Deceased/Not Found UK - April Jones, 5, Machynlleth, Wales, 1 Oct 2012 #4 *M. Bridger guilty*

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm beginning to think that the press cannot be trusted at all on its comments in this case.

the media reports always need to be taken with a grain of salt imhoo. That being said there are plenty of police press conferences that are what they want the public to know about this case.
 
Yes, just wondering which story to believe, they were at home or not when she went missing. But since theyre not suspects I guess it doesnt matter.

bbm: no they are not suspects... they are victims.

As for what media report to believe... well as I said upstream, it is largely with a grain of salt. I am positive the police know these answers.
 
I'm beginning to think that the press cannot be trusted at all on its comments in this case.

To be fair, the media is under extreme time pressure these days with 24/7 reporting, the internet, twitter etc. They have to rush to get stories out and they don't always have time to check and cross check. Mistakes get made and they don't always get corrected. That's why many on here rely on police Press Conferences, VT interviews and directly quoted statements.
 
So April went swimming at 5pm and the parents meeting didn't start until 5pm?

Mark Bridger was at a parents' evening between 5.30pm and 6pm, the local council has confirmed to Sky News.

And it was the same parents' evening that April Jones's family were at.

But, the council has said, Coral and Paul Jones are believed to have left at 3.30pm, meaning it is unlikely they and April overlapped with Bridger.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/05/april-jones-search-day-five-live


So the swimming was well after the Jones' had left the parents meeting.
 
Surely there is something we don't know, which has never been revealed to the press. MB was a suspect almost right from the start. It wasn't like "Oh! She got into Mark's van, that's ok, so we can all relax, he's her uncle after all." Big sigh of relief. No, instead it was "OMG she got into Mark's van? We have to find them!!!" Big police search starting right away. And as soon as LE saw him the next day he was carted off.

Knowing that and knowing that he went on a crabbing trip with April and other children in August I assume something must have happened between that trip and October (or during that trip), something that made everyone mistrust him, even fear him.

Otherwise this is just a very weird reaction to the fact that she went with uncle mark whom she apparently liked and trusted (otherwise she wouldn't have gotten into the van).

Could also be that they called him when it became clear that is was MB's van she had climbed into and he said something on the phone that left no doubt ... and sparked off the intense police search.
 
Sorry, Im having a bit of a slow day, not sure what you mean.

Sorry, can see i'm coming across confusing, but was wondering whether the witness may have said it's MB's car rather than saying/describing a Land Rovery Discovery/Ford Connect. Speaking from experience with kids of that age, they don't really know car makes/models so they associate them with the driver.

i probably haven't made that any clearer (also having a slow day)
 
Also intriguing that he only appears on the electoral register for 2002 and that was with EG.

Not at all. The edited electoral roll is sold to commercial companies for marketing purposes,, directories etc. When you fill in the electoral form each year, you can opt for your name not to appear on the edited roll. It's like choosing to have an ex-directory telephone number. Clearly he has opted out since 2002.

Ok, put yourself in that situation. Would you phone the mother and say your daughter has been kidnapped, or would you say she got into the car with her uncle?

You've confused me there. Did someone phone CJ and tell her that April had been kidnapped?
 
Sorry, can see i'm coming across confusing, but was wondering whether the witness may have said it's MB's car rather than saying/describing a Land Rovery Discovery/Ford Connect. Speaking from experience with kids of that age, they don't really know car makes/models so they associate them with the driver.

i probably haven't made that any clearer (also having a slow day)

I get you. We dont know if MB was named, may well have be if it was him, or rather probably was if it was him. the police said it was described as a light coloured or grey van IIRC small at the front and big at the back. Of course, most kids that age wont know the makes unless they picked them up in conversations.
 
Sorry, can see i'm coming across confusing, but was wondering whether the witness may have said it's MB's car rather than saying/describing a Land Rovery Discovery/Ford Connect. Speaking from experience with kids of that age, they don't really know car makes/models so they associate them with the driver.

We don't know what she said, but judging from the early press conference, it seems that she described her impressions of the shape and colour of the vehicle. It was DS Bevan who said that "it might be something like a Ford Connect or perhaps a Land Rover". I don't think anyone publicly mentioned the word 'Discovery' until the vehicle had been located. She may have said it was MB in the car, but no one has confirmed that she did.

Something I have wondered was whether MB ever drives a Ford Connect with his current job?
 
I get you. We dont know if MB was named, may well have be if it was him, or rather probably was if it was him. the police said it was described as a light coloured or grey van IIRC small at the front and big at the back. Of course, most kids that age wont know the makes unless they picked them up in conversations.

yeah, you're right. its just, while i've been lurking, silently agreeing with what you and some others have been saying, i've been trying to think of other explanations as to where she could be as they still haven't found a body. IMO he doesn't seem the type to hide a body this well and then with being charged, still not tell when he knows the family. They must have something on him, i agree. But i'd really like to know what.
 
Surely there is something we don't know, which has never been revealed to the press.

Without a doubt. The police must have convincing evidence for the CPS to have brought a murder charge. It is very unlikely we will know what it is until the court case is under way.

MB was a suspect almost right from the start.

Probably from the Tuesday morning. The closure of the A487 seems to me to be the indication that the police by then knew who they were looking for, even though they obviously didn't have a precise address.

It wasn't like "Oh! She got into Mark's van, that's ok, so we can all relax, he's her uncle after all." Big sigh of relief. No, instead it was "OMG she got into Mark's van? We have to find them!!!"

I imagine that it didn't dawn on them immediately whose vehicle it was. It seems to me to be likely that when the police put it to them that the vehicle concerned was probably RHD, and possibly asked them if they knew anyone with an RHD vehicle, that the dreadful truth dawned on them. They may perhaps have tried phoning MB, only to find his phone switched off.

Knowing that and knowing that he went on a crabbing trip with April and other children in August I assume something must have happened between that trip and October (or during that trip), something that made everyone mistrust him, even fear him.

Otherwise this is just a very weird reaction to the fact that she went with uncle mark whom she apparently liked and trusted (otherwise she wouldn't have gotten into the van).

I disagree. I think it is a very natural reaction if someone - even a relative - takes your child without permission.

The key thing is that he didn't ask permission from the parents to take the child. That would be a cause of alarm for any parents.
 
bbm: no they are not suspects... they are victims.

As for what media report to believe... well as I said upstream, it is largely with a grain of salt. I am positive the police know these answers.

Thing is though, there hasn't been a trial yet. It's not done and dusted. At the moment the only person anyone knows for sure to be a victim is April herself. If the suspect is eventually found not guilty (and he is currently meant to be assumed innocent anyway), then it leaves anyone eligible to be the perp. I don't like to assume who is perp and who is victim before a verdict is in. He's a suspect, not a convict.

Agreed about the media, though.
 
Mark Bridger was at a parents' evening between 5.30pm and 6pm, the local council has confirmed to Sky News.

And it was the same parents' evening that April Jones's family were at.

But, the council has said, Coral and Paul Jones are believed to have left at 3.30pm, meaning it is unlikely they and April overlapped with Bridger.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/05/april-jones-search-day-five-live


So the swimming was well after the Jones' had left the parents meeting.

And Below yet another version by the press!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...rk-Bridger-was-at-school-parents-evening.html

April’s parents, Coral and Paul, were reportedly still at the parents’ evening when April, who was playing outside on her bicycle, disappeared.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
251
Guests online
3,228
Total visitors
3,479

Forum statistics

Threads
592,666
Messages
17,972,751
Members
228,855
Latest member
Shaunie
Back
Top