GUILTY UK - Bernadette Walker, 17, left parent's car, Peterborough, 21 July 2020 *Arrests* #5

[CSIAngus]

Why would she invent places she was staying at? And fabricate messages from Bee asking to stay with her gran?

Exactly. Any normal parent reporting their daughter missing to Police would do so factually and accurately. Why would anyone lie at that point and attempt a deliberate deception. MOO but I believe she knew long before that point that BW was dead because she was directly involved in the plan to make her disappear.

 

[WhippetOut]

One thing must be asked.

If Sarah wasn’t aware of what was to happen. Why did she reset passwords to Bernadette’s phone while she was at her grandparents.

Because Scott convinced her probably. He is from Peterborough so knows more people and places there than her. Coercive control is very powerful too. More will be revealed at sentencing I hope.

 

[WhippetOut]

One thing must be asked.

If Sarah wasn’t aware of what was to happen. Why did she reset passwords to Bernadette’s phone while she was at her grandparents.

There was definitely a cover-up and it happened in advance of the disappearance but IMO this doesn't prove Sarah thought her daughter would be killed.

 

[spdflower]

If I remember rightly we figured the password changing was likely done because you have to change a password to gain access to accounts when you don't know the current password.
So that was just to gain access to the accounts, to begin posing as B.

The act of falsely impersonating B could be done because she knew b wouldn't be around anymore to say otherwise.

But the act of 'changing someone's passwords' alone, who you want to stop saying certain things to friends isn't necessarily knowledge of impending murder.

The act of changing someone’s passwords and pretending to be them on social media while knowing they’re alive and could easily set up new accounts to speak her truth to the world is a pretty risky move though. If SaW believed Bernadette was safe, why would she think simply changing her social media passwords would stop her from speaking out?

 

[MIdge28]

Because Scott convinced her probably. He is from Peterborough so knows more people and places there than her. Coercive control is very powerful too. More will be revealed at sentencing I hope.

Don’t forget SaW has lived in Peterborough for over 10 years.

 

[MrsBrooks]

The women has been found guilty she knew her daughter was dead! Anything more revealed at sentencing will not change that fact! She is a callous and cunning women who has manipulated the situation from day one! IMO the fact she hid and did not take the stand (whether she was advised to or not) shows her guilt. There was nothing she could say or do to explain her actions away because she is guilty!!!! Guilty of knowing her daughter was murdered! And her defence knew it!

 

[Bethan]

It’s my route to and from deeping daily. It’s needle in haystack stuff. Could be literally anywhere. It’s why I kept arguing that no grave was needed, as it’s all dykes, ditches, quarries, coppices and lakes. It floods. It changes.

I originally thought more towards crowland, but after seeing the evidence in court, that night trip was to discard the phone and push the blame on the friend out there. I think it was all done that Morning just after pick up. I am leaning towards peakirk due to the horse slip, but even then that’s a blind stab

I don’t know the fens, only passed through the area a few times, so forgive me….I’m not meaning to contradict you MercSw.

My thoughts against water making a good ‘disposal site’ are just this point…..it floods, it changes…..so surely there could be more chance that a body might become exposed over a period of time.

On the other hand, with passage of time there will be less useful forensic evidence, particularly if the victim was strangled/smothered?

And if a body is found in water, as opposed to buried, it could be difficult/impossible to exclude suicide, or misadventure?

So while writing this post, I’ve realised that disposal in water could be advantageous to a murderer, as long as the body is not discovered too soon, as very fortunately happened in the case of Libby Squire.

 

[MrsBrooks]

If I remember rightly we figured the password changing was likely done because you have to change a password to gain access to accounts when you don't know the current password.
So that was just to gain access to the accounts, to begin posing as B.

The act of falsely impersonating B could be done because she knew b wouldn't be around anymore to say otherwise.

But the act of 'changing someone's passwords' alone, who you want to stop saying certain things to friends isn't necessarily knowledge of impending murder.

that is the point though it was not ‘the act of changing someone’s passwords alone’ - it was the not only thing Sarah did this was not an alone incident! IF it was all she did I too could well believe she did so to cover up the sickening abuse of her daughter to protect her self. But she did not only do this did she ?

 

[Mercsw]

I had a trip out today.
Along the A15, past Glinton, McDonald's, the Barn Garden Centre, and all along the A47 to Kings Lynn and beyond.
I was struck by how dense the shrubs, hedging and trees are, bordering the roads.
And I was reminded just how vicious the currents are in the Nene, that runs directly by the side of the road, right out to The Wash.
All I kept thinking, that whole way, was "Where are you, Bernadette?"

It’s my route to and from deeping daily. It’s needle in haystack stuff. Could be literally anywhere. It’s why I kept arguing that no grave was needed, as it’s all dykes, ditches, quarries, coppices and lakes. It floods. It changes.

I originally thought more towards crowland, but after seeing the evidence in court, that night trip was to discard the phone and push the blame on the friend out there. I think it was all done that Morning just after pick up. I am leaning towards peakirk due to the horse slip, but even then that’s a blind stab

I don’t know the fens, only passed through the area a few times, so forgive me….I’m not meaning to contradict you MercSw.

My thoughts against water making a good ‘disposal site’ are just this point…..it floods, it changes…..so surely there could be more chance that a body might become exposed over a period of time.

On the other hand, with passage of time there will be less useful forensic evidence, particularly if the victim was strangled/smothered?

And if a body is found in water, as opposed to buried, it could be difficult/impossible to exclude suicide, or misadventure?

So while writing this post, I’ve realised that disposal in water could be advantageous to a murderer, as long as the body is not discovered too soon, as very fortunately happened in the case of Libby Squire.

This was my thoughts too. We have dykes that are overgrown and durged once a decade. If no one sees you dump something in there, the wildlife will cover it almost immediately (they didn’t report for 4 days and the police just believed the parents for 2 months!!!) and then you have eels, foxes, pikes and carrion birds. The chances of finding anything is slim to none.

to give you an idea, they recently discovered a ww2 tank in crowland. It was lost during training. Despite knowing roughly where it was, it took 80 years to locate it.

narrowing down his actions to 3 90 minute windows of almost perfect isolation means we don’t even know the county with any reasonable doubt.

I believe the only chance or locating her rests with the truth finally coming out

 

[mrazda71]

I understand how it (the murder) came to happen - Scott didn't want the abuse news to get out ... I can even understand Sarah panicking and wanting to help Scott cover it up - if he's telling her he killed Bea but it was an accident, he lost his temper etc .. I can just about understand her helping him thinking that she didn't want to lose her other kids, Bea was dead and she can't change that but she can lie and keep her other kids.

What I can't understand is that now, she's lost everything, her baby, her other children, Bea, her friends ... and now she's got nothing to lose, she's STILL silent.

So the only thing I can believe now, is that she was way more involved than she's been convicted of ...
if she tells the truth now, she'll be potentially looking at more charges, more trial and more time inside.

She knows where Bea is ... she knows and she's not telling. She knows how much her other children are suffering not knowing where Bea is and yet she's STILL silent.

Self preservation.

 

[jackal67]

I would say it’s vital. He could be released in 20 years, I would like to think a 70 year old is on a register somewhere and not allowed near other kids. I don’t want to hear he’s got a new identity and may return to my city

Why would he be given a new identity when released? Is this normal for convicted murderers ?
SaW maybe though, didn't this happen with Maxine Carr?

 

[KarenUK]

Why would he be given a new identity when released? Is this normal for convicted murderers ?
SaW maybe though, didn't this happen with Maxine Carr?

I doubt it though, Maxine Carr was given a new identity because of how notorious the Soham case was and threats from the public. This case has had very little media attention, and life long anonymity orders are incredibly rare (I believe its only about five or six in the UK in total, Maxine Carr, John Thompson, Robert Venables, Mary Bell and I think two other boys that were underage at the time of their crime)

 

[Tortoise]

I don’t know the fens, only passed through the area a few times, so forgive me….I’m not meaning to contradict you MercSw.

My thoughts against water making a good ‘disposal site’ are just this point…..it floods, it changes…..so surely there could be more chance that a body might become exposed over a period of time.

On the other hand, with passage of time there will be less useful forensic evidence, particularly if the victim was strangled/smothered?

And if a body is found in water, as opposed to buried, it could be difficult/impossible to exclude suicide, or misadventure?

So while writing this post, I’ve realised that disposal in water could be advantageous to a murderer, as long as the body is not discovered too soon, as very fortunately happened in the case of Libby Squire.

I'm not a fan of the water disposal theory for several reasons.

1. It seems he went back for 2-3 hours that night, early morning hours, and there is also 1.5 hrs of time with their phones off after they were seen at Glinton the day after that. If she was put in a river that lunchtime why would he/they need to return twice, or even have a spot to return to? If he'd secured her body with say concrete blocks to stop it drifting that would immediately look like foul play if she was found.

2. He went to the lock-up many times and I doubt now that he stored her body in the lock-up, because that would have not only chanced contaminating his car with decomposition evidence 12 hours later, and being stopped with a body on his hands, it would pose risks if his parents went to the lock-up while he left it seemingly unconcerned, and it also posed risks of him being seen dragging or lifting something heavy in and then back out again. Although he seems to have been camera aware people record on their phones all the time if they see something unusual happening. So I think if not her body it was likely to be tools he was taking and then returning and cleaning afterwards. Perhaps a saw or an axe to cut branches to cover her the first time, or ropes/straps to move her so he didn't contaminate himself, and a spade to dig the second time. These are just guesses, not even knowing if he had tools stored there. I did see heavy duty straps hanging on the door in the press photos.

3. If she was put in water I think they would have reported her missing sooner because there would be greater risk of her body drifting and being found which would raise questions about them not reporting her running off and being at risk. If they were using her phone in Westwood and Cowbit and she was discovered in a river at a time or place that didn't make sense with the location of her phone (Scott hadn't been on the A16 to Cowbit since 2019) the police would know straight away it wasn't her sending messages and they would have had a much higher chance of tracking down the parents' journeys and involvement immediately.

moo

 

[Mammaalli]

Has anyone got s link to the police station interview with Saw?

 

[hellobear]

...

Has anyone got s link to the police station interview with Saw?

The only one I have seen is a VERY short clip that was on BBC Look East (West) , however that is no longer on iPlayer as they remove the episodes after 24 hours.

In the clip she was waffling, something about deleting a thread of messages where BW had said " I love you " ... so basically telling the police she had deleted messages from her phone but she didn't mean to do it ( we need a face palm emoji ! )

 

[jackal67]

I am going to predict he'll cry self pity tears like a baby and she will be cold as ice.

I think she will weep and wail 'she can't be dead' AGAIN!. Has to keep up the show for her loyal supporters JMO

 

[Mammaalli]

...


The only one I have seen is a VERY short clip that was on BBC Look East (West) , however that is no longer on iPlayer as they remove the episodes after 24 hours.

In the clip she was waffling, something about deleting a thread of messages where BW had said " I love you " ... so basically telling the police she had deleted messages from her phone but she didn't mean to do it ( we need a face palm emoji ! )

Aww ok, Thank you any way.

 

[hellobear]

Not related, but might be interesting. There is a documentary on ITV at 9pm tonight called No Body Discovered

I would imagine it is available on ITV hub also

In January 2020, father of three Mike O'Leary disappeared on his way home from work. Police immediately launched a major investigation. But how do you solve a mystery without a body? With access to the investigation, this documentary follows detectives as they try to solve a crime that has shaken the close-knit rural community of Carmarthen in West Wales.

 

[Mammaalli]

Not related, but might be interesting. There is a documentary on ITV at 9pm tonight called No Body Discovered

I would imagine it is available on ITV hub also

In January 2020, father of three Mike O'Leary disappeared on his way home from work. Police immediately launched a major investigation. But how do you solve a mystery without a body? With access to the investigation, this documentary follows detectives as they try to solve a crime that has shaken the close-knit rural community of Carmarthen in West Wales.

Ohh thank you, it's looks interesting. I will be giving that a watch.

 

[Gooner666]

FYI on ITV1 tonight a documentary on a no body murder investigation

starts 9pm

Edit: oops seen it’s been mentioned