Found Deceased UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London - Clapham Common area, 3 March 2021 *Arrests* #10

[MsMiniSleuth]

If WC says he's guilty, and there is no jury, will we never find out what happened?

We will find out some I believe. I certainly remember in the Ian Watkins child abuse case, he pleaded guilty, so we never heard any witness reports or the prosecution case in court, but there was a lot that was discovered on the Judge's report later, about he and the other two defendants.

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Arrests as police clash with crowds at cancelled vigil for Sarah Everard

 

[Nikynoo]

When you zoom into this shot, the position of the person and seatbelt in the front seat looks really odd, like someone is seating sideways facing the passenger window, but with their seat-beat on across them.

I can't make it zoom any chance you can screen shot it please?

 

[Bedlam]

I know. It has. But it doesn't sit right with me. I'm not suggesting that they went out drinking together - but maybe, they had met. Maybe he liked the look of her. Maybe she looked like his wife when she was younger....

Just a list of maybes and an unexplained reason for her interacting with him make me think.

I totally understand what you're saying but - JMO - I think people, whether subconsciously or not, need to form a way of how the victim and perpetrator must have known each other prior to the crime as it makes them feel safer, rather than it being a completely random attack. Please know this is absolutely not a criticism of you or others who think they must have know each other in some way, it's just something that often seems to come up in cases like this.

 

[Meabh]

Yea totally skips on 5 minute increments.

Can anyone enlighten me on whether LE would remove footage? It certainly seems alte

It looks like it skips the period, but you can use the 5 mins increments, but if footage is being used as evidence makes sense they would remove it.

 

[Alyce]

If WC says he's guilty, and there is no jury, will we never find out what happened?

The Judge’s sentencing remarks will give some details as the Judge will outline the reasoning and justification for the length of sentence.

 

[obsessed21]

When you zoom into this shot, the position of the person and seatbelt in the front seat looks really odd, like someone is seating sideways facing the passenger window, but with their seat-beat on across them.

yes and the hand look tied like the person is twisted towards passenger side

 

[Officer Dibble]

In the UK morning its okay on here until America comes online but the mods keep shutting it for our morning their night as they can't keep up with all the violations of the rules. So when the thread opens up again it coincides with the GF trial in USA and is overloaded and runs super slow.

 

[Pinkizzy]

I think I can see seatbelts across the driver's and passenger's body. I have an old astra but I really couldn't say from that image, although the smaller wing mirrors suggests an older type model to me, or a basic model? What are those markings on top on the car roof? Light distortion?

There's another white car a few minutes before or after that one.

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

Also, re children being at school... maybe in childcare bubble with grandparents and mum brought them home on her way home. Would give him more time perhaps.

 

[Mr. Moon]

RE. His movements. He seems to work on a fractured shift pattern. This isn’t a 9-5 where your spouse is in tune with the rhythm of your day. At the drop of a hat it’s completely possible to drop a ‘They need me at X, probably won’t be home until X’ and it’s not only expected but accepted without question. Perhaps on many occasions it’s not even something to be passed on. He’s home when he’s home otherwise he’s working.

 

[LdnPimlico]

Yes I’ve been trying to see if there are any hidden clues in these dates:

Assuming the most recent work schedule reports are accurate, can anyone confirm when he was meant to be on leave from the 3rd March until please? I think I’ve seen reports that he also called in sick with stress on the 5th before emailing his superiors with the firearm concern on the 6th. So I wonder if:

1) Worked 2nd into the 3rd (7am)
2) Unclear if he also worked 2-8pm on the 3rd which would make it more reasonable for him to be in London (even Clapham) at 9:35pm (footage of car linked back to him with hazards on), but regardless it is now alleged he was in Clapham at 9:35pm at least.
3) Annual leave booked 4th - uses this for further crimes against SE and/over to complete cover up
4) Maybe he hasn’t completed what he wants to by the 5th so calls in sick? Maybe they can see he calls or emails this from home and so may be why the police are interested if neighbours saw him on this day?
5) He may not have been rostered to work the weekend, or maybe he was but his 5th call of stress has paved the way for him to be off this day and the 7th, but either way he emails that he no longer wishes to work with firearms. This could be signs of remorse, or if the disposal of SE is complete by this point his attention could instead be turning to developing an image of instability/diminished responsibility.
6) 7th-8th - not sure, presumed still off sick/portraying the pretence of being sick. Maybe wasn’t rostered to work anyway. Maybe the ambulance came around this time, not sure if date has been confirmed.
7) Believed he worked on the 9th but was back home in time to be arrested at 8pm? Working again seems unusual if the email about stress and firearms concerns was heeded, or just me?

I’m trying to find the details of the above dates in MSM that were reported earlier but has it been edited/masked? Can anyone tell me if the above is rendered moot by a confirmed report that he was on annual leave across the 4th-7th or 4th-8th and there was no need to actually call in sick on any day? The reason I ask is I wonder if the calling in sick was to create time and space to attend to SE, and then the email on the 6th was him turning his attention back to himself.

I've not seen anything that tells us when his leave was due to end - just that he was on pre planned leave on the 4th.

I agree seems weird to have an email re: stress on the 5th, then a return to work so soon.

I also think emailing saying you don't want to work with firearms on the 6th seems an odd thing to do given thats the unit you are on, as it sort of draws attention to you when you'd surely not want to have attention drawn to you in this case. Unless - the email was a follow-on from the stress email on the 5th? Normally being off work for stress means you'll be off for a longer period, and there's a possibility the email about not wanting to carry a firearm being a 'actually I don't think I need lots of time off, but perhaps less stressful work rather than carrying a firearm/patrolling'.

I agree being back to work on the 9th seems odd if he was 'signed off' with stress.

 

[suzyjackson]

According to court reports from today, he called in sick on the 5th March with stress. So he can't have already been on sick leave, otherwise why would he call in sick. I see no reason to doubt the reports from today's court appearance - his last day at work was 2nd March, then he was due to be on leave until the 8th March, but called in sick on the 5th March.

So he must have been expected in at work on the 5th or no need to call in sick?

 

[Nikynoo]

If WC says he's guilty, and there is no jury, will we never find out what happened?

You'll get a summary - very much like the one today - at the sentencing hearing.

 

[Mrs Marple]

Hmm l agree her family wouldn't know but still l think it was random. How would they have met? Different circles, lifestyles etc..not impossible of course but doesn't seem likely to me.

I am also wondering when she died.

 

[Sarahjo]

I thought the passenger looked off too position wise but that it might be my eyes and the quality of image!

That is time stamped at 21.50 not 21.35 so I think this would be too late, plus if it was them i think it would have been taken down like the rest...IMO it doesn’t fit the timing..

 

[tigerowl]

I totally understand what you're saying but - JMO - I think people, whether subconsciously or not, need to form a way of how the victim and perpetrator must have known each other prior to the crime as it makes them feel safer, rather thank it being a completely random attack. Please know this is absolutely not a criticism of you or others who think they must have know each other in some way, it's just something that often seems to come up in cases like this.

I understand and appreciate your comments - but my issue is that it does not seem random. London is huge. People are on every footpath at every hour of every day. Why choose somewhere so public? CCTV, bus routes and highly residential at a relatively early hour. It's that bit that doesn't wash with me. So much unnecessary risk when he could have gone 3 streets over and probably found a lone female out of view.

 

[wackyw]

He has, but we don’t know how long he was under surveillance for. Did the MET trace the plates of the Astra early on and track him? Would he risk going back and forth knowing he might be being watched? I’m not sure he wasn’t planning to go back to hide her body better, but perhaps wanted to ensure he wasn’t number one suspect first.

BBM - I've been wondering about this too. From the way some of the reports in the press have been written it can be inferred they were tracking the car within minutes of the abduction "as it was leaving London". But I understood the boyfriend was the one who reported her missing the next day, so that wouldn't fit unless there had been some other report of a possible abduction/incident. I guess it could mean that they "tracked" it several days later on recorded video, as opposed to real time. Hmmm.

 

[ApparentlyInDenial]

Not an Astra. You cannot get a white Astra with black wing mirrors, except the VXR racing version that also has a black roof.

I’m telling you it is not the car.

That is time stamped at 21.50 not 21.35 so I think this would be too late, plus if it was them i think it would have been taken down like the rest...IMO it doesn’t fit the timing..

 

[yardyyardy]

A

those photos could just as easily be from a communal landing on the flats opposite you know...

just a thought

So?

 

[Cannycat]

We will find out some I believe. I certainly remember in the Ian Watkins child abuse case, he pleaded guilty, so we never heard any witness reports or the prosecution case in court, but there was a lot that was discovered on the Judge's report later, about he and the other two defendants.

Oh I hope he’s having an awful time. Sick s

I understand and appreciate your comments - but my issue is that it does not seem random. London is huge. People are on every footpath at every hour of every day. Why choose somewhere so public? CCTV, bus routes and highly residential at a relatively early hour. It's that bit that doesn't wash with me. So much unnecessary risk when he could have gone 3 streets over and probably found a lone female out of view.

Then why not arrange to pick her up on such a street if as you claim he knew her? You’re right it doesn’t seem to make sense but none of the explanations do. I can’t imagine SE getting in willingly. But we just don’t know. Why didnt he pick a quiet street in Kent with less cctv?

I half think he enjoyed the thrill of being caught like with his IE episode a few
Days earlier