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

[Rosegold68]

We are aware that the scene of Lindsay's murder is unknown. However, reading the defendant's statement again, he said "he (the invisible man) showed me where the body was". He also said "he told me he would leave the money for me where the body had been at first". Would this not be the murder scene?!

could of been killed somewhere else then been shown where they left the body for him to “get rid of”[/QUOTE]

this is what i was alluding to earlier when i said Lindsay hadn't been seen (alive) on the coppice. The soil from the coppice found with her body could be from the secondary site

 

[Ann Blyth]

We are aware that the scene of Lindsay's murder is unknown. However, reading the defendant's statement again, he said "he (the invisible man) showed me where the body was". He also said "he told me he would leave the money for me where the body had been at first". Would this not be the murder scene?!

could of been killed somewhere else then been shown where they left the body for him to “get rid of”[/QUOTE]
We all see. To be thinking about this aspect at exactly the same time!

 

[Ann Blyth]

We are aware that the scene of Lindsay's murder is unknown. However, reading the defendant's statement again, he said "he (the invisible man) showed me where the body was". He also said "he told me he would leave the money for me where the body had been at first". Would this not be the murder scene?!

could of been killed somewhere else then been shown where they left the body for him to “get rid of”[/QUOTE]
We all see. To be thinking about this aspect at exactly the same time!

We are aware that the scene of Lindsay's murder is unknown. However, reading the defendant's statement again, he said "he (the invisible man) showed me where the body was". He also said "he told me he would leave the money for me where the body had been at first". Would this not be the murder scene?!

Possibly was the murder scene, but the defendant, despite having a quite, IME lengthy pre prepared statement, has not given up where he had to collect the body from nor where he was to pick up his cash afterwards. He hasn’t even told his defence team, possibly protecting someone?

 

[Alyce]

So, at the very least, the defendant has to have known where he collected the body from - even if, as Sunflower says, this was not the actual murder site - because he had to return there to collect his large payoff, as soon as everything was clear.

But, then again, we were told he has no understanding of the value of money , so perhaps he didn't bother to make a note of where the payment would be left for him.

 

[Rosegold68]

does he not want his cash then? if not, then why do it?

 

[Ann Blyth]

does he not want his cash then? if not, then why do it?

I believe that this is what he was told to say and stick to.

 

[Kaykedi]

I found these 3 words interesting. Why the need to qualify ? Or is this his solicitor's wording ?


Taking it to the cemetery on Burnley Road where I buried it on my own.

I too have thought over those words Alyce, and, we both know exactly what they mean! IF they're not solely his solicitor's words of course ... Have you ever seen any videos featuring Peter Hyatt? He's a Statement Analysis Expert. In this instance, what he would say when the defendant states, "I have not met this man before. I have not met him since nor have I had any contact with him" is, 'I have met this man before. I have met him since and I have had contact with him"

 

[PiggyStardust]

Though 'damp knees' could just be explained away by 'handling the body - which of course 'he' has admitted to (as 'he' had no way out of that one).

Indeed MM "handling the body" could be an explanation.
IMHO: Moving the body, man-handling the body into the wheelie bin and concealing the body would be mighty difficult on his knees.
Wet knees maybe from hiding in the bushes, yes or in commission of the dastardly crime and the damage to Lindsay's throat and neck as described in court.

 

[Ann Blyth]

I too have thought over those words Alyce, and, we both know exactly what they mean! IF they're not solely his solicitor's words of course ... Have you ever seen any videos featuring Peter Hyatt? He's a Statement Analysis Expert. In this instance, what he would say when the defendant states, "I have not met this man before. I have not met him since nor have I had any contact with him" is, 'I have met this man before. I have met him since and I have had contact with him"

Agreed, I am thinking the same way also he is not saying where he had to collect the body from nor where to collect his cash, because he has been told exactly what to say, and he has almost rote learned it, because why would he not make it public where the body was? He hasn’t at all, even in his pre prepared statement. He gets nothing for keeping the collection site quiet, he has no reason to IF HE DID NOT KNOW THE MURDERER, therefore, it’s a reasonable assumption to say that HE KNOWS THE MURDERER, the so called hooded man.

 

[Spender]

The more I read about the case the more I think RM will be back in the comfort of his parents trailer some time soon unless they can try him for unlawful burial etc.....murder just isn’t going to stick with what has been reported.....just my opinion.

 

[Angleterre]

The first prosecution witness today is Zoe Braithwaite.
She is giving evidence in the witness box from behind a screen.
Her Honour Mrs Justice Yip has told the jury that it is no reflection on the witness or the defendant and it is to put the witness at ease.

Zoe Braithwaite on CCTV heading towards the Coppice
Zoe Braithwaite is being asked about events on August 12, 2019 - the day of Lindsay Birbeck’s disappearance.
The jury is being shown CCTV of the witness on Elmwood Close walking towards the Coppice in Accrington at 3.44pm and then walking back at around 4.04pm near to the Peel Park Hotel.

Zoe Braithwaite said: “I looked to my left and saw a lone male figure on a a path that runs parallel to the path that I’m on. “There was a lot of foliage. I didn’t have a clear view of him at that point.”

Zoe Braithwaite told the jury that as the paths got closer together she had a clearer view of the male.

The jury heard that she could see him at a distance of 15m through the trees.

She described the male from a side view as between 20 and 25 years old, around 6ft to 6ft 2ins, of slim build and that he had his hands in his pocket.
She said: “I decided whatever route he went I would take another route.
“From the first time I saw him I was wary of him.
“He looked out of place in the woods.
“He was in front of me. He was walking very slowly.
“I didn’t want to be in front of him.
“I wanted to be able to see him at all times. I slowed down so I could be behind him
Zoe Braithwaite told the jury that at one point the male was about 120m away.

She said he then joined her path and was about 50m away and ‘pulled up as if he had been running’.
She said: “That’s when I became concerned. I picked up my pace and down the descent as quickly as I could.
“I didn’t look back again. I just daren’t. I never saw him again.


Zoe Braithwaite said there was a ‘mass search’ at the Coppice on August 19 and she went there hoping to find a police officer but couldn’t.
She then contacted 101 but couldn’t get through because it was busy.
Mrs Braithwaite told the jury that she then started to fill in a form on the Lancashire Constabulary website but her session ‘timed out’.
The next day (August 20) she completed the website form and included a ‘basic description of what I could see’.


Zoe Braithwaite is now being cross examined by defence barrister Mark Fenhalls QC.
The witness said the closest she got to the male on the Coppice was 3m (10ft) and the furthest away was around 150ft.

Mr Fernhall then refers the jury to her statement where she describes her eye sight.
Mrs Braithwaite said she wears varifocal glasses for driving.
In her statement, she said: “My sight from anything beyond 15ft can be affected if I don’t wear my glasses.
“I’m not sure I did have them on that day.”


Defence barrister Mr Fenhalls then asks Mrs Braithwaite about the part on the police form where she was asked if she ‘felt vulnerable’.
Mrs Braithwaite replied on the form saying “don’t know”.
The witness then explains she did not feel vulnerable at the time filling out the form on August 20.


Zoe Braithwaite is asked about her description of the male as 20 to 25 years old and between 6ft and 6ft 2ins.
Mr Fenhalls said: “What was it about the figure that made you think he was 20 to 25?”
She replied: “His height, the way he was dressed.”

Police visited Mrs Braithwaite on August 27, 2019 to have a face to face conversation.

The jury were told that in her statement she said the male’s trainers had an ‘upside down V’ and were blue

Defence barrister Mr Fenhalls refers Zoe Braithwaite to her earlier description to the jury of the male ‘pulling up as if he had been running’.
This was from the time when he was around 120m away to around 50m away on the Coppice path.
He then refers to her police statement where she says: “So while I can’t say what his original pace was at that point, what I can say for sure is that as I turned my head to glance at him he pulled up short, almost startled when I turned to look.”

When asked about the difference in her description and no mention of the male running in her statement, Mrs Braithwaite said: “He pulled up as if he had been running. He couldn’t have covered that ground unless he had run.”

Mr Fenhalls asked if she then saw anyone else apart from ‘two Asian lads’ and she said ‘no’.
Zoe Braithwaite said she did not see anybody else on the Coppice apart from the male.

When asked by the prosecutor about her pace during the latter part of the walk, she said ‘really fast’.

The evidence from the witness and cross-examination has now ended.

Thank you
I appreciate that x

 

[Ann Blyth]

To be fair, since the pre prepared statement given to the police before he was charged, he has said nothing at all, and I believe he will not take the stand, he’s been told to keep quiet, he will not be giving live evidence, and with this messy case, he doesn’t need to.

 

[Spender]

Indeed MM "handling the body" could be an explanation.
IMHO: Moving the body, man-handling the body into the wheelie bin and concealing the body would be mighty difficult on his knees.
Wet knees maybe from hiding in the bushes, yes or in commission of the dastardly crime and the damage to Lindsay's throat and neck as described in court.

Well if you’ve ever tried putting a heavy awkward item in a wheelie bin then you will know it tries to tip over or run away from you , so I would think putting LB inside would have probably been easier if the bin was laid down hence RM having wet knees.....assuming he put her in there himself......just a thought .

 

[Kaykedi]

The more I read about the case the more I think RM will be back in the comfort of his parents trailer some time soon unless they can try him for unlawful burial etc.....murder just isn’t going to stick with what has been reported.....just my opinion.

Yes Spender, and, just 2 miles from my home to his!

 

[Angleterre]

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.

I am sorry to hear about your brother and I hope that you got justice for him when you went to court . That is one thing that needs to change about the court process and that is how families of the victim are made to sit near and share space with the family of the accused. It’s not right and should have been addressed years ago IMOO

 

[Spender]

Yes Spender, and, just 2 miles from my home to his!

Not sure I’d want him this close to my family knowing what he has admitted to in his statement.

 

[Roostercat]

I

It was 4.30 pm for the coat sighting - but I agree, still very short window.

Someone said earlier ( may have been you Roostercat, apologies cant find it again in the thread ) that going up to The Coppice by using the cut through between Whitakers and the Funeral Directors would likely be quite muddy on that day ( due to earlier rain ) and not the ideal option. Based on that and the cctv reports from Peel Park Ave ( or lack of ) then it is quite likely, imo, that LB did go up Peel Park Ave.
In which case and if she went through to the Coppice via the car park, then she would literally have missed ZB by a minute or so.

Yes was me, i thought it would not have been an option for me due to the mud but everything I read seemed to infer that she went up that path and I incorrectly assumed the cctv on peel park Ave would have picked her up clearly not as it wasn't working. Now I have no idea and I am not sure I can rule out the possibility of her getting into a car either! I have lost the plot with it. 80 to 100 cars in a 2 hour period, there aren't that many houses up there but clearly alot of traffic, so maybe many dog walkers.

 

[PiggyStardust]

Well if you’ve ever tried putting a heavy awkward item in a wheelie bin then you will know it tries to tip over or run away from you , so I would think putting LB inside would have probably been easier if the bin was laid down hence RM having wet knees.....assuming he put her in there himself......just a thought .

The bin looks pretty clean from the photos, if it had lain on it's side and had any heavy awkward object shoved into it there would be scuff marks, muck and debris on the outside and would help forensics to match soil samples n stuff to identify the murder location. Even if the perp, used a tree trunk or fencepost as a back stop there would be bark or wood scuffs to the same end surely?

 

[Rosegold68]

its sounding like theres still a murderer out there, which is in itself, really worrying!!

still no clear motive though.

 

[Mind your biscuits]

.

The more I read about the case the more I think RM will be back in the comfort of his parents trailer some time soon unless they can try him for unlawful burial etc.....murder just isn’t going to stick with what has been reported.....just my opinion.

I agree, I've placed him on my 'most likely to re-offend list' too. Moo.