UK UK - Sarah Wellgreen, 46, Kent, 9 Oct 2018 #2 *B. Lacomba guilty*

[Coconutmilk]

I have only just seen this which I am surprised about as I am fairly local to the area.

Disappearance of Kent mother-of-five Sarah Wellgreen treated as potential murder

___

Thread #1 - UK - UK - Sarah Wellgreen, 46, Kent, 9 Oct 2018

 

[Tortoise]

“You got the shock of your life when you went back into the property at 4.52am didn’t you.”

Lacomba is sick later that day

My favourite quotes from the trial. I bet he was sick - it's the only truth so far from his lips.

And meanwhile - the night before the night Sarah disappeared - one of the children had noticed Sarah was missing - but her phones were there and her bed was wet - and had gone downstairs to watch TV - while Ben got up and went outside to listen to wild animals.

This piece of toast is looking almost burnt now.

IMO

 

[Tortoise]

I'd say this was premeditated from the time he moved the cctv monitor into the child's bedroom for them to use as a TV, instead of fixing it (cough cough) to use with his cctv cameras.

Thanks for the updates @Alyce and @Spy Versus Spy !!

 

[Alyce]

10:25

Day 12: Prosecution set to continue cross examination of Lacomba

Good morning and welcome to Day 12 of the Sarah Wellgreen murder trial.

Her ex partner Ben Lacomba denies killing the 46-year-old.

Lacomba is set to return to the witness box this morning (October 16) for Alison Morgan QC, prosecuting, to continue cross examination.

Proceedings will begin at 10.30am.


Live updates as Sarah Wellgreen's ex-partner goes on trial accused of her murder

 

[Kaykedi]

Wishing I had more time and was less sleep-deprived at moment to keep up with this compelling case and trial. I really appreciate it when a thread gets into such an interesting and civil discussion so thanks to all contributing.

But I had to comment and agree with Mrazda's post about Sarah's apparently unusual amount of different relationships with men and the effect that this might have on the case. Of course it is relevant because the more men a woman has in her life the more at risk she is from one or other or several of them. More suspects, therefore maybe a more confusing picture, and in this case I do believe that Lacomba (and his father IIRC) has from the beginning tried to use this to his advantage. Subtle "*advertiser censored*-shaming" IMO.

What worries me in this case is I don't feel that I have heard Sarah's voice in this trial. Perhaps I have missed this but it is so important that her friends and family get to speak for her. She hasn't even had the dignity of being found and put to rest. I haven't seen anything about her childhood, we know she was married very young which is nowadays again unusual. Very often there are psychological reasons why women will gravitate towards men, looking for love and affection even though they have had bad experiences with men time and time again. Often they will try and cement that bond through having children with those men. Again they need the love that children give them.
Pausing for now as getting v emotional!

Wishing I had more time and was less sleep-deprived at moment to keep up with this compelling case and trial. I really appreciate it when a thread gets into such an interesting and civil discussion so thanks to all contributing.

But I had to comment and agree with Mrazda's post about Sarah's apparently unusual amount of different relationships with men and the effect that this might have on the case. Of course it is relevant because the more men a woman has in her life the more at risk she is from one or other or several of them. More suspects, therefore maybe a more confusing picture, and in this case I do believe that Lacomba (and his father IIRC) has from the beginning tried to use this to his advantage. Subtle "*advertiser censored*-shaming" IMO.

What worries me in this case is I don't feel that I have heard Sarah's voice in this trial. Perhaps I have missed this but it is so important that her friends and family get to speak for her. She hasn't even had the dignity of being found and put to rest. I haven't seen anything about her childhood, we know she was married very young which is nowadays again unusual. Very often there are psychological reasons why women will gravitate towards men, looking for love and affection even though they have had bad experiences with men time and time again. Often they will try and cement that bond through having children with those men. Again they need the love that children give them.
Pausing for now as getting v emotional!

We are so on the same page. I've been wondering, is it just me that hasn't read anything regarding her family speaking about her? Being her voice, as you said. It's also making me emotional

 

[deugirtni]

@deugirtni You in Canada? I followed the Nathan o'Brien & his grandparents murders and I can honestly say, I will never ever forget it. ;....

Yes mrazda71, I'm in Canada. The Nathan O'Brien case was tragic and very interesting. There was another really huge case(s) here, if you ever get bored.. look up Dellen Millard.. the biggest and most widely publicized case he was involved in, was the Tim Bosma case, but the fellow ended up being convicted in 3 separate trials for killing 3 people, one of whom was his own father. The intertwining of the cases and the police work involved was astounding.

 

[deugirtni]

Just reminded me of a similar phrase from today.... BBM from:

12:36 KEY EVENT

Were the police already looking at me?

Good catch!

 

[Ironside]

My favourite quotes from the trial.

And meanwhile - the night before the night Sarah disappeared - one of the children had noticed Sarah was missing - but her phones were there and her bed was wet - and had gone downstairs to watch TV - while Ben got up and went outside to listen to wild animals.

I thought this was the night she actually went missing was it not?

 

[Tortoise]

I thought this was the night she actually went missing was it not?

Yes, but he wants the jury to believe it was the night before that the child was up and saw him coming home from either taxi job or wild animals...which would not tally with child stating neither parent was at home.

This is why the prosecutor said he wants the jury to think the child was half right. He is lying his butt off.

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

11:06

Prosecution: 'Did you dig Sarah's grave the night of October 9/10?'

Alison Morgan QC, prosecuting, has began today’s proceedings by questioning Lacomba, who is continuing to stand in the witness box today.

“Did you dig Sarah’s grave before the night of the 9th/10th of October?,” asks Ms Morgan.

“I did not” replies Lacomba.

Sgt Law’s map of the search parameters is shown to Lacomba.

“It typically takes someone an hour and a half to dig a grave,” says Ms Morgan so Lacomba would have had “a quarter of an hour to get somewhere and a quarter of an hour to get back”.

“Did you dig that grave before October 10? Do you want to help us now, have a look? Where is it? Where’s the grave?” asks Ms Morgan.


“I have not murdered the mother of my children Sarah Lacomba,” replies Lacomba.

“If you used a little shovel or you used your father’s shovel it would take you longer wouldn’t it Mr Lacomba,” says Ms Morgan.

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

11:13

'Is a shovel an appropriate Christmas gift for an elderly lady?'

His mother Marilyn Lacomba, born in 1953, is described as “elderly and not in the best physical health.”

The prosecution begins to question Ben Lacomba over the long handed shovel, which he claims to have bought his mother for Christmas.

Ms Morgan asks: “Are you suggesting this is an appropriate Christmas gift for an elderly lady, Mr Lacomba?”


Mr Lacomba feels its weight in the courtroom.

“Are you seriously suggesting that you picked that up in a DIY store and thought that was appropriate for you elderly mother?”, asks Ms Morgan.

“My mother said she wanted to dig and do some gardening at the front of my house,” replies Lacomba.

“She gets the gift of a shovel and the gift of hard labour on your front garden,” says Ms Morgan.

“I don’t remember her using it but I think she did use it a couple of times,” replies Lacomba.

“What a surprise that as an elderly woman she found it easier to use a trowel than a grave digger shovel,” says Ms Morgan.


Ms Morgan asks Lacomba where he got the shovel or how much it cost.

He says he “can’t recall” but thinks he bought it from B&Q or Wickes in Dartford.

“This is complete nonsense isn’t it Mr Lacomba”, says Ms Morgan. “You don’t have any sensible explanation for why you have a shovel that size in your shed.”

Marilyn visited Lacomba on the Saturday before he started giving evidence.


“Did you talk about that shovel?”, asks Ms Morgan.

“I don’t recall talking about any of the evidence I am giving,” says Lacomba

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

11:53

Lacomba: 'The car doesn’t look particularly dirty that day'

“The car doesn’t look particularly dirty that day,” says Lacomba when looking at CCTV showing his car at 9am from cameras at 23 Bazes Shaw on October 9.

“I can see what you’re talking about but I wouldn’t call it a significant amount of dirt,” Lacomba says on CCTV showing his car looking allegedly dirty on October 10.


“Your solicitor went and photographed the journey which you say you took on the way back to New Ash Green (on his last taxi drop off on October 9 before returning home at 5.08pm).

These photos are shown on screen.

Lacomba claims this journey through country lanes with passing places is why his car had mud on it.

“You were driving in this direction along this road weren’t you. You see there’s a problem with that explanation isn’t there Mr Lacomba. There wasn’t mud on one side of your car was there.

There was mud on both sides of your car. Not just the passenger side, the bit pulling into those passing places, but on your side - the driver’s side.” says Ms Morgan.


Lacomba claims he had to pull his whole car into one of the passing places and that’s why it was on the driver’s side.


“Where did it get that mud from?”asks Ms Morgan.

Lacomba says he tries to keep his car clean and gets it washed before he pays his taxi rent on a Wednesday morning.

Edit. Removed duplicate report



Live updates as Sarah Wellgreen's ex-partner goes on trial accused of her murder

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

12:05


Prosecution: 'You were laughing and joking with work colleagues'
Ms Morgan questions why Lacomba refused to give a regular a lift on the morning of October 10 and asks “was it because you didn’t want him seeing the mud inside your car and asking questions?”.


“How can you lose a pair of shoes Mr Lacomba? When you’re in the office, you’re laughing and joking with your work colleagues,” despite the “abnormal” thing missing being Sarah according to Ms Morgan.


“I see no reason why I mention Sarah in the office that day”. says Lacomba

He calls his mum at 7.18am that morning to come round. “Did you ask her to do anything else that morning?” asks Ms Morgan.

Marilyn arrives at 7.38am and stays at 22 Bazes Shaw for 11 minutes. 7.51am she leaves again in her car. Then she comes back at 8.04am. “What was your mother doing that morning?”

“I can’t remember exactly what she was doing. I assume maybe she forgot something,” explains Lacomba.


“Did you ask her to do anything for you in those 15 minutes Mr Lacomba?” asks Ms Morgan.

 

[Shadowplayed]

“I have not murdered the mother of my children Sarah Lacomba,” replies Lacomba.

So he referred to her as Sarah Lacomba ..?

What if he is telling the truth here, and he didn't murder her. What if some one else did, someone close to him, but he helped with the removal/disposal of her body to try and protect them ?

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

12:17

Prosecution: 'Why were you so tired the next day?'
“Why were you so tired on October 10?” asks Ms Morgan.

“I threw up that afternoon when I got home from work and I was ill.” replies Lacomba.

“You were asleep because you had been out the night before, that’s why you were tired Mr Lacomba” says Ms Morgan.

Ms Morgan says PC Manley “would have found three telephones that we no longer have” if Lacomba hadn’t been involved with her search. Two were Lacomba’s and one was Sarah’s iPhone 4.

“That (iPhone 4) was in the address of October 11”, says Ms Morgan.

“Not that I could see,” says Lacomba

 

[Zippy3321]

Have the prosecution got any damming evidence.
Seeing as the trial has taken a year to come to court.
I know not having a body makes it difficult
I keep thinking shes done a runner

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

12:30

Prosecution: The missing telephone

“You knew on the 10th there was a missing telephone but you didn’t mention it in your 999 call at any stage” and he didn’t mention it to PC Manley, says Ms Morgan.

“PC Manley recalls you being there with more than one phone looking through messages.”

“I suggest that one of the phones you had with you on October 11 was Sarah’s iPhone,” as Lacomba showed messages from Neil James sent on the night before.

Ms Morgan says: “The significance of this is obvious, isn’t it Mr Lacomba, you know this.”

An iMessage log - iPhone to iPhone - between Neil James and Sarah Wellgreen shows these messages were on Sarah’s missing iPhone 4.

The “sexually explicit” messages between Sarah and Anthony Garnham which Lacomba said he saw on one of Sarah’s phones in his evidence.

Lacomba said: “I did not have the iPhone. I didn’t do anything with Sarah’s iPhone on October 11 or the days before that.

“I’ve never looked through that phone, the only phone that I looked through was the small white phone and once I had the passcode for the other one.”

He then mentioned to police officers later that day that Sarah’s phone was missing.

Lacomba visited Asda in Greenhithe on October 11 which is next to Serenity Court, where he says he dumped his own phones.

“It is 100 yards away from where you ended up on October 14,” says Ms Morgan. “ so you did get rid of Sarah’s phone on the afternoon of October 11 and that’s why you were so happy to announce that her phone was missing.”


Lacomba on his claim that he composed nasty texts to Sarah that he never sent.


Edit to add extra that source has added.

 

[GimmeAclueBlue]

Have the prosecution got any damming evidence.
Seeing as the trial has taken a year to come to court.
I know not having a body makes it difficult
I keep thinking shes done a runner

A runner is definately not an option. All phones left behind, purse, bank cards the KIDS she fought for in court over and over . No signs of life at all from extensive police searches. Im not sure u can come to that conclusion .
If he didnt murder her why was he out that night and then lies? Why did he turn cctv off? Why did he get rid of ALL phones? Ahhhhh good old coincidence

 

[Websleuther08]

Ms Morgan is doing a good job so far of ripping into him.

I highly doubt someone murdered SW for BL and he just helped out. How could his mum do it, even in her 50's and probably fitter than made out to be. I'd fairly certain she was in on what happened and knows exactly what he has done. I highly doubt he joined in with one of the men she was seeing and killed her off. It's far too risky in a house with kids, and would be much easier to creep down to SW's floor and do something to her quietly in her sleep. What if the assailant *advertiser censored* up, for example ducking of the head on CCTV? It all seems like too much hard work for me and would be too risky. I definitely think he did it all and his doting mother knows the truth. It just doesn't add up him driving with someone or someone using his car to dispose of her.

I can't really get over how someone can live with themselves (if he has truly done it) and go about life knowing where she is but can't bring closure to her friends, family, partners, colleagues and whatnot. I think that it's disgusting and if it were my mother I'd be distraught at not even knowing what has really happened to her. I think it's truly disgusting and I do feel for those around her and SW herself.

 

[GimmeAclueBlue]

Ms Morgan is doing a good job so far of ripping into him.

I highly doubt someone murdered SW for BL and he just helped out. How could his mum do it, even in her 50's and probably fitter than made out to be. I'd fairly certain she was in on what happened and knows exactly what he has done. I highly doubt he joined in with one of the men she was seeing and killed her off. It's far too risky in a house with kids, and would be much easier to creep down to SW's floor and do something to her quietly in her sleep. What if the assailant *advertiser censored* up, for example ducking of the head on CCTV? It all seems like too much hard work for me and would be too risky. I definitely think he did it all and his doting mother knows the truth. It just doesn't add up him driving with someone or someone using his car to dispose of her.

I can't really get over how someone can live with themselves (if he has truly done it) and go about life knowing where she is but can't bring closure to her friends, family, partners, colleagues and whatnot. I think that it's disgusting and if it were my mother I'd be distraught at not even knowing what has really happened to her. I think it's truly disgusting and I do feel for those around her and SW herself.

Great post! Agree with it all. I hope mommy does time for all the lies she has backed up.
IMO mommy cleaned his brown shoes for him too and i cant wait to hear her answers. Its amazing what mothers will do for there children, maybe he never said it out loud but she knew what he had done
IMO