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

[Bampot]

Maybe I'm wrong but I think the responsibility of the juror is to decide if you think he is guilty or not guilty. Believing they are guilty but not returning a guilty verdict doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Maybe I'm wrong but I think the responsibility of the juror is to decide if you think he is guilty or not guilty. Believing they are guilty but not returning a guilty verdict doesn't make any sense to me.

I suppose mega logical people might look for 100% proof of guilt and might often struggle to find that. I think the judge's summing up in this case (if that's the right term) will be really interesting and could guide the jury if they have this dilemma?

 

[Alyce]

I suppose mega logical people might look for 100% proof of guilt and might often struggle to find that. I think the judge's summing up in this case (if that's the right term) will be really interesting and could guide the jury if they have this dilemma?

I agree. Judge will be possibly more important than usual in this case.

 

[Alyce]

Maybe I'm wrong but I think the responsibility of the juror is to decide if you think he is guilty or not guilty. Believing they are guilty but not returning a guilty verdict doesn't make any sense to me.

I get what you're saying and yes, if they believe he is guilty, based on the evidence they have heard, then they have to go with a guilty verdict.
Can only speak for myself, obv , but whilst I have had thoughts in my head that yes, he might have done it, I need to have something in the evidence that convinces me beyond reasonable doubt and, so far, I have not heard that.

 

[Tortoise]

I've created a poll thread so that people can vote as they would if they were on the jury.

Votes can be changed if you hear more evidence that changes your mind this week. It's open for 7 days.

POLL - UK - Lindsay Birbeck trial verdict

 

[Dcflag]

It's interesting. I truly, wholeheartedly, 1000% believe he did it, and alone. I really do. But as a jury member? I don't think there's enough to prove he acted alone beyond a reasonable doubt. What would really clinch it is whether you believe there's a second person, and whether you believe he really could just be moving the body for someone else. Logic dictates if you're moving the body, you killed the person but within the law, is that enough for you to convict someone?

I don't know that I'd be able to vote for a guilty verdict despite my own belief he deserves one. If he were going to go to prison anyway for his part in moving her body, it might make it a little easier to accept a not guilty verdict. If he were going to walk free I'd be far more inclined to push for guilty.

Suppose id make a terrible juror but as jurors are deciding based on the evidence provided within the trial, I don't know how in good conscience you could be 100% certain he was responsible when there is that small element of doubt. Hard one.

 

[J4k]

I just don't buy his "hooded man" story. As a juror he'd have to make me believe that with providing more details.

So take that away and he's the only one with linked with Witnesses, CCTV & DNA to this tragic case.
JMO

 

[MusicalMonkey]

It's interesting. I truly, wholeheartedly, 1000% believe he did it, and alone. I really do. But as a jury member? I don't think there's enough to prove he acted alone beyond a reasonable doubt. What would really clinch it is whether you believe there's a second person, and whether you believe he really could just be moving the body for someone else. Logic dictates if you're moving the body, you killed the person but within the law, is that enough for you to convict someone?

I don't know that I'd be able to vote for a guilty verdict despite my own belief he deserves one. If he were going to go to prison anyway for his part in moving her body, it might make it a little easier to accept a not guilty verdict. If he were going to walk free I'd be far more inclined to push for guilty.

Suppose id make a terrible juror but as jurors are deciding based on the evidence provided within the trial, I don't know how in good conscience you could be 100% certain he was responsible when there is that small element of doubt. Hard one.

I don't think there's a sane person alive that would believe 'The Hooded Man' so the 'defence' is obviously lying.

At the same time. The murder evidence as far as we can tell (and it's worth noting we aren't in court so don't get the full facts or a sense of how things might be being said) isn't convincing at all.

It must be difficult for the jury. Imagine being in that same situation as you describe.
You think the defendant has done it, but don't think there's enough evidence to convict.

So basically you're left making the decision to set a murderer free, and no less one that is *highly likely to reoffend.

*Whatever it was (mental imbalance etc.) that caused him to attack a stranger at random is unlikely to go away as opposed to a motive based attack.

 

[MissUnderstood]

Add my vote to defendant

Thanks for cleaning it up Tortoise.

I can't quite believe that nobody thinks it's The Hooded Man. Don't you guys believe in Father Christmas either?

Websleuth Jury so far:

The Defendant: 19
Known Associate: 6
Defendant & Known Associate: 2

 

[JosieJo]

To convict as a juror I'm short of just one thing to link him to the killing
Could be
Intimate DNA
Internet searches pre killing
Witnesses to tendency to violence or knew of thoughts of crime / abnormal behaviour

The prosecution can not even demonstrate a crime scene or motive as yet

I do think it's very likely he did this alone ..but so far I could not be sure
Yes I would be worried about him going back into the community...but I would also worry that a vulnerable "child" almost had made up the story of hooded man in fear of repercussions from someone known to him

 

[Roostercat]

Judge apologies to Lindsay Birbeck murder trial jurors

 

[Smccat]

Judge apologies to Lindsay Birbeck murder trial jurors

Never known such a disjointed trial - It’s like they are having to pad it out and are struggling at that. Must be so hard for the jury members to get into it the way it’s been this week.

 

[Roostercat]

I agree, and I think we (even i) have been hung up on her death being very quick after she left the house. But this is based on a message received and not read. I'm sure if you're being sexually assaulted before murdered you're still not going to be reading or replying to WhatsApps. There is every possibility he sexually assaulted her before killing her.

I am sure when she went missing there was a lot of talk about her phone, I can't find where it is (it might have been on the search LB FB group), I am sure it was mentioned that her phone last recieved a signal at 3.48. Many people couldn't understand why if it had no charge she took it with her. It was a massive discussion point. It was reported during trial. that she sent a message at 3.41

 

[Legally Bland]

I am sure when she went missing there was a lot of talk about her phone, I can't find where it is (it might have been on the search LB FB group), I am sure it was mentioned that her phone last recieved a signal at 3.48. Many people couldn't understand why if it had no charge she took it with her. It was a massive discussion point. It was reported during trial. that she sent a message at 3.41

Ms Birbeck's friend Sharon Griffiths sent her a WhatsApp message at 4.30pm, which was received but never opened.
Teen 'murdered woman and moved her body to cemetery in wheelie bin', court hears

I don't use whatsapp so not sure, but I'm assuming that a data connection would be needed to receive the message.

 

[Niner]

Hopefully we will get a new thread before trial tomorrow....

 

[Kaykedi]

aykediWell-Known Member
Regarding the 'inability' to locate the scene of Lindsay's murder, would anyone on here be able/be prepared to guestimate the following : if Lindsay left home at 4.06pm, walked up Peel Park Avenue towards the coppice, and, the defendant left the vicinity of the Peel Park Hotel, Peel Park Close at, say 4.04pm, what time, or, place would they be likely to 'meet'? Det Sgt Bowler said "there is no cctv Lindsay Birbeck on Burnley Road in Accrington beyond the junction with Peel Park Avenue".

 

[sunflower22]

aykediWell-Known Member
Regarding the 'inability' to locate the scene of Lindsay's murder, would anyone on here be able/be prepared to guestimate the following : if Lindsay left home at 4.06pm, walked up Peel Park Avenue towards the coppice, and, the defendant left the vicinity of the Peel Park Hotel, Peel Park Close at, say 4.04pm, what time, or, place would they be likely to 'meet'? Det Sgt Bowler said "there is no cctv Lindsay Birbeck on Burnley Road in Accrington beyond the junction with Peel Park Avenue".

Top of Peel Park Avenue there is a path that leads to the coppice also a path that leads to the peel park pub, I’d say it would of taken her 4/5 min from her home to reach this area.

 

[Roostercat]

6 to 7 minutes from cctv point to top of peel park Ave. Here the road forks, right goes into a path that leads to hotel. The road to left is a steep ascent towards the coppice car park, goes into a hair pin bend, with a narrow track heading of to the left from the hair pin that then leads to the back of WA. I don't know how to mark on a map. If defendant was in this area they would have met at approx 4.12. I wouldn't say this part is really isolated though quite ballsy of him if they met on this road.

 

[Roostercat]

Top of Peel Park Avenue there is a path that leads to the coppice also a path that leads to the peel park pub, I’d say it would of taken her 4/5 min from her home to reach this area.

You could be right, 7 mins tops if slow. I will walk and time tomorrow and try to get photos to upload!

 

[sunflower22]

You could be right, 7 mins tops if slow. I will walk and time tomorrow and try to get photos to upload!

We walked around the coppice yesterday, we seen so many people out with dogs it’s just surprising that no one seen anything, the dog walkers must of just missed her literally.