GUILTY UK - Tia Sharp, 12, New Addington, London, 3 Aug 2012 #3

[laserdisc10]

Yes, CS was escorted by the police but no arrest was made until later whilst at the police station but PM could still have been home during that time.

I can't find the timeline now but I thought CS and PM were arrested after SH was found.

I believed the same

When could CS have stated that SH had taken off earlier ? I managed to watch the video of CS being escorted from the house and saw the plainclothes female police officer say, ' Just keep walking'. I didn't see CS say anything to anyone, although of course she may have done. So, when could CS have stated to media that SH had taken off and she didn't know where he was? I've been under the impression CS said it prior to being led away from the house and if that's correct, she must have said it prior to commencement of the search

If it was prior to commencement of the search, it was also prior to discovery of the body. If PM did assist SH to depart the area prior to the search and prior to discovery of the body -- what offence had PM committed at that point by giving a lift to SH or otherwise assisting him to depart the area (if in fact PM did so, as has been suggested)?

 

[Crazy Mama]

The family members who live in Merton are her mother and step father.

No, her mother and her mothers boyfriend, not step father.

 

[MobyBluff]

Ok, fair enough, BUT this is a child. If something happened on my road and I'd been hearing unpleasant rumours I'd probably save my kids ears from it and just say I hadn't heard anything. (I don't have kids - I'm 20 - but hypothetically speaking)

20 and no kids? Clearly you don't live in New A!!

 

[Inge Jones]

We're not privy to information which would explain why PM was charged, obviously. It's possible he confessed to police (under questioning and after the body was discovered) that he had deliberately and falsely claimed to police (during the week of searching) that he'd seen the victim after she'd allegedly left CS's house shortly after noon on Friday

Oh I am sure in that case he would have been charged. But he wasn't. He was arrested under suspicion and bailed.

 

[laserdisc10]

Oh I am sure in that case he would have been charged. But he wasn't. He was arrested under suspicion and bailed.

Thanks, yes. Clarified further up

 

[wfgodot]

Do you all want a new thread, or should we just lump along with this one?

 

[kaos]

I believed the same

When could CS have stated that SH had taken off earlier ? I managed to watch the video of CS being escorted from the house and saw the plainclothes female police officer say, ' Just keep walking'. I didn't see CS say anything to anyone, although of course she may have done. So, when could CS have stated to media that SH had taken off and she didn't know where he was? I've been under the impression CS said it prior to being led away from the house and if that's correct, she must have said it prior to commencement of the search

If it was prior to commencement of the search, it was also prior to discovery of the body. If PM did assist SH to depart the area prior to the search and prior to discovery of the body -- what offence had PM committed at that point by giving a lift to SH or otherwise assisting him to depart the area (if in fact PM did so, as has been suggested)?

I think it was in the morning too. If SH told him what he'd done while he was giving him a lift then he'd be assisting an offender.

I think it was just a phone call rather than giving him a lift though - or perhaps CS has given them info that implicates him too for all we know!

 

[MobyBluff]

Which pub was he in, or outside? The post I quoted was the first time I have seen or heard of him being in a pub or drinking Special Brew.

Amber, it was my post. It was semi-tongue in cheek. The reason i suggested that pub is because it was close to the co-op & tram stop, but quite far from the home. Special Brew is a beer known to get you drunk and quickly....forget that post.....I wasn't stating facts, just giving an opinion of where I am with this right noe.

 

[kaos]

I could have sworn there was an image released of the receipt from the co-op of the stuff SH bought but can't find any references to it anywhere now.

 

[MobyBluff]

Has anyone noticed that, at least according to the press, the police are still apparently considering the possibility that the body was moved (despite the apology) - as otherwise why continue to report it in today's Sun? Maybe it was moved in the house. Do these houses have cellars?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-accused-girls-murder-told-father-strong.html

I thought i read this, at 5 am on friday morning roughly, prob on iPhone and half asleep. Assumed it was twitter and couldn't find it. THX

 

[India99]

Amber, it was my post. It was semi-tongue in cheek. The reason i suggested that pub is because it was close to the co-op & tram stop, but quite far from the home. Special Brew is a beer known to get you drunk and quickly....forget that post.....I wasn't stating facts, just giving an opinion of where I am with this right noe.

thing is , you may be closer to the truth about where he met up with her than you think.

 

[laserdisc10]

I think it was in the morning too. If SH told him while he was giving him a lift what he's done, then he'd be assisting an offender.

I think it was just a phone call rather than giving him a lift though - or perhaps CS has given them info that implicates him too for all we know!

If SH told PM that he'd killed Tia and/or that her body was in the loft while PM was giving SH a lift (if he did) and if PM didn't immediately inform police of what SH had said, then that could be 'assisting an offender', imo

And if PM phoned SH while SH was downing vodka in town to say the body had been discovered, then that also could be 'assisting an offender', imo

If PM claimed to police prior to discovery of the body that he'd seen the victim walk past on Friday shortly after noon when PM knew he was making a false statement and if he'd done so to assist SH, then that could be 'assisting an offender', imo

I've seen in the media that PM was arrested for the 3rd (above) possibility. Doesn't mean the media was correct, nor can I offer a link to where I read it. There's been a lot of confused reporting throughout and don't think we'll learn much more for a while

 

[kaos]

If SH told PM that he'd killed Tia and/or that her body was in the loft while PM was giving SH a lift (if he did) and if PM didn't immediately inform police of what SH had said, then that could be 'assisting an offender', imo

And if PM phoned SH while SH was downing vodka in town to say the body had been discovered, then that also could be 'assisting an offender', imo

If PM claimed to police prior to discovery of the body that he'd seen the victim walk past on Friday shortly after noon when PM knew he was making a false statement and if he'd done so to assist SH, then that could be 'assisting an offender', imo

I've seen in the media that PM was arrested for the 3rd (above) possibility. Doesn't mean the media was correct, nor can I offer a link to where I read it. There's been a lot of confused reporting throughout and don't think we'll learn much more for a while

The 3rd would be more like a misleading statement - which was what Martin Brunt the Sky reporter said on Twitter.


E.T.A. Wasn't Martin Brunt, it was The Sun

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4484949/Tias-body-found-in-binbag-in-loft.html

 

[MobyBluff]

no idea

Guys, where in my post did I say it was an MSM quote? Come on.....!

 

[Amber34]

Guys, where in my post did I say it was an MSM quote? Come on.....!

The problem is, you didn't say it wasn't fact! It reads like a timeline, hence I thought I had missed something about him drinking Special Brew, which could have put a whole different spin on the Thursday night.

We have to be careful to stick to the facts.

 

[Clio]

Assisting an offender is defined as

The offence of assisting an offender ("the principal offender") is committed when:

the principal offender has committed an arrestable offence;
the accused knows or believes that the principal offender has committed that or some other arrestable offence;
the accused does any act with intent to impede the apprehension or prosecution of the principal offender; and
the act is done without lawful authority or reasonable excuse.

Examples of the type of conduct appropriate for a charge of assisting an offender include:
hiding a principal offender;
otherwise assisting a principal offender to avoid arrest;
assisting a principal offender to abscond from bail;
lying to the police to protect principal offenders from investigation and prosecution;
hiding the weapon used in an assault/robbery;
washing clothes worn by a principal offender to obstruct any potential forensic examination.

Assisting an offender is sometimes not an easy offence to prove since it requires proof that the principle committed an arrestable offence and that the accused knew or believed this. In the absence of such proof, other public justice offences, such as obstruction or perverting the course of justice, can provide alternative charges.

Full definition http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/public_justice_offences_incorporating_the_charging_standard/

 

[Jackalyn]

OK I found out there was another fair = a third one early August in the Ashburton park (from my mum, who could not remember how long it was for but says it was a commercial one from Hampshire. Myt mum should know as she lives pretty near it.)

https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=charmaine+and+john+davis+funfairs

As for confusing Orpington and Ashburton. If you lived in the area you would know that it would be hard to do that as they are nowhere in the same direction from New Addington. I don't buy the confusion. I personally wonder if they went to any fair at all and just named a fair they thought was on. -It just would not be possible to go to Orpington and think you were at Ashburton or had been, or vice versa.

Wonder where CS said they went?

Oh just found this

 

[MobyBluff]

Strongly disagree. I think you're giving credit where credit isn't due. We're talking about a police force who could not find a child's body, even after repeated visits, and even after the "sniffer" dog/s went through a small home.

The body was next door! In the lofty, a cupboard etc.

 

[India99]

OK I found out there was another fair = a third one early August in the Ashburton park (from my mum, who could not remember how long it was for but says it was a commercial one from Hastings. Myt mum should know as she lives pretty near it.)

As for confusing Orpington and Ashburton. If you lived in the area you would know that it would be hard to do that as they are nowhere in the same direction from New Addington. I don't buy the confusion. I personally wonder if they went to any fair at all and just named a fair they thought was on. -It just would not be possible to go to Orpington and think you were at Ashburton or had been, or vice versa.

Wonder where CS said they went?

i've been saying for quite a while that its a mistake somebody who had lived there for quite a few years wouldn't make.

and as i said before i think it was part of a story that didn't get used as the one that did get used seemed more believable.

 

[India99]

The body was next door! In the lofty, a cupboard etc.

that theory would only work if there was access to both lofts from both houses and at the moment we don't know if there was.

and as i've stated in previous posts, the only way there would be access to both from both houses is if it was put in at some point as the houses don't have access to next door through the loft as a matter of design.

when this case does actually come to court and details are released then a lot of us are going to be wrong and a lot of us are going to be right.

i think most of us will be both, if that makes sense.