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

[MusicalMonkey]

he's the perfect disguise isn't he?

if someone truly wanted to commit this crime and cover it up, who better for a scapegoat than this lad?

its all so messy

What could possibly be a motive for that though?

Also, there's no evidence of 'an accomplish' entering or exiting the Coppice at any time.
The only thing that could possibly point to that is the 'man' that witness Zoe Braithwaite saw - but again, there are no sightings of this person on any CCTV anywhere. The likelihood is that it was the defendant.

 

[sunflower22]

I understand that family members need to be accommodated. But it seems like it's a Public Gallery where no members of the public can attend.

Well I thought the same, not sure how much seating there was put i would say only 15 people went in today that was family. No room for only 4 members of the public

 

[SpursGyal]

so....how have the police failed to find the murder scene? thoughts?

I think that may be down to the area. Her cause of death, means he may not have caused any wounds. So no blood pools to be found.

In the 2 weeks between her death and her being found, you have the weather to contend with, and multiple large public search groups, small groups and individuals walking all over the potential site. I’m not surprised they haven’t found it.

 

[Loulou38]

Well.. my brother was murdered and at Preston court my family was put with the defendants family in the gallery, there was like 5 benches or summat.. not much tbh!! We was in court one too

 

[Ann Blyth]

We

Well.. my brother was murdered and at Preston court my family was put with the defendants family in the gallery, there was like 5 benches or summat.. not much tbh!! We was in court one too

Welcome Loulou and my condolences for your loss and for what you have been through, especially in court.

 

[Loulou38]

Thank you, was quite a few years ago now but remember that court well, I still think it's strange they put opposite sides together in the gallery.. I have read all the comments on here and some excellent views of the case.

 

[Bampot]

I'm from the area, I'm new btw to this thread and it's all confusing.. I've reported what I've been told to the police by people who know stuff but nothing was done I don't think. I can't help but think he hasn't acted alone.

Is there anything that makes you think the police didn't follow up the info you were told? I suppose they can't follow up absolutely everything. But as you said if it came from people that know stuff, you'd think they would...

 

[MusicalMonkey]

*Please feel free to point out anything major I may have missed.

What is the main evidence so far?

Forensic:

DNA of defendant and victim on glove(s) found near the burial site.
DNA of victim inside the blue wheelie bin.

CCTV of Defendant with bin.

This of course links the defendant with the body of the victim. Though 'he' has already admitted to moving and burying the body.
So what do we have that could link him to the actual murder (circumstantial or otherwise)?:

And as we all know there is no murder scene, so no DNA evidence from that. There is also no DNA evidence that could link an alive Lindsay to the defendant (DNA under fingernails etc).

Digital Forensics: Nothing

Seemingly his phone was disposed of.

(*I am of course presuming he had/used a phone. If not then he could quite probably be one of the only 16 year olds in the UK that doesn't have one.
I heard that he had Facebook - which would imply that he wasn't a 'technical recluse').

Eye witnesses:

Possible sighting of the defendant 'stalking' (by Zoe Braithwaite) at around the time of the victim's disappearance (and in the same area).
Though the defence has already made her account out to be 'unclear' - Vague description and also they called into question the eyesight of the witness and doubt over whether she had her glasses.

'Character' witnesses:

The only thing going in the prosecution's favour is something about the defendant 'not valuing money' by a couple of former school teachers.
And someone from the gym inferring that he 'appeared stronger than he looks'.

All very flimsy stuff.

So I think the only other thing that is against the defendant is the obviously made up story about a 'strange hooded man' and the fact that for some reason the defendant who doesn't suffer from some kind of bizarre goldfish memory syndrome seemingly cannot remember or refuses to say where exactly he met the hooded man and also in what way the hooded man showed him where the body was.

Is this enough to convict for murder? I would say 'no'.

My theory is that The defendant did kill Lindsay Birkbeck on his own and that he has had help from friends and/or family members to concoct a story and possibly even get rid of possible evidence (phone?). They had a massive 15 days from the time of the murder (12th August) until arrest (27th August).
(Why didn't 'he' dispose of the clothes? - Well he was seen on CCTV with those clothes on - finding the same clothes at his home still fits in with the story. To get rid of them would at least imply they were trying to hide something and of course go against the 'I'm so naive I don't know what I'm doing' story).
Also, as some others have pointed out. How has a guy who can supposedly only say 'yes' and 'no' and nod come up with his own story about a hooded man? That has come from somewhere, right? And it's my understanding that a defence solicitor can't legally make up a story on behalf of a client.

The story about a stranger is ridiculous in the extreme. I also don't think Lindsay was killed by another person (or both). Though more plausible than the 'stranger story', there is still the issue with this supposed accomplish vanishing into thin air. Why is there no trace of the '2nd person' especially when the defendant (and also other possible suspects that were subsequently eliminated from the enquiry) were caught on CCTV?
For those that think another person was involved in the actual murder? What is your theory regarding this?

* Just to clarify from someone that knows the law. If the only charge is murder and he's found not guilty. Will he walk free?
Even though he has obviously moved and disposed of a dead body, that isn't on the charge sheet as far as I'm aware. Thanks.

 

[SpursGyal]

* Just to clarify from someone that knows the law. If the only charge is murder and he's found not guilty. Will he walk free?
Even though he has obviously moved and disposed of a dead body, that isn't on the charge sheet as far as I'm aware.

SBM.

I’ve been looking at this, because that’s what concerned me. It appears that if he is found not guilty, and the judge doesn’t instruct the jury they can consider manslaughter, or if indeed she does and again is not guilty, then yes. He walks free.

Error by the prosecution I feel, especially if they do not have anything concrete up their sleeve.

 

[Ann Blyth]

*Please feel free to point out anything major I may have missed.

What is the main evidence so far?

Forensic:

DNA of defendant and victim on glove(s) found near the burial site.
DNA of victim inside the blue wheelie bin.

CCTV of Defendant with bin.

This of course links the defendant with the body of the victim. Though 'he' has already admitted to moving and burying the body.
So what do we have that could link him to the actual murder (circumstantial or otherwise)?:

And as we all know there is no murder scene, so no DNA evidence from that. There is also no DNA evidence that could link an alive Lindsay to the defendant (DNA under fingernails etc).

Digital Forensics: Nothing

Seemingly his phone was disposed of.

(*I am of course presuming he had/used a phone. If not then he could quite probably be one of the only 16 year olds in the UK that doesn't have one.
I heard that he had Facebook - which would imply that he wasn't a 'technical recluse').

Eye witnesses:

Possible sighting of the defendant 'stalking' (by Zoe Braithwaite) at around the time of the victim's disappearance (and in the same area).
Though the defence has already made her account out to be 'unclear' - Vague description and also they called into question the eyesight of the witness and doubt over whether she had her glasses.

'Character' witnesses:

The only thing going in the prosecution's favour is something about the defendant 'not valuing money' by a couple of former school teachers.
And someone from the gym inferring that he 'appeared stronger than he looks'.

All very flimsy stuff.

So I think the only other thing that is against the defendant is the obviously made up story about a 'strange hooded man' and the fact that for some reason the defendant who doesn't suffer from some kind of bizarre goldfish memory syndrome seemingly cannot remember or refuses to say where exactly he met the hooded man and also in what way the hooded man showed him where the body was.

Is this enough to convict for murder? I would say 'no'.

My theory is that The defendant did kill Lindsay Birkbeck on his own and that he has had help from friends and/or family members to concoct a story and possibly even get rid of possible evidence (phone?). They had a massive 15 days from the time of the murder (12th August) until arrest (27th August).
(Why didn't 'he' dispose of the clothes? - Well he was seen on CCTV with those clothes on - finding the same clothes at his home still fits in with the story. To get rid of them would at least imply they were trying to hide something and of course go against the 'I'm so naive I don't know what I'm doing' story).
Also, as some others have pointed out. How has a guy who can supposedly only say 'yes' and 'no' and nod come up with his own story about a hooded man? That has come from somewhere, right? And it's my understanding that a defence solicitor can't legally make up a story on behalf of a client.

The story about a stranger is ridiculous in the extreme. I also don't think Lindsay was killed by another person (or both). Though more plausible than the 'stranger story', there is still the issue with this supposed accomplish vanishing into thin air. Why is there no trace of the '2nd person' especially when the defendant (and also other possible suspects that were subsequently eliminated from the enquiry) were caught on CCTV?
For those that think another person was involved in the actual murder? What is your theory regarding this?

* Just to clarify from someone that knows the law. If the only charge is murder and he's found not guilty. Will he walk free?
Even though he has obviously moved and disposed of a dead body, that isn't on the charge sheet as far as I'm aware. Thanks.

If he is found not guilty to murder, he will walk free, as that is the only charge on the indictment. If the prosecution offer other lesser charges, such as unlawful burial, to the defence and jury, he will be found guilty on that charge, there is still time to offer an alternative, but it’s usually at the beginning of a trial, if at all.

 

[MusicalMonkey]

If he is found not guilty to murder, he will walk free, as that is the only charge on the indictment. If the prosecution offer other lesser charges, such as unlawful burial, to the defence and jury, he will be found guilty on that charge, there is still time to offer an alternative, but it’s usually at the beginning of a trial, if at all.

Can a prosecution come back at a later date with lesser charges in a different trial or will that be it?

I'm just trying to get my head around the fact that it's been proved beyond doubt that someone has at the very least disposed of a dead body but that will somehow be overlooked.

Especially in a society where you can go to prison for 'writing a naughty comment on social media' . . . . It just seems, well... crazy to be honest.

 

[Ann Blyth]

As far as I know, that’ll be it, I can only assume that the prosecution were sure they would get a conviction on the evidence they had for murder, they could have added unlawful burial / disposal when they charged him for the murder, as that is what he has admitted in his pre prepared statement, and indeed, what his defence is.

 

[Ann Blyth]

SBM.

I’ve been looking at this, because that’s what concerned me. It appears that if he is found not guilty, and the judge doesn’t instruct the jury they can consider manslaughter, or if indeed she does and again is not guilty, then yes. He walks free.

Error by the prosecution I feel, especially if they do not have anything concrete up their sleeve.

Completely agree as to error, not sure the judge or prosecution will offer manslaughter as his defence only really relates to unlawful burial, I.e. the actual deed of killing was nothing to do with him at all, it would be pointless to offer manslaughter in that case, but who knows? If convos were to happen behind closed doors between the parties concerned, which we are not privy to, maybe a manslaughter charge could be offered, but in the evidence thus far, looking doubtful.

 

[Mommysleuth11]

I think it will be useful if/when we find out exactly what lengths the police went to in ruling out any third party involvement. They knew his story pretty early on and given we know they have a good deal of cctv (of witnesses and the accused) from different areas I, and im sure the Jury too would be incredibly interested to find out just how far they went to disprove the theory. MOO

 

[Tortoise]

I just had a look back to the first hearing in September and he was charged with body disposal. Given his prepared statement he has to have pleaded guilty to that charge, so imo he will be sentenced for it after the trial on the murder charge.

Found Deceased - UK - Lindsay Birbeck, 47, Accrington, 12 Aug 2019 *Arrest* #2

moo

 

[Jartykarate]

I cant help thinking there must be further evidence to come, i can't see how the CPS allowed this to be a murder charge when there doesn’t seem to be any evidence of the murder, that couldn’t be explained by the movement and burial of the body.

Unless it has been set up this way to bring a lesser charge nearer the end of the trial.

At this stage manslaughter cannot be an option as no murder evidence means no manslaughter evidence either.

 

[Mind your biscuits]

Thank you, was quite a few years ago now but remember that court well, I still think it's strange they put opposite sides together in the gallery.. I have read all the comments on here and some excellent views of the case.

Welcome, a case like this must be painful to follow.

 

[Loulou38]

Welcome, a case like this must be painful to follow.

Thank you, but no it's not hard to follow, would of been for some years after but not anymore. I do hope Lindsay's family get justice..

 

[Loulou38]

The person who killed my brother was 16 at the time too, he wouldn't plead guilty and wanted a manslaughter charge.. he changed lawyer because he was telling him to plead guilty but he wouldnt.. pretty sure he paid private too.. he still got a murder charge but only got 11 years, so I doubt very much he will get long, I think the jury will charge this lad with murder cause his fabricated story doesn't make sense/no proof of any other guy.

It doesn't make sense to move the body like he did, why not leave it where it was? I think hes defo had help and guidance whether or not he did. I think he was waiting for an open grave and would of put her in and covered her up with soil then someone would be buried on top then you'd never find the body again. Did they say he did I dry run? I think he was checking for open graves.

 

[Doris777]

The person who killed my brother was 16 at the time too, he wouldn't plead guilty and wanted a manslaughter charge.. he changed lawyer because he was telling him to plead guilty but he wouldnt.. pretty sure he paid private too.. he still got a murder charge but only got 11 years, so I doubt very much he will get long, I think the jury will charge this lad with murder cause his fabricated story doesn't make sense/no proof of any other guy.

It doesn't make sense to move the body like he did, why not leave it where it was? I think hes defo had help and guidance whether or not he did. I think he was waiting for an open grave and would of put her in and covered her up with soil then someone would be buried on top then you'd never find the body again. Did they say he did I dry run? I think he was checking for open graves.

I thought exactly the same thing about him looking for an open grave! Can u imagine... doesn't bare thinking about.

I just hope more is said and done today as it seems to be small bits of info then finish for the day. There not sitting tomorrow are they so they need to get stuff done today.

Like so many have said... nothing is pointing to murder at the minute...just moving a body.