GUILTY UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London, Clapham Common area, 3 Mar 2021 *Awaiting Sentencing*, #15

[Marantz4250b]

Perhaps I have watched too much line of duty, but I stated at the beginning there is a much bigger picture to this and I still believe this to be true. I think there was internal help for him to be where he was, I think blind eyes were turned because of his contacts and whilst I originally believed it to be to do with gang related and targets, his trafficking is on a similar vein. I think he pleaded guilty as he had no choice, if he didn't he would be gone before he could reveal a whole sordid story in court. I said it was far fetched, but that they were my first impressions and got told they were far fetched- however I still think I’m on the right lines. All the tripe about not doing enhanced checks etc for several years and that he flew through different departments as a middle aged mechanic, due to staff shortages is absolute ********

I certainly do not think that he benefitted from any "internal help" or "blind eye's" being turned. I don't see any evidence that he was involved with "trafficking" or that the police let that slide. Do you have evidence that he was? If so then please provide it.

The bottom line is that the Met messed up and didn't check him properly because of incompetence, quite frankly. They will be Royally hauled over the coals for same in due course. There is not some grand conspiracy of "high-ups" protecting sex criminals and paedophiles running the UK's major institutions. The entire notion is ludicrous, quite frankly.

 

[Marantz4250b]

Perhaps I have watched too much line of duty, but I stated at the beginning there is a much bigger picture to this and I still believe this to be true. I think there was internal help for him to be where he was, I think blind eyes were turned because of his contacts and whilst I originally believed it to be to do with gang related and targets, his trafficking is on a similar vein. I think he pleaded guilty as he had no choice, if he didn't he would be gone before he could reveal a whole sordid story in court. I said it was far fetched, but that they were my first impressions and got told they were far fetched- however I still think I’m on the right lines. All the tripe about not doing enhanced checks etc for several years and that he flew through different departments as a middle aged mechanic, due to staff shortages is absolute ********

I certainly do not think that he benefitted from any "internal help" or "blind eye's" being turned. I don't see any evidence that he was involved with "trafficking" or that the police let that slide. Do you have evidence that he was? If so then please provide it.

The bottom line is that the Met messed up and didn't check him properly because of incompetence, quite frankly. They will be Royally hauled over the coals for same in due course. There is not some grand conspiracy of "high-ups" protecting sex criminals and paedophiles running the UK's major institutions. The entire notion is ludicrous, quite frankly.

I know the vetting process and the wording used in the newspaper articles doesn’t ring true about we skipped vetting as we needed staff. Add to that all the people who are now coming out stating oh we thought he was odd, yes we knew he was doing things he shouldn’t be- again covering their backs. Plus his immediate guilty plea, after smashing his head against a wall to try and plead insanity- therefore avoiding any in depth investigation.

It in no way avoids any "in depth" investigation. If you think that then you haven't been following the media reports. It's fairly obvious that the delay until September for sentencing is due almost entirely to the fact that the investigation into what, specifically, he did is ongoing.

 

[Moll]

I know the vetting process and the wording used in the newspaper articles doesn’t ring true about we skipped vetting as we needed staff. Add to that all the people who are now coming out stating oh we thought he was odd, yes we knew he was doing things he shouldn’t be- again covering their backs. Plus his immediate guilty plea, after smashing his head against a wall to try and plead insanity- therefore avoiding any in depth investigation.

He didn't immediately make a guilty plea to murder, though, did he?

 

[Marantz4250b]

He didn't immediately make a guilty plea to murder, though, did he?

The court didn't immediately ask him for one! He was asked to plead to the kidnap and rape charges at a hearing prior to the one asking to plead to the murder charge.

 

[Moll]

The court didn't immediately ask him for one! He was asked to plead to the kidnap and rape charges at a hearing prior to the one asking to plead to the murder charge.

Yes, I know. I've re-posted extracts from the reports from that hearing on the previous page. But the previous poster can't say he made an immediate guilty plea.

 

[Ruthbullock]

Yes, I know. I've re-posted extracts from the reports from that hearing on the previous page. But the previous poster can't say he made an immediate guilty plea.

I didn’t say he made an immediate plea. Again make of that what you will.

 

[Gemmie]

I wonder what the blacked out bits say.

You could take a stab at this sentence : In terms of culpability, PC Couzens has ___________________________ committed the offences of kidnap, rape and murder.

It's hard to count the number of characters since some letters of the alphabet are thinner (l, i, etc.) while others are fatter (w, m, etc.) but I made a guesstimate of the number of letters using the letters and spaces in the sentence directly below the blacked out section.

I guesstimated ~27 characters (including spaces). The text on the line below that blacked out section is "ng has not gone into the de".

I guessed 'knowingly and willingly' but that's obviously wrong as that's only 23 characters and my (wrong) guess has 7 thin letters (i's & l's), while the section of the sentence below the blacked out text has only 1 thin letter. So.... my guess would need more letters if using a lot of thin ones... or more fat letters.

Did I lose anyone? LOL

 

[Dotta]

I admire your dedication

 

[Moll]

I didn’t say he made an immediate plea. Again make of that what you will.

Sorry. I evidently misunderstood this:
'Plus his immediate guilty plea, after smashing his head against a wall to try and plead insanity- therefore avoiding any in depth investigation.'

 

[Gemmie]

I admire your dedication

Hehehe

 

[Lola68]

I had to step away from this thread for a few days as it's not good for my anxiety, but something has been bothering me that I wanted to share (and apologies in advance if this has been noted already because I haven't been able to read every post).

Observations that have led to my potential theory:

1. WC regularly used sex workers.
2. There was a significant period of time between the end of WC's shift and SE's abduction.
3. We know that it wasn't a random or spur of the moment attack because of the evidence of pre-planning (hire car, protective film, timing of last shift before holiday, etc).
4. There are lots of vulnerable women in London - as LE, WC would know where to find one (if that's what he was looking for) and he wouldn't need to wait until it got dark.
5. There were two instances of him exposing himself in the days before SE's abduction. Do we know who reported him? Were they teenagers?
6. It's been mentioned in the media that SE did "all the right things" but it still wasn't enough to keep her safe (i.e. she phoned her boyfriend; was wearing a high vis jacket and flat shoes; was covered up/not wearing anything 'provocative'; was alert). NOTE: I do not support this misogynistic narrative of victim blaming - no woman deserves to be attacked regardless of what they are wearing etc - but it led me to consider -

Was WC looking for a particular type of woman? Was SE targeted specifically because she wasn't obviously vulnerable? Because she looked 'wholesome'?

All IMO

 

[Dotta]

I had to step away from this thread for a few days as it's not good for my anxiety, but something has been bothering me that I wanted to share (and apologies in advance if this has been noted already because I haven't been able to read every post).

Observations that have led to my potential theory:

1. WC regularly used sex workers.
2. There was a significant period of time between the end of WC's shift and SE's abduction.
3. We know that it wasn't a random or spur of the moment attack because of the evidence of pre-planning (hire car, protective film, timing of last shift before holiday, etc).
4. There are lots of vulnerable women in London - as LE, WC would know where to find one (if that's what he was looking for) and he wouldn't need to wait until it got dark.
5. There were two instances of him exposing himself in the days before SE's abduction. Do we know who reported him? Were they teenagers?
6. It's been mentioned in the media that SE did "all the right things" but it still wasn't enough to keep her safe (i.e. she phoned her boyfriend; was wearing a high vis jacket and flat shoes; was covered up/not wearing anything 'provocative'; was alert). NOTE: I do not support this misogynistic narrative of victim blaming - no woman deserves to be attacked regardless of what they are wearing etc - but it led me to consider -

Was WC looking for a particular type of woman? Was SE targeted specifically because she wasn't obviously vulnerable? Because she looked 'wholesome'?

All IMO

I think what mattered for him was that she was a young woman walking alone in what seemed a deserted street. He was desperate, cruising like a shark looking for a prey. And here came Sarah walking home. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Gemmie]

I think what mattered for him was that she was a young woman walking alone in what seemed a deserted street. He was desperate, cruising like a shark looking for a prey. And here came Sarah walking home. Nothing more, nothing less.

That's exactly what I thought. She had what he wanted, the opportunity arose, and he took it.

Except it didn't seem too deserted as it's a highly used road from what I've read. Maybe other single (alone) women walked by but too many cars were around so he waited for a better opportunity. Early on investigators were looking off the street and collecting stuff they found. Like around that parking garage and garbage area. They walked away with a lot of bagged things that may or may not have given them any concrete evidence. My thought was they may have thought whoever it was was hanging out waiting for the moment to strike, likely smoking and flicking the butts when done.

Maybe as the night progressed, and he let various women pass by due to 'the moment not being right' (too many vehicles/people)...., maybe he was getting himself more and more worked up to grab a woman that he didn't wait until there was absolutely no cars/people around (since he was caught on the bus cam) and took a slight chance that he wasn't willing to do earlier in the evening.

All MOO....

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

Sarah Everard’s murderer Wayne Couzens has stopped eating in jail after being ‘plunged into a depression’


KILLER cop Wayne Couzens has stopped eating after being “plunged into a depression” over his sickening crimes, The Sun on Sunday can reveal.

Sarah Everard’s murderer, 48, is barely touching prison food inside top security Belmarsh jail.

The former gun cop is being watched 24/7 by prison officers over fears he “might take the easy way out”.

Couzens, who this month admitted murdering Sarah, 33, could get a whole life sentence when he next appears in court in September.

Last night, a source said: “After pleading guilty, Couzens basically didn’t touch any food for days.

“He’s still not eating properly, barely anything at all.

“It’s clear the enormity of his crimes have finally begun to register. But he’s being watched like a hawk in case he tries to take the easy way out.”

Sarah Everard's murderer Wayne Couzens has stopped eating in jail after being 'plunged into a depression'

 

[Lucy6226]

Sarah Everard’s murderer Wayne Couzens has stopped eating in jail after being ‘plunged into a depression’


KILLER cop Wayne Couzens has stopped eating after being “plunged into a depression” over his sickening crimes, The Sun on Sunday can reveal.

Sarah Everard’s murderer, 48, is barely touching prison food inside top security Belmarsh jail.

The former gun cop is being watched 24/7 by prison officers over fears he “might take the easy way out”.

Couzens, who this month admitted murdering Sarah, 33, could get a whole life sentence when he next appears in court in September.

Last night, a source said: “After pleading guilty, Couzens basically didn’t touch any food for days.

“He’s still not eating properly, barely anything at all.

“It’s clear the enormity of his crimes have finally begun to register. But he’s being watched like a hawk in case he tries to take the easy way out.”

Sarah Everard's murderer Wayne Couzens has stopped eating in jail after being 'plunged into a depression'

Poor guy, gotta feel sorry for him right?! Hope he rots in there and spends every single waking second thinking about what he has done.

 

[annpats]

There were two instances of him exposing himself in the days before SE's abduction. Do we know who reported him? Were they teenagers?

The last was one at the McDonalds just near the M20 motorway in Bromley, Kent, very near south east London.

He exposed himself at one of the Drive-Thru windows. The staff reported it to police and they were able to trace who did it through the car numberplate, as McDonald's Drive-Thrus have a multitude of cameras.

I don't know what the instance previously to that was. Maybe another late night fast-food drive thru somewhere else?

 

[tayaway]

SBM

Was WC looking for a particular type of woman? Was SE targeted specifically because she wasn't obviously vulnerable? Because she looked 'wholesome'?

All IMO

Without a covid mask, SE looks similar to WC's wife (who is off limits when it comes to violent sex, rape...) when she was younger, blonde, same type of face... Maybe she has the same walking gait? It could even be something as simple as the jacket SE was wearing - there may be a work colleague he's lusted after who wears a similar one. Or, as you suggested, because she looked wholesome. It'd be interesting to know the appearance of the prostitutes he hired over the years.

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

Poor guy, gotta feel sorry for him right?! Hope he rots in there and spends every single waking second thinking about what he has done.

He knows he's going to get a real hard time from other inmates in there, not just because he was a cop, but a lot of the old lags don't like offences against women, especially what he did. I think he may not last the sentence one way or another.

 

[JuicyLucy]

I had to step away from this thread for a few days as it's not good for my anxiety, but something has been bothering me that I wanted to share (and apologies in advance if this has been noted already because I haven't been able to read every post).

Observations that have led to my potential theory:

1. WC regularly used sex workers.
2. There was a significant period of time between the end of WC's shift and SE's abduction.
3. We know that it wasn't a random or spur of the moment attack because of the evidence of pre-planning (hire car, protective film, timing of last shift before holiday, etc).
4. There are lots of vulnerable women in London - as LE, WC would know where to find one (if that's what he was looking for) and he wouldn't need to wait until it got dark.
5. There were two instances of him exposing himself in the days before SE's abduction. Do we know who reported him? Were they teenagers?
6. It's been mentioned in the media that SE did "all the right things" but it still wasn't enough to keep her safe (i.e. she phoned her boyfriend; was wearing a high vis jacket and flat shoes; was covered up/not wearing anything 'provocative'; was alert). NOTE: I do not support this misogynistic narrative of victim blaming - no woman deserves to be attacked regardless of what they are wearing etc - but it led me to consider -

Was WC looking for a particular type of woman? Was SE targeted specifically because she wasn't obviously vulnerable? Because she looked 'wholesome'?

All IMO

I thought I knew where you were going with this right up until the last point, where you diverged from what I was thinking @Lola68!

I thought you were going to say that in view of the unaccounted for time, and the fact that he was obviously escalating by the day of Sarah's abduction, had anyone thought to look go through crime reports over the subsequent days and weeks to see if any other women in Kent or London could have been abducted during that time window when he was cruising around in his hire car, even if reported missing, or found dead, much later.

I am wondering if the comments about mixed DNA samples relate to a third, perhaps unknown, party.

JMO

 

[Marantz4250b]

Was WC looking for a particular type of woman? Was SE targeted specifically because she wasn't obviously vulnerable? Because she looked 'wholesome'?

All IMO

Personally, I think she was targeted because she looked a bit like his wife. What his particular psychological reasons for that were are anyone's guess but I don't think the resemblance is entirely coincidental.