he knew that person then he is tying RM into the case and he doesn’t want to do that
He wants to leave it as vague and open to interpretation ,without really saying very much , as he can get away with....
RM has no obligation to take the stand and there’s no way in a month of Sunday’s that they will put him up there ... If he is as inarticulate as is stated , he will be devoured , torn into shreds, eaten alive - however you wish to phrase it AND more importantly, he won’t be able to stick to the script and he is likely to slip up and one tiny slip and it allows the prosecution a way to get in there and undermine everything that’s been said thur far . Furthermore, we do not know how he reacts under pressure and the chances are that he will reveal his true character ( angry , violent, frustrated etc ) and this will not be a good strategy for his defence
Again all MOO

 

[Angleterre]

I

I have a question for you.

Some here have brought up the possibility that the victim's phone and keys (and presumably the FitBit too) were taken to the 'traveller site' by the defendant, and disposed of by family members at some stage.
Given what you claim to know about digital forensics and the possibility of phones being tracked when turned off. Do you think a massive opportunity has been lost there?

I presume a phone that's off can't be tracked if it's gone through a crusher or even lies at the bottom of a lake, or is buried several feet underground.

I will say this and no more
I think a massive opportunity has potentially been lost here. And you don’t need possession of the phone to know what numbers were dialled in and out and what text messages were sent and received... but let’s not forget that it’s a massive cost to do this and I am talking A LOT OF MONEY

 

[SpursGyal]

I wonder if the prosecution will bring up the ‘hooded man’ story. Am I remembering correctly that they asked the jury to note who was present at the interviews?

 

[MusicalMonkey]

I

I will say this and no more
I think a massive opportunity has potentially been lost here. And you don’t need possession of the phone to know what numbers were dialled in and out and what text messages were sent and received

I suspect it's a resources issue. High risk missing person - no. But then a murder inquiry? Is that not high level enough? Or speculatively perhaps some degree of 'bias' was involved - as in 'it's an open and shut case' we don't need to investigate other possible scenarios?

I am certain that had this been a terrorism case the digital forensic part would have been done without question. I believe the tech has been around for well over a decade.
Going off point further, LOL. But I think we all know why 'Osama' supposedly never used a phone.
Some of the stuff I read about what high level 'intelligence services' were (are) using was mind blowing. Lasers from space hitting windows and measuring the sound waves inside (i.e. - speech) etc. etc. Wooaaahhh! Have I gone off point? Haha.

 

[sunflower22]

I wonder if the prosecution will bring up the ‘hooded man’ story. Am I remembering correctly that they asked the jury to note who was present at the interviews?

Could theY say the “hoody guy “ could of possibly of been the person from ZB statement? I know she gave a description of his clothing which possibly matched RM but how many men own grey tracksuits, quite a lot I’d say

 

[Angleterre]

DBM duplicate post

 

[Mommysleuth11]

Ive been looking for trainers with an upside down v design. I could only find a couple a brands/pairs online that could come close to that description and non less than around £500. (Im not saying other dont exist but i didnt come across any).
Also interestingly how would one decifer an 'upside down V' from a capital A, especially from a distance? What would draw one to conclude it was indeed an 'upside down V' rather than the more simple A? Perhaps the presence of other upside down letters but somehow the V was the prominent one remembered? Obviously my own random musings..

 

[JosieJo]

Just throwing a few thoughts around

He wasnt very savvy around CCTV , leaving the bin near the body , disposal of glove , saw and her trainers

Yet we are to believe he realised that her phone , clothes and Fitbit would be particularly damning?

It's almost a gift to the defence...its only the disposal that's been clumsy

Regards her trainers.. it's an odd one but I wonder if he cut her clothes off but for some reason didn't get round to the trainers before putting her in the bin (maybe time / or disturbed) ...perhaps her trainers were only removed later at the cemetery

Or for some reason her trainers were put in the bin with her but clothes were not ...maybe her clothes were in rucksack but trainers wouldn't fit in

 

[Alyce]

Ive been looking for trainers with an upside down v design. I could only find a couple a brands/pairs online that could come close to that description and non less than around £500. (Im not saying other dont exist but i didnt come across any).
Also interestingly how would one decifer an 'upside down V' from a capital A, especially from a distance? What would draw one to conclude it was indeed an 'upside down V' rather than the more simple A? Perhaps the presence of other upside down letters but somehow the V was the prominent one remembered? Obviously my own random musings..

I also wonder how she saw this V ........ her initial views were side on, through shrubbery so not sure a logo or symbol would be that clear. Her final view was face on when she turned and saw him behind her, so she would be seeing the front section of his trainers. I would expect a logo to be on the side of the shoe.

Found these .....

 

[Alyce]

 

[MusicalMonkey]

Does anyone else have the feeling that it's the defence (and not the prosecution) that have all but finished presenting their case? The prosecution doesn't seem to have anything at all.

Also, that with all the chamber sitting and 'cutting down' of the time in court that there must have been a 'deal done' already (I see they now don't plan on re-starting proceedings until 2pm on Monday 9th March)?

 

[Jartykarate]

Water yesterday, heating today. It sounds like there's perhaps been some shoddy workmanship done on the court.

Matches the original investigation

 

[SpursGyal]

Could theY say the “hoody guy “ could of possibly of been the person from ZB statement? I know she gave a description of his clothing which possibly matched RM but how many men own grey tracksuits, quite a lot I’d say

I think the person in her statement is clearly our defendant. But of course the Defense are going to claim there was a hooded man who evaded CCTV.
He was on that coppice before she died until after she died, then kept returning. Did he not see anyone else on there?

His ‘hooded man’ is too far fetched for me.