Page 9 of 56 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 19 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 836
  1. #121
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    4,546
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    Thank you for that. Failing to surrender and interfering with the course of justice ... hmmm ... This is from the bail information:

    "If their investigation is continuing, the police can bail you without charge to return to the police station at a fixed time and date. Failure to do so could be a separate offence."

    Is there any possibility that he was bailed before and it didn't make the news, and that he was required to surrender at a certain time and date and didn't appear?
    BBM

    Hmmm, I wonder?.

    ETA I did search the term failing to surrender earlier but could only find references to bail and couldn't make it out because I didn't think that he was on bail?.

    A lot of info at the below link.

    10. Failure to surrender to a police station results in police time being wasted and the course of justice being impeded; potentially, it can also result in victims and witnesses being distressed and concerned about their safety and the ability of the system to protect the public and deliver justice. However, the circumstances in which such bail is granted are less formal than the grant of court bail and the history of the individual case should be examined. There may be less culpability where bail has been enlarged on a number of occasions and less harm if court proceedings are not significantly delayed.

    http://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/...er_to_Bail.pdf
    Last edited by enzeder; 02-02-2011 at 04:53 PM.


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to enzeder For This Useful Post:


  3. #122
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,512
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    Is there any possibility that he was bailed before and it didn't make the news, and that he was required to surrender at a certain time and date and didn't appear?
    Quote Originally Posted by enzeder View Post
    I did search the term failing to surrender earlier but could only find references to bail and couldn't make it out because I didn't think that he was on bail?.
    No, I think people are missing the point here. One of the reasons given by the prosecution for opposing bail was that they thought he might fail to surrender, not that he had already done so before. In other words, they don't trust him not to do a runner.


  4. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Cherwell For This Useful Post:


  5. #123
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Cherwell View Post
    No, I think people are missing the point here. One of the reasons given by the prosecution for opposing bail was that they thought he might fail to surrender, not that he had already done so before. In other words, they don't trust him not to do a runner.
    This is what made me wonder:

    "Once charged, the police must release you on bail unless the custody officer reasonably believes that:

    There is doubt about your name or address; or
    Detention is necessary to protect you or somebody else; or
    You will fail to attend court or will interfere with witnesses or the administration of justice.

    Like the courts, the police are now able to attach conditions to your bail, such as living at a fixed address, reporting to a local police station, obeying a curfew, avoiding named people or places, or providing a financial guarantee for your attendance at court.

    If you fail to attend court without reasonable excuse when on bail, you commit a separate offence under the Bail Act 1976. If you break any of the conditions of your bail, you can be arrested and brought in custody to the next sitting of the local Magistrates' Court, who may then take away your bail."

    Ref: http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrig...ants/bail.html

    Since he must be granted bail unless one of the conditions apply, then one of the problems could be related to " Failing to surrender"; perhaps also meaning that "failing to attend court" could be a concern.


  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to otto For This Useful Post:


  7. #124
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by naturally suspicious View Post
    that reticence would go with his personality, surely...

    careful,considered,intelligent,cerebral,introvert. ..in parts...shock would make you withdraw, particularly if no glasses,clothes etc.

    he's an intelligent man...could look forward...and visualise the horror of his future, whatever the verdict at the end of his trial...

    probably has withdrawn into himself as a means of protection.....if he is not guilty...and probably also if he is...

    I was commenting on the last sentence in that post - about the LL making no noise


  8. #125
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    139
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynn R View Post
    I was commenting on the last sentence in that post - about the LL making no noise
    perhaps still being on bail prevents him from making a statement...

    it was interesting that "a friend" told the world of cj's intention to seek compensation against the media for obtrusive/inaccurate reporting...

    also to sue the police...

    either that or he is lying low, seeing as he is not yet exonerated of any misdoings/suspicion about the case..

    he must, surely, be concerned by the fact that he is still on bail....

    he would want to do nothing else to prevent his name being cleared....


  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to naturally suspicious For This Useful Post:


  10. #126
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,702
    Quote Originally Posted by Patticake View Post
    Tabak Family Summit

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...ly-summit.html

    Not sure if this was in Marcel's video ... but Vincent called a family summit [minus the children] when he was visiting at Christmas to tell them he was "under suspicion.

    So his family could not have been completely surprised when he was arrested.

    .
    at christmas? Now if a neighbor was murdered and I were completely innocent, the last thing I would think is that I was under suspicion. obviously i would be questioned like everyone else but that would not make me "call a family summit" to tell them I am under suspicion. This to me is a huge red flag, he was setting them up to believe his story if caught.

    imo


  11. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to SilkySifaka For This Useful Post:


  12. #127
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,512
    Isn't it just the usual lurid tabloid style, though? Try stripping away the dramatic and emotive language. Of course he would want to tell his family that his next-door neighbour had been murdered, and about all the brouhaha that goes with that, interviews, searches etc. Wouldn't you? And quite understandable that they wouldn't want to discuss it in front of children.


  13. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Cherwell For This Useful Post:


  14. #128
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    709
    Quote Originally Posted by Cherwell View Post
    Isn't it just the usual lurid tabloid style, though? Try stripping away the dramatic and emotive language. Of course he would want to tell his family that his next-door neighbour had been murdered, and about all the brouhaha that goes with that, interviews, searches etc. Wouldn't you? And quite understandable that they wouldn't want to discuss it in front of children.

    I don't think SilkySifaka was talking about the lurid style.

    I think the point was, sure you're going to tell the family about the front page headline story unfolding in and around your home ... but why would you include you were "under suspicion"!

    An innocent person would not have drawn that inference. After all, they have nothing to fear ... they are completely innocent.

    .


  15. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Patticake For This Useful Post:


  16. #129
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,512
    Quote Originally Posted by Patticake View Post
    I don't think SilkySifaka was talking about the lurid style.

    I think the point was, sure you're going to tell the family about the front page headline story unfolding in and around your home ... but why would you include you were "under suspicion"!

    An innocent person would not have drawn that inference. After all, they have nothing to fear ... they are completely innocent.
    .
    But that's exactly my point. It's all media paraphrasing. How do we know what he said, exactly? For one thing, he would have been speaking in Dutch; for another, we have no idea how the subject was approached. An innocent person may well have made light of it: "I'm a suspect, you know!" Even the brother's words are now coming with the benefit of hindsight.


  17. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Cherwell For This Useful Post:


  18. #130
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Cherwell View Post
    Isn't it just the usual lurid tabloid style, though? Try stripping away the dramatic and emotive language. Of course he would want to tell his family that his next-door neighbour had been murdered, and about all the brouhaha that goes with that, interviews, searches etc. Wouldn't you? And quite understandable that they wouldn't want to discuss it in front of children.
    That's certainly my take on it too ... a much exaggerated perspective on the fact that VT wanted to tell his family, out of the presence of the children, about what was going on at home.


  19. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to otto For This Useful Post:


  20. #131
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,110
    If I was innocent I would discuss it casually as a matter of passing with my family but to call a family summit, as if he was preparing them for what he knew was to come. It seems he knew he was under suspicion and he knew why.

    The fact that he is now charged with murder adds more weight to that.


  21. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to whiterum For This Useful Post:


  22. #132
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,295
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    This is what made me wonder:

    "Once charged, the police must release you on bail unless the custody officer reasonably believes that:

    There is doubt about your name or address; or
    Detention is necessary to protect you or somebody else; or
    You will fail to attend court or will interfere with witnesses or the administration of justice.Like the courts, the police are now able to attach conditions to your bail, such as living at a fixed address, reporting to a local police station, obeying a curfew, avoiding named people or places, or providing a financial guarantee for your attendance at court.

    If you fail to attend court without reasonable excuse when on bail, you commit a separate offence under the Bail Act 1976. If you break any of the conditions of your bail, you can be arrested and brought in custody to the next sitting of the local Magistrates' Court, who may then take away your bail."

    Ref: http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrig...ants/bail.html

    Since he must be granted bail unless one of the conditions apply, then one of the problems could be related to " Failing to surrender"; perhaps also meaning that "failing to attend court" could be a concern.
    IMO it could mean he could flee the country and the police would have to secure an European arrest warrant (if they can find him) which might be disputed and take ages to sort out. Also that he could try to intimidate witnesses or find a person to give him an alibi. The fact it was reported he was on suicide watch could also mean he knows the gravity of the position he's in. JMO

    Edited to add.. VT will know by now who the sobbing woman was and that person might have expressed a need for protection.


  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Robin Hood For This Useful Post:


  24. #133
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    This is what made me wonder:

    "Once charged, the police must release you on bail unless the custody officer reasonably believes that:

    There is doubt about your name or address; or
    Detention is necessary to protect you or somebody else; or
    You will fail to attend court or will interfere with witnesses or the administration of justice.

    Like the courts, the police are now able to attach conditions to your bail, such as living at a fixed address, reporting to a local police station, obeying a curfew, avoiding named people or places, or providing a financial guarantee for your attendance at court.

    If you fail to attend court without reasonable excuse when on bail, you commit a separate offence under the Bail Act 1976. If you break any of the conditions of your bail, you can be arrested and brought in custody to the next sitting of the local Magistrates' Court, who may then take away your bail."

    Ref: http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrig...ants/bail.html

    Since he must be granted bail unless one of the conditions apply, then one of the problems could be related to " Failing to surrender"; perhaps also meaning that "failing to attend court" could be a concern.
    Perhaps there is the concern that VT might fancy a trip to Holland , there are plenty of way's to get from England to Holland other than flying.
    Then there is whole formal process of getting VT back to England.

    I do find it strange that bail was not even asked for, bail would have been denied anyway JMO.


  25. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Trio For This Useful Post:


  26. #134
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    638
    How many accused murderer's are regularly released on bail?


  27. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Myserty64 For This Useful Post:


  28. #135
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,295

  29. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Robin Hood For This Useful Post:


Page 9 of 56 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 19 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. UK - Joanna Yeates Clifton, Bristol, 17 December 2010 - #11
    By Salem in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 643
    Last Post: 01-31-2011, 03:36 PM
  2. UK - Joanna Yeates Clifton, Bristol, 17 December 2010 - #10
    By Texas Mist in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 637
    Last Post: 01-24-2011, 05:54 PM
  3. UK - Joanna Yeates, Clifton, Bristol, 17 December 2010 - #8
    By Cubby in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 510
    Last Post: 01-21-2011, 06:27 PM
  4. UK - Joanna Yeates, Clifton, Bristol, 17 December 2010 - #5
    By wfgodot in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 720
    Last Post: 01-15-2011, 07:01 PM
  5. UK - Joanna Yeates, Clifton, Bristol, 17 December 2010 - #4
    By wfgodot in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 493
    Last Post: 01-12-2011, 08:08 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •