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

[sunflower22]

When was this earlier near miss supposed to have happened?

I heard the week before but could be hear say, the lady joined up with a group of others who was walking in the coppice and pretended she was meeting them to escape him. Just what I heard but there was so many rumours.

 

[The Truth Is]

I heard the week before but could be hear say, the lady joined up with a group of others who was walking in the coppice and pretended she was meeting them to escape him. Just what I heard but there was so many rumours.

Ohh right interesting. It mentioned in an earlier post it might have been near the Cricket club, is this just the wrong location or another incident?

 

[Roostercat]

When was this earlier near miss supposed to have happened?

Apparently it was posted on FB at the time, believe it happened earlier the same day LB went missin. I thought it was originally just FB gossip as nothing further came out and I would have assumed his description would have been released during missing persons investigation, as a person of interest but nothing. I would like to think it is a very reliable source that told me they are being called as a key witness.

 

[Roostercat]

When was this earlier near miss supposed to have happened?

Apparently it was posted on FB at the time, believe it happened earlier the same day LB went missin. I thought it was originally just FB gossip as nothing further came out and I would have assumed his description would have been released during missing persons investigation, as a person of interest but nothing. I would like to think it is a very reliable source that told me they are being called as a key witness.

 

[The Truth Is]

Apparently it was posted on FB at the time, believe it happened earlier the same day LB went missin. I thought it was originally just FB gossip as nothing further came out and I would have assumed his description would have been released during missing persons investigation, as a person of interest but nothing. I would like to think it is a very reliable source that told me they are being called as a key witness.

did this happen up the coppice or near cricket club?

 

[SpursGyal]

I doubt this because Lindsay would surely not pass the bungalow to go to this shed.

The Chicken sheds have been spoke about a bit, as maybe where he hid her for a while. Not that I think she went there on her walk.

 

[The Truth Is]

The Chicken sheds have been spoke about a bit, as maybe where he hid her for a while. Not that I think she went there on her walk.

I understand. It was somebody that posted "maybe she saw someone out her window near the shed and went to invetigate".

 

[LancashireLad]

did this happen up the coppice or near cricket club?

The one mentioned happened in the coppice area on the day Lindsay went missing I believe. The other occasion near the cricket club was on a previous day but not sure when but think it was a while before the murder. May be other incidents as well if you believe the rumours

 

[Angleterre]

Did you ever take any "no body" cases to trial? I can think of a couple of cases where there was less evidence and I feel pretty comfortable with the guilty verdicts.

I'm struggling to see how admittedly being in possession of (and disposing of) a murdered woman's body isn't a very convincing piece of circumstantial evidence.

That’s the issue
It is a good piece of circumstantial evidence but circumstantial evidence on its own, unsupported by other actual tangible evidence, is not enough beyond all reasonable doubt.
One of the first no body ‘ cases was Helen McCourt murdered by pub landlord Ian Griffin I think his name was. Lots of circumstantial evidence and no body found , even to this day and Helen disappeared in 1988. But, and this is the important part, there was evidence , tangible evidence, found that tied him to her in that one of her earnings with her dna was found in his bed and there was blood at the scene that tied them both together.
Please let me know if I am wrong because as I say, I haven’t been following due to being hospitalised but unless there’s evidence of him actually committing the murder or him having the time to do so and the wherewithal to do so then it’s tricky . Yes he’s put himself in possession of LBs body , but does that mean that it can be proved beyond all reasonable doubt that he was the one who killed her ?
Genuine questions here :
1. Was he found in possession of the murder weapon
2. Do his clothes /shoes have LBs blood on them and if so, can the forensics show the blood to be indicative of him being involved in the act of murder ?
3. If strangulation took place , did LB fight back and scratch the offenders face neck etc ? And if he is the offender, did he have scratches on him ? Did LB have the skin cells of the offender underneath her own nails where she tried to fight back and scratched him whilst being strangled.?
4. Is there any DNA that matches RM found inside LBs body that can’t be explained away other than the obvious?
So what I am saying is that yes it’s very strong circumstantial evidence being found in possession of LBs deceased body , but can it be proven that he in fact had the means , motive and opportunity to kill LB or was he just moving the body on behalf of another?
I certainly wouldn’t want to be on that jury making a decision as to wether a 16 year old lad, is responsible or not, for the death and murder of LB and was it premeditated or happenstance... and if found guilty , send him to prison for life , unless they were absolutely sure beyond all reasonable doubt. Because the tiniest bit of doubt in your mind and you cannot convict .
That is the adversarial system that we currently have in the UK .

Edited to add : Do the prosecution know where LB was murdered ? The murder site as opposed to the deposition site ? And can RM be tied to these by forensic evidence?

 

[Angleterre]

Ah that’s very kind of you to say @ Kaykedi
Thank you very much x

 

[The Truth Is]

That’s the issue
It is a good piece of circumstantial evidence but circumstantial evidence on its own, unsupported by other actual tangible evidence, is not enough beyond all reasonable doubt.
One of the first no body ‘ cases was Helen McCourt murdered by pub landlord Ian Griffin I think his name was. Lots of circumstantial evidence and no body found , even to this day and Helen disappeared in 1988. But, and this is the important part, there was evidence , tangible evidence, found that tied him to her in that one of her earnings with her dna was found in his bed and there was blood at the scene that tied them both together.
Please let me know if I am wrong because as I say, I haven’t been following due to being hospitalised but unless there’s evidence of him actually committing the murder or him having the time to do so and the wherewithal to do so then it’s tricky . Yes he’s put himself in possession of LBs body , but does that mean that it can be proved beyond all reasonable doubt that he was the one who killed her ?
Genuine questions here :
1. Was he found in possession of the murder weapon
2. Do his clothes /shoes have LBs blood on them and if so, can the forensics show the blood to be indicative of him being involved in the act of murder ?
3. If strangulation took place , did LB fight back and scratch the offenders face neck etc ? And if he is the offender, did he have scratches on him ? Did LB have the skin cells of the offender underneath her own nails where she tried to fight back and scratched him whilst being strangled.?
4. Is there any DNA that matches RM found inside LBs body that can’t be explained away other than the obvious?
So what I am saying is that yes it’s very strong circumstantial evidence being found in possession of LBs deceased body , but can it be proven that he in fact had the means , motive and opportunity to kill LB or was he just moving the body on behalf of another?
I certainly wouldn’t want to be on that jury making a decision as to wether a 16 year old lad, is responsible or not, for the death and murder of LB and was it premeditated or happenstance... and if found guilty , send him to prison for life , unless they were absolutely sure beyond all reasonable doubt. Because the tiniest bit of doubt in your mind and you cannot convict .
That is the adversarial system that we currently have in the UK .

Edited to add : Do the prosecution know where LB was murdered ? The murder site as opposed to the deposition site ? And can RM be tied to these by forensic evidence?

I would like to be on the jury and definitely call him guilty based on evidence so far, because unless he can come up with what happened by the so called mystery person he is a very dangerous person to walk free, regardless of the sentence because we all know the sentences are lenient anyway

 

[Roostercat]

did this happen up the coppice or near cricket club?

I always assumed the Coppice. I can't find it now as it was on the lindsay search group page. From what i remember the post said something along the lines of 'poor Lindsay, I was nearly grabbed moments before but I managed to run away, I wish I could go back and warn Lindsay'. From what I recall that was the only post I saw so discounted it at the time but now with a reliable source saying they are a key witness, I am not so sure. I guess we will see what this week brings up.

 

[Angleterre]

Great Post and very helpful. Well written for those of us that have little understanding of autism, provides useful insight. Thank you

Very interesting post . Thank you!
I would personally like to speak with you a little more on this subject ...

 

[Angleterre]

So you can say that beyond all reasonable doubt, the prosecution have proven that he did in fact murder LB? And you have heard sufficient evidence to support your decision?
I am not judging you in any way, I am merely interested in your thoughts and processes .

 

[The Truth Is]

So you can say that beyond all reasonable doubt, the prosecution have proven that he did in fact murder LB? And you have heard sufficient evidence to support your decision?
I am not judging you in any way, I am merely interested in your thoughts and processes .

Based on the evidence so far and his movements and what he did to get away with it, i am 99% sure this person committed murder. Also my personal opinion is that, already what he has owned up to doing, i would throw away the key.
Anybody that is willing to do what he has done shouldn't be walking the earth. Just my opinion. I'm also confident that they have more evidence to prove me right. Beyond reasonable doubt is a funny one to me because the system is flawed, he should now have to prove that there was another person. I think it is beyond reasonable doubt that somebody else committed it, so yes i would return a guilty verdict.

 

[Legally Bland]

That’s the issue
It is a good piece of circumstantial evidence but circumstantial evidence on its own, unsupported by other actual tangible evidence, is not enough beyond all reasonable doubt.
One of the first no body ‘ cases was Helen McCourt murdered by pub landlord Ian Griffin I think his name was. Lots of circumstantial evidence and no body found , even to this day and Helen disappeared in 1988. But, and this is the important part, there was evidence , tangible evidence, found that tied him to her in that one of her earnings with her dna was found in his bed and there was blood at the scene that tied them both together.
Please let me know if I am wrong because as I say, I haven’t been following due to being hospitalised but unless there’s evidence of him actually committing the murder or him having the time to do so and the wherewithal to do so then it’s tricky . Yes he’s put himself in possession of LBs body , but does that mean that it can be proved beyond all reasonable doubt that he was the one who killed her ?
Genuine questions here :
1. Was he found in possession of the murder weapon
2. Do his clothes /shoes have LBs blood on them and if so, can the forensics show the blood to be indicative of him being involved in the act of murder ?
3. If strangulation took place , did LB fight back and scratch the offenders face neck etc ? And if he is the offender, did he have scratches on him ? Did LB have the skin cells of the offender underneath her own nails where she tried to fight back and scratched him whilst being strangled.?
4. Is there any DNA that matches RM found inside LBs body that can’t be explained away other than the obvious?
So what I am saying is that yes it’s very strong circumstantial evidence being found in possession of LBs deceased body , but can it be proven that he in fact had the means , motive and opportunity to kill LB or was he just moving the body on behalf of another?
I certainly wouldn’t want to be on that jury making a decision as to wether a 16 year old lad, is responsible or not, for the death and murder of LB and was it premeditated or happenstance... and if found guilty , send him to prison for life , unless they were absolutely sure beyond all reasonable doubt. Because the tiniest bit of doubt in your mind and you cannot convict .
That is the adversarial system that we currently have in the UK .

Edited to add : Do the prosecution know where LB was murdered ? The murder site as opposed to the deposition site ? And can RM be tied to these by forensic evidence?

All the best in your recovery. I think I'll have to respectfully disagree with -

circumstantial evidence on its own, unsupported by other actual tangible evidence, is not enough beyond all reasonable doubt.
​

- People are convicted every day of the week on purely circumstantial evidence. It gets a bad rap, but circumstantial evidence can be very compelling. I'm not expecting you to read up on other cases, but this is from the Judge's summing up in the Sarah Wellgreen trial (no body, no blood, just circumstantial evidence) -

Judge Kinch describes it as a “circumstantial case which relies on circumstantial evidence”. In other words, the prosecution claim “the variety of fact that proves the case can’t be explained as coincidence”.
​

Live updates as Sarah Wellgreen's ex-partner goes on trial accused of her murder

 

[LancashireLad]

Does anybody know if the ex-husband Tim has been in the public gallery with his children or is being called as a witness?

 

[SpursGyal]

That’s the issue
It is a good piece of circumstantial evidence but circumstantial evidence on its own, unsupported by other actual tangible evidence, is not enough beyond all reasonable doubt.
One of the first no body ‘ cases was Helen McCourt murdered by pub landlord Ian Griffin I think his name was. Lots of circumstantial evidence and no body found , even to this day and Helen disappeared in 1988. But, and this is the important part, there was evidence , tangible evidence, found that tied him to her in that one of her earnings with her dna was found in his bed and there was blood at the scene that tied them both together.
Please let me know if I am wrong because as I say, I haven’t been following due to being hospitalised but unless there’s evidence of him actually committing the murder or him having the time to do so and the wherewithal to do so then it’s tricky . Yes he’s put himself in possession of LBs body , but does that mean that it can be proved beyond all reasonable doubt that he was the one who killed her ?
Genuine questions here :
1. Was he found in possession of the murder weapon
2. Do his clothes /shoes have LBs blood on them and if so, can the forensics show the blood to be indicative of him being involved in the act of murder ?
3. If strangulation took place , did LB fight back and scratch the offenders face neck etc ? And if he is the offender, did he have scratches on him ? Did LB have the skin cells of the offender underneath her own nails where she tried to fight back and scratched him whilst being strangled.?
4. Is there any DNA that matches RM found inside LBs body that can’t be explained away other than the obvious?
So what I am saying is that yes it’s very strong circumstantial evidence being found in possession of LBs deceased body , but can it be proven that he in fact had the means , motive and opportunity to kill LB or was he just moving the body on behalf of another?
I certainly wouldn’t want to be on that jury making a decision as to wether a 16 year old lad, is responsible or not, for the death and murder of LB and was it premeditated or happenstance... and if found guilty , send him to prison for life , unless they were absolutely sure beyond all reasonable doubt. Because the tiniest bit of doubt in your mind and you cannot convict .
That is the adversarial system that we currently have in the UK .

Edited to add : Do the prosecution know where LB was murdered ? The murder site as opposed to the deposition site ? And can RM be tied to these by forensic evidence?

1) No. cause of death is neck injury, pathologist can’t determine exactly, she seems consistent Foot/knee to the neck.

a knife has been recovered with soil the same as with her body, only knife wound to her is the attempted dismemberment of her leg.

2) So far, we only have the glove that has her blood on the outside and his DNA inside.

3 and 4) No, not yet anyway.

 

[SpursGyal]

Does anybody know if the ex-husband Tim has been in the public gallery with his children or is being called as a witness?

Someone was there Friday and said he wasn’t. I’m not sure on other days.

also, @Angleterre Prosecution haven’t been able to determine the murder site.

 

[MusicalMonkey]

Pink line is footpaths. The arrow I put is where I think the lady has seen the coat. From pink line with red dot to where coat was. Also the distance is not as far as it looks. All paths out lead to Burnley road.

I know this slopes down from Coppice to road side, but it seems to be around 200 metres from arrow to arrow.