UK UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London - Clapham Common area, 3 March 2021 #4 *Arrests*

[tesni]

Sarah Everard, 33, vanished as she walked home to Brixton, south London, from the Clapham Junction area.

She spoke to her partner en route but has not been heard from since about 21:30 GMT, friend Rose Woollard said.

Sarah Everard: Police 'increasingly concerned' for Brixton woman

https://twitter.com/LambethMPS/status/1367784499237576704?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1367784499237576704|twgr^|twcon^s1_c10&ref_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56281473

Thread #1
Thread #2
Thread #3

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

Many posts have been removed.

We do not know whether or not SE broke lockdown rules. To speculate or assume that she did is to somehow apportion blame toward a victim and is not victim friendly.

From The Rules: Etiquette & Information

VICTIM FRIENDLY

Websleuths is a victim friendly forum. Attacking or bashing a victim is not allowed. Discussing known victim behavior, good or bad is fine, but do so in a civil and constructive way, and only when such behavior is known to be relevant to the case.

The "victim friendly" rule extends to the family members of victims and suspects. Sleuthing family members, friends, and others who have not been designated as suspects is not allowed. Don't make random accusations, suggest their involvement, nor bash and attack them. Posting their personal information, including names, addresses, and background data -- even if it is public -- is not allowed. That does not mean, however, that statements made by family members and other third parties cannot come into discussion as the facts of the case are reported in the media.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

Hey everyone,

There are far too many TOS violations going on in this thread. Please read TOS (aka The Rules, linked in my signature line) that everyone has agreed to upon registering with Websleuths, some of which includes:

All quoted material and information stated as fact must have a link to the source and ALL images require a link to the source. Always remember: No link, no post !!

Copyright rules are that no more than 10% of any article may be copied. It is not just a WS rule, it is copyright law.

Rumors are not allowed. This includes social media comments and/or hearsay.

Sleuthing of family, friends, or anyone else not officially named a POI / suspect is not allowed. Members may discuss what has been said in MSM about the person or what that person has said in MSM, but sleuthing out their personal information is not allowed. Members may sleuth this type of thing behind the scenes and discuss in private messaging with others, but it is not allowed to be posted on the public forum.

WS is victim friendly and victims include family, friends, and innocent persons. It is okay to have an opinion, but if your opinion is an insinuation or direct accusation of someone not officially named a POI or suspect, it is not allowed.

The thread is dedicated to discussion of Sarah's case. Anything else is off topic. If you have a question about The Rules, please private message a Mod or Admin for clarification rather than discussing it on the thread.

Thank you to everyone for your cooperation and for being here to discuss Sarah's case.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

from: The Rules: Copyright Violations:

Members may link to a paywalled article so that others who have paid for a subscription or wish to get one can read the article. However, members can not copy/paste or quote directly from the article. It is not only a TOS violation, it is a violation of copyright law.
Members may briefly paraphrase what the article is about or they can copy the Google hit summary to give an idea of what the article contains in the event people wish to pay for the article.


On another note, approved MSM means publications such as major newspapers, not social media discussion groups like nappyvalleynet.

Also, random social media accounts are not approved sources. All posts (and responses) based on discussion of a random Twitter account have been removed.

 

[Sillybilly]

What is a random social media/Twitter account vs an approved or ok one?

Approved social media sites are those belonging to a victim, a POI/suspect who has been officially named by LE, MSM, LE, and group support pages.

Please see The Rules: Social Media - Facebook, Twitter, etc

 

[v0x]

Update: Links to the traffic cam site are allowed. Screenshots including random individuals are not. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

 

[v0x]

Note the boyfriend has not been named as a POI in this case. Please refrain from sleuthing him.

 

[DouglasFirs]

Hello, I'm new, been reading this thread for a few days and just absolutely cannot stop thinking about SE. Like many others posting, I've lived a very similar life to her and its really shaken me.

This new development is horrifying. JMO but I can't shake the feeling that he used his uniform to coerce SE into compliance, whether into a building or vehicle.

JMO again, I feel like the search at the flats today may have been intended to 'flush out' someone who lives in the flats (as others have mentioned, the way the forensic investigation was conducted seemed quite unusual), and I can't help but wonder if maybe the officer who has been arrested was the 'flushee', who then fled to Kent, where I am imagining that the woman who was arrested provided a hiding place? Again, JMO. Hope that's enough JMOs, I really don't want to do anything wrong so please tell me if I have. I'm just so emotional over this and needed to get my thoughts out!

Also, I'm not familiar with this but is there a reason that the officer was arrested 'in connection' but the woman's reason for arrest has been made explicit, i.e. arrested for 'assisting an offender'? I also think that's an odd term. Whatever he may have done, he hasn't been found guilty yet and therefore isn't an offender? Maybe I'm wrong on that though. Just thought it was odd wording if it is relating to the officer. All of this just my opinion.

 

[legal2021]

You also have to consider that the woman also arrested at the same address (wife?) "assisted the offender". It's one thing to imagine he assaulted her, it's another to then accept that she was complicit in the crime!!

Assisting an offender isn't quite what you'd think it is. It doesn't mean assisting an offender to commit the index offence. It relates to committing an act that stops the arrest/prosecution of an offender.

A common one is letting someone hide out at an address whilst 'wanted' by the Police.

 

[Itsgrimupnorth]

Well that justifies the 'complex nature of the case' the police were talking about.

It also shows that they did have more than they were letting on. As many suspected. It also explains why they were so tight lipped. It also gives clues as to why they made the thorough searches including CSI that they did.

I stated my personal view that she was removed from the area via vehicle and still believe this to be true. It would be easier to do that if it wasn't an attack but a willing cooperation from SE. How does that happen? If it's someone you know or a figure of authority with instant trust... the police.

For any USA readers remember the cop James Duckett? It does happen.

 

[Skigh]

MOO If i was a gambling man I would bet on the fact that they already knew each other and the meeting was planned. Then something crazy happened. This case came to mind

If a meeting was planned,why not meet at her flat,she only lived a short drive away and lived alone.

 

[Thebutlerdiditagain]

I'm surprised there were no eye witnesses to help police yet, none that we know of anyway. A young woman stopping to talk to police in a car, and getting into a police car would be more memorable than any old car.


This assumes he was in a police car, but if he wasn't Sarah trusting him is less likely. MOO

I think he has been caught either by his car spotted on cctv or he lives close by and I would not be surprised if he knows her as a friend of a friend or a possible ex boyfriend

But then again on the flip side I would also not be surprised if he is not known to her and could be a serial offender who has finally been caught

 

[Tortoise]

Let's hope he hasn't been erasing cctv records. There are a fair few that people here couldn't access.

 

[infinit]

I now keep thinking back to that post on here somewhat out of the blue from a user contacted on SM, allegedly from a police officer, about what CCTV images could be accessed and how... we initially scoffed that an officer wouldn’t know about that sort of thing (I should add: scoffed not at the truthfulness of the poster on here, but rather in the sense of assuming that the officer might not be who they said there were if they didn’t know that but were involved in the investigation, and instead might have been a journo trying it on.

But what if that was this officer, and he was snooping on the case online because he wasn’t actually part of the investigation and/or had a LE role that didn’t require use or even knowledge of TFL CCTV, and was concerned he could be picked up on camera coercing SE into his vehicle? Doesn’t bear thinking about... but nothing would surprise me with this case now.

That is a very grim thought. I'm on my phone in bed but is anyone able to get a link?

 

[CoverMeCagney]

Your post gives me flashbacks to a post I think I remember about a Putney? police officer being surprised about the TfL cameras....And now I won't sleep.

Anyone else remember the post/poster?

Thread #2
Post #362
@hed_ts

 

[Vaccine]

no but the rules are a bit flimsy and for a lot of people if a police officer tells you something you tend to do it. MOO i think they probably knew each other. For me it makes the most sense at this stage

I think the offer of a lift is just as likely.

 

[SouthLondon85]

I now keep thinking back to that post on here somewhat out of the blue from a user contacted on SM, allegedly from a police officer, about what CCTV images could be accessed and how... we initially scoffed that an officer wouldn’t know about that sort of thing (I should add: scoffed not at the truthfulness of the poster on here, but rather in the sense of assuming that the officer might not be who they said there were if they didn’t know that but were involved in the investigation, and instead might have been a journo trying it on.

But what if that was this officer, and he was snooping on the case online because he wasn’t actually part of the investigation and/or had a LE role that didn’t require use or even knowledge of TFL CCTV, and was concerned he could be picked up on camera coercing SE into his vehicle? Doesn’t bear thinking about... but nothing would surprise me with this case now.

This is such a good - and chilling - point @Parmalade.

 

[peterf]

If a meeting was planned,why not meet at her flat,she only lived a short drive away and lived alone.

that's a good point. Maybe the plan was to pick her up and bring her home. All speculation, maybe he was coming off duty and picked her up? But yeah does seem fishy now you say it

 

[TheBlueGuardian]

A prank? This is well beyond prank territory. She's been missing for a week.

A prank can take 10 mins ... there have been lots of cases where a prank or stupid game turns into harm, crime and murder which extends into cover up. We are all trying to make sense of this by bringing up different ideas. Two perps are caught but there can be more involved JMO

 

[tedtink]

Does anyone know how long it typically takes for the name of a suspect to be released? If that was here, we’d typically have a name by now.

When/if he's charged.