UK UK - Melanie Hall, 25, Bath, Somerset, 9 June 1996

[Dotta]

I find these words interesting

"Detectives now believe
the key to unlocking the case could lie in uncovering the links
the killer had to the location where she was found.

'Despite the passing of nearly 30 years since the disappearance and murder of our daughter Melanie,
we remain totally committed to finding her killer.

It is our belief
that more than one person may have knowledge of what happened to Melanie'."

'Our daughter was murdered - someone close to killer can give us justice'

The dad, mum and sister of Melanie Hall suspect more than one person may know what happened to her and are begging: 'Please come forward and help us solve this case'

www.mirror.co.uk

 

[Professor Moriarty]

I am very sceptical of what the police say, years later, in such cases. The time to catch the killer was when Melanie disappeared. In this case the discovery of the body, so many years later, makes very little difference. The killer might be dead by now. The idea that "someone must know" who did it is weak. If someone did know, that person could also be dead now. If someone provides a name, what evidence against that named person can the police establish now? They will have the testimony of the informant, but, if the killer doesn't confess and denies everything, will that be enough? Can the police prove he did it?

Some cold cases do get solved, often because of DNA or a fingerprint. I hope this murder gets solved. But the best time to solve a murder is usually soon after it occurs.

 

[Dotta]

I am very sceptical of what the police say, years later, in such cases. The time to catch the killer was when Melanie disappeared. In this case the discovery of the body, so many years later, makes very little difference. The killer might be dead by now. The idea that "someone must know" who did it is weak. If someone did know, that person could also be dead now. If someone provides a name, what evidence against that named person can the police establish now? They will have the testimony of the informant, but, if the killer doesn't confess and denies everything, will that be enough? Can the police prove he did it?

Some cold cases do get solved, often because of DNA or a fingerprint. I hope this murder gets solved. But the best time to solve a murder is usually soon after it occurs.

There is partial DNA
(whatever that means)
on both the rope and bags.

According to reports.

 

[tes1984]

I am very sceptical of what the police say, years later, in such cases. Some cold cases do get solved, often because of DNA or a fingerprint. I hope this murder gets solved. But the best time to solve a murder is usually soon after it occurs.

I agree, but look at the Carol Morgan murder. The prime suspect (her husband) was convicted fairly recently after a historic witness came forward. Other than that witness, the case seems to have been entirely circumstantial, yet one new witness was enough to convince the CPS and then a jury.

 

[tes1984]

In 2014 the police case against a 45 year old man from Bath was rejected by the CPS.

The man would have been 26/27 when Melanie was murdered.

Presumably he is one of the 15 or so suspects being looked at by the current investigators.

 

[tes1984]

I find these words interesting

"Detectives now believe
the key to unlocking the case could lie in uncovering the links
the killer had to the location where she was found.

This wouldn't be one of my main lines of enquiry. Every day thousands of people will have driven close to where Melanie was found.

The killer could have gone to the slip road with the planned intention of dumping Melanie there, but he could just as easily have dumped her body there in a panic.