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

[Smccat]

If there was a hooded man he certainly ran into him and the body rather quickly! The cctv has him around there before, during and after Lindsay went missing. That means he also knows the location of the murder, which he has not divulged yet. I think he is the sole offender here, he is not giving more info as they will find more evidence against him. MOO
Also, where are lindsays clothes? We know her shoes were cut up in the bin, a possible coat sighting on the day but no other mention of any other articles of clothing.

BBM. Why would he do this ? Sounds like a lot of hassle to just dump them in the same bag with the uppers.

edited by me for spelling

 

[Kaykedi]

Do you know if the upper parts and the soles of Lindsay's trainers were dumped together?

 

[Smccat]

Do you know if the upper parts and the soles of Lindsay's trainers were dumped together?

I’ve just been back to check and I understand they were, yes.

 

[Kaykedi]

‘and a large skip from the cemetery contained a pair of her Sketchers trainers which had been cut along the sole.’

It doesn’t state any part remains missing.


Lindsay Birbeck murder trial: Every piece of evidence heard in week one

Thanks too for this

 

[Kaykedi]

I’ve just been back to check and I understand they were, yes.

Thank you

 

[Doris777]

You have made a point there Doris about why his family took him to the police station. Do you think it's a member/members of his 'community' that have told him he's guilty, or, someone outside of it? I haven't heard anyone say one word about Lindsay's boyfriend either. I wonder if it's partly because he doesn't live in the area? Maybe more difficult to be a part of things when you live and work in Cumbria?

Yeah that's what I was thinking. He's been"told" to be guilty of moving the body. Nothing else. The family will no what to say..hence they have said say no comment then there's is a prepaird statement. U should say this that and the other..it's all very "out there" is the story of a hooded man. It's something u see in movies. Not real life. With him only being 16 I think they have seen it as well he's only young he will get less years than someone older. If they play the disabilities card as well...they will literally get away with murder..or just do a few years behind bars which is just a holiday to the lad anyway...all moo and me thinking out loud.

I just think the whole thing is just bonkers.

Yeah I understand about the boyfriend.

 

[Kaykedi]

Yeah that's what I was thinking. He's been"told" to be guilty of moving the body. Nothing else. The family will no what to say..hence they have said say no comment then there's is a prepaird statement. U should say this that and the other..it's all very "out there" is the story of a hooded man. It's something u see in movies. Not real life. With him only being 16 I think they have seen it as well he's only young he will get less years than someone older. If they play the disabilities card as well...they will literally get away with murder..or just do a few years behind bars which is just a holiday to the lad anyway...all moo and me thinking out loud.

I just think the whole thing is just bonkers.

Yeah I understand about the boyfriend.

Very interesting, thank you for this

 

[HongKongPhooey]

I dont understand why the trainers were cut up. Any theories guys?

 

[Tortoise]

Being honest, I think on the balance of probabilities he's guilty but I wouldn't be able to convict him if I was a juror on the evidence I've heard so far. There's always a chance we haven't heard everything in opening argument because of reporting.

I think it's much easier to judge cases here with our instincts for what sounds like BS etc, but having been on a jury I do know how much heavier a burden it is to return a guilty verdict. It's possible he could have moved the body because he hadn't been paid and thought he hadn't done a good enough job. I think he would have mentioned the sum he was offered to do it if that was true, but it's difficult to assess without knowing more about him.

As a side note, I wonder if he's been exposed to any TV programmes like Dexter.

 

[Bampot]

I dont understand why the trainers were cut up. Any theories guys?

All I can think is a really poor attempt to destroy evidence.

 

[RachelZachary]

If we are to believe his story that he only moved the body, what does this say about the type of person he is anyway?

A 16 year old boy, hanging out in the woods on his own for 4 hours, who just happens to be approached by someone he’s never met before, who just happens to have killed someone, and he happily says “Oh yes, I’ll move the body for you, random man” What 16 year old boy would do this? And it’s all very coincidental isn’t it?

If we believe he isn’t telling the truth, and is actually covering for someone, why?

 

[RachelZachary]

I dont understand why the trainers were cut up. Any theories guys?

She didn’t quite fit in the wheely bin and he tried to cut them to size rather than remove them from her feet? Did he also try to chop her leg off for the same reason?

 

[Smccat]

She didn’t quite fit in the wheely bin and he tried to cut them to size rather than remove them from her feet? Did he also try to chop her leg off for the same reason?

I wondered (urgh can’t believe I’m typing these words) if he perhaps thought cutting her legs off would be easy - and the best way to fit into the bin - and then he found it a lot more difficult physically than he was expecting.

 

[Alyce]

Being honest, I think on the balance of probabilities he's guilty but I wouldn't be able to convict him if I was a juror on the evidence I've heard so far. There's always a chance we haven't heard everything in opening argument because of reporting.

I think it's much easier to judge cases here with our instincts for what sounds like BS etc, but having been on a jury I do know how much heavier a burden it is to return a guilty verdict. It's possible he could have moved the body because he hadn't been paid and thought he hadn't done a good enough job. I think he would have mentioned the sum he was offered to do it if that was true, but it's difficult to assess without knowing more about him.

As a side note, I wonder if he's been exposed to any TV programmes like Dexter.

I also could not convict him of murder at the moment. I know there's more to come and hopefully there will be enough decent evidence to make it clear one way or the other.
I am, so far, impressed with his Counsel. I thought he did an excellent job with the pathologist, in getting her to qualify her original statement and having to concede that she didn't know whether LB had been strangled or smothered and she could not definitively say that all of the neck damage had been from direct attack.

 

[MrEgg]

I'm 95% certain he's guilty. I've got 5% doubt due to so many people on different sites insisting that someone else is involved

Are you referring to sites such as FB?

 

[Alyce]

I dont understand why the trainers were cut up. Any theories guys?

That puzzles me too. If it was an attempt to remove evidence from the soles of the shoes, then why would he dispose of the soles with the uppers. That does not make sense.

Is it possible that he had removed all the clothing before putting LBs body into the bin, but left the trainers on to make it easier for him to manoeuvre the body into the bin. Then, when he got to the cemetery and buried the body, he decided to take the trainers off and by that time, rigor mortis being further advanced, he had to cut them off the body.
Hence why only the trainers have been found in the cemetery bin.

 

[Bampot]

Just a reminder of the prepared statement -

"I did not murder Lindsay Birbeck. I was not involved in her death. I was not present at the time or place of her death.

"I did move a body from an area off Burnley Road Accrington in a wheelie bin.

"At first I hid the body but later moved it again in a wheelie bin, taking it to the cemetery on Burnley Road where I buried it on my own.

"A man came up to me when I was walking alone in that area off Burnley Road and he asked me to “get rid of a body” for him.

"He said that he would pay me a lot of money when everything was clear. He showed me where the body was and he went away straightaway leaving me to “get rid of the body”.

"I have not met this man before. I have not met him since nor have. I had any contact with him. He has not paid me any money.

"He told me that he would leave the money for me near where the body had been at first once everything was clear.

"I cannot describe the man other than to say he was white, male, spoke English.

"I could not see his face well as he was covering it with his hood. I am not sure of his height, build or age.

"Other than as above I do not wish to say anything further”

 

[Bampot]

So the hooded man was going to leave the money near where the body was?

But is he implying where the body was, was not the murder scene? As he was not present at the place of her death.

 

[Barbieshell]

Can't believe the lying toad is pulling such a disgustingly outlandish defence as that, lets hope there is DNA / other evidence attributed to him that CANNOT be explained away (I'm betting there will be no stranger or evidence to support that excuse). 16 year old kids can be calculated and evil, you just have to look at the Aaron Campbell case to know that ffs.

 

[LucyRocket]

I'm not quite sure how to write this, so bear with me while I try and get started.

I can't join in with any of the theorizing because it's been reported that the youth has autism.

Everything I see posters theorizing seems to be around the thinking of someone not on the spectrum. When apparently he is. We have no idea of his range of autism, all I can tell is that he has speech. That's it.

I'm trying to recall some of the things that stand out to me.

1. Him spending so much time alone on the coppice being unusual. No it isn't. All of the male youths I with with spend nearly all of their time alone, having as little communication with other people as possible. Some spending all of their time on a computer, and some spending equal time on a computer and outdoors. Whether on a computer or outdoors, their thoughts are completely solitary. For those that have speech, even at times when they are having conversation with others, the other party has to follow the conversation as it plays out in the mind of the person with autism, or they can't continue with the conversation.

(I mean no disrespect by using 'they', by 'they' I am referring to my recollection of each time I have supported young males who have autism, in a criminal investigation).

2. Trying to rationalise his actions. A person with autism has their own 'manual' that they live by. By 'manual', this is how I refer to their understanding of how life should be. You can't tell them any different. They will just think you are wrong. Autism is very matter-of-fact and most people on the spectrum don't have the capacity to accept that there are different ways for different people. Eg. A person who is noisy is wrong. They will not accept that that person is happy, or excited in that moment. They are just a bad person for being noisy. Noise is not acceptable according to the manual. This is one example, but it applies to their thinking about all aspects of human behaviour. You can add to their manual, but you can't change it.

3. Jonty Bravery being used as an example of a person with autism understanding the consequences of his actions, because he had reportedly said he wanted to kill someone, and had specifically said that he wanted to push someone off a high structure. This only shows that he had a plan of action. He knew what actions he wanted to carry out, but there is nothing that's been reported on that case which indicates he had any connections to the emotions or consequences on victims. Which most people on the autistic spectrum wouldn't.

4. It's very difficult to question someone with autism. You know the questions that you looking for answers to, but they don't understand why you are questioning, and due to the point I made about a conversation having to follow their own thoughts, don't cope well with questioning. They don't understand why you would be asking, because of course, the logical answers are all in the 'manual', which as far as they are concerned, we know. They would want to escape from a situation of being questioned. It's about one of the most anxiety- inducing situations they face.

To try and cover these points with a specific example, I'll tell you about the most recent arrest I have been part of. A young man with autism I know very well. Functions fairly independently. I have as good a relationship with him as anyone. He goes out for hours during the night. I don't know what he's doing for these hours. In the morning he'll show me pictures of the moon, pictures of car lights in the fog. So I can see some of the places he's been. I'll ask him what was he doing out late at night and he'll say something like "I mustn't cross the road when it's foggy Lucy because the car might not see me and bang" and then he'll walk away, because I've asked a question. He will go out for hours during the day and I know he is spending a lot of time in the bushes at the primary school. He tells me that there are often balls in the bushes and that's why he goes there, to look for them. He'll spend hours in there watching the children. You can imagine what people think when they see this, and he doesn't 'look' disabled. I ask him if he has a girlfriend and he says when he has a wife he will let me know, that there are lots of girls in the primary school and lots of girls in the college and who knows which one will be his wife. I try to explain to him that he mustn't look at the girls in the school because he is a man, so they can't be his wife, but again he walks away, as my opinion is nonsense according to his manual.

I know this has no relevance to this case, I just thought maybe for some who might not have been in a position to have experience of autism it might be a little helpful. I still can't give any answers though because each person has slight variations, and as I said, all I think I know about the person you are discussing in this case is that he has autism and speech. All the wondering about why he cut her shoes, you'll never come up with an answer. Because you're looking at it from your reasoning. He will have, what is to him, the perfectly logical answer as to why he did that, but I can guarantee you that no matter how long you think about it you are NEVER going to come up with what that is. Unless he tells us. It's in the manual. The one we don't have.

I notice that the other person on this forum who I know has a good insight into autism has gone very quiet also, they've probably been feeling as up against a wall as I have.