UK UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London - Clapham Common area, 3 March 2021 *Arrests* #7

[FrancesFlower]

Also, in regards to his head injury in custody.

I had the misfortune of being stuck in a relationship with one particularly nasty piece of work some years ago.

Whenever he'd done something to me or anybody else that meant the police would be called (like smashing up the house we shared) he would hit himself in the head/face over and over - or make a ton of superficial cuts to his arms in advance of the police attending. This was, in my experience, designed to make himself look mentally ill.

Such theatrics from him worked and instead of being carted off to the police station on several occasions he was taken to the mental health unit for assessment and later discharged with no repercussions.

Any 'normal' person would have been arrested.

With the benefit of hindsight and some newer understanding of psychology it's clear that he had a pretty severe personality disorder.

It could be the case that WC is laying the groundwork for claims that he's not criminally responsible.

Of course it could also be a suicide attempt, but anybody with much sense would know that you're not going to succeed committing suicide in police custody (which is alot different to prison in terms of how frequently you're checked on - especially being the suspect in such a high profile case)

Just my take anyway.

 

[SpursGyal]

Would his wife even know about the IE charge if they didn't suspend him from duty?

I highly doubt it.

 

[canbereached]

The wife I suspect is in trouble for giving WC some kind of false alibi. It’s a serious misdeed but a bailable offence. JMO MOO

Is this not the same as Maxine Carrr though? It's perverting the course of justice. Was she bailed? I find that hard to believe.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Am I reading this right, that two serving officers are being investigated? And the part about it being linked to four other referrals! What’s going on?!

"The IOPC’s investigation follows a conduct referral from the MPS in relation to two officers, received last night, which is linked to four other referrals.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14310271/sarah-everard-police-wayne-couzens/

I suggest IOPC referrals for the following

Referral 1 - Police investigation regarding indecent exposure report
Referral 2 - Conduct of police during missing person investigation for SE, subsequently a murder investigation
Referral 3 - Serving police officer arrested for serious crime
Referral 4 - Person in custody (WC) coming to harm in this case requiring hospital treatment

I suspect 2-4 are standard practice in all police forces in England and Wales.

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

Oh my god! This is terrible. No wonder The Met are worried. He wouldn't have been in London that day had those officers actually investigated. Wow.

He may still have been in London - he could be one of those people who follows a routine even if they lose their job. Would probably not have been Sarah but may well have been someone else. Moo.

 

[stephaniejanes]

I think he banged his head to wind down time on the PACE clock. I reckon he wanted to minimise interview and detention time. There was an episode of 24 Hours in Police Custody where a woman did the same thing.

 

[misscandle]

I have to say this, I consider myself very street savvy - I've lived alone since 19 (bar a couple boyfriends) and I'm mid 20s now, I know exactly how to handle myself out and about, I look behind myself often, check my route, always make sure to let people know where I am and avoid going out at dark/sticking to busy places. But I absolutely feel my guard goes down - as I'm sure it does with most people - when a police officer approaches me. Because in my mind, they have quite a lot of power over me, and they do don't they? Even recently in Dorset we've seen police arresting people for being out more than once a day on walks (there's lots of controversy over this and what actually went on but bottom line is that it is happening), so it's completely and absolutely believable a police officer would ask someone why they're out walking. Just because we're on the umpteenth lockdown doesn't make their presence any less imposing. I don't think anyone's initial reaction to a police officer asking questions about the whys and wherefores of why we're out at such and such a time would be: "Fake!", especially when shown a badge. I don't think that's "flimsy or unbelievable" at all. In fact I think it's much more believable than him just coming up behind her and knocking her out with something as some have suggested. He's a policeman. Of course he's going to use that to his advantage. Of course he's going to be out with psychological control to get what he wants. That badge would've been used, one way or another.

edit: something else I just thought of also. I bet in the back of her mind as she was walking she was aware that she possibly wasn't supposed to be out and about, maybe thinking "ah I'm breaking lockdown here". There's every likelihood when she saw him some part of her thought "I've been caught", and she was much more receptive to him than anyone ordinarily would be. He likely played upon that.

I’m inclined to disagree with the fact about someone being scared about being out and about in lockdown. London has largely remained quite busy, despite the rules. Lots of people still travelling to work etc. I assume The Met (in general) have bigger jobs to deal with than lone women supposedly breaking lockdown - especially as a woman walking in the street is most likely a key worker/going for daily walk/going to the shop. etc etc. Walking in the street isn’t breaking any sort of lockdown rule. I’m saying this as a 27 year old female who doesn’t live too far from Clapham and that’s personally how I feel, so can of course not speak for anybody else.

I also don’t think it’s been confirmed yet but I assume he wasn’t in uniform as he wasn’t on duty and was not driving a police vehicle.

JMO.

 

[LeopardLeotard]

Neighbours say they spotted a Land Rover containing two men watching the property for two hours before around 20 officers raided the house.
I didn't think there were more, I'm starting to think there could be now.
A shirtless Couzens was led from the house in handcuffs with one witness saying: 'He looked very calm - just walked out'.

Today it was claimed that Couzens worked a 2pm to 8pm shift at the US embassy on the day his alleged victim vanished 'into thin air'. The building he was guarding is less than three miles from where Miss Everard was last seen at 9.30pm as she walked home to Brixton on March 3.

Met Police operations will continue at the woods and in Deal for the rest of the week.

A Kent Police spokesman said: 'Over the next few days, the Met Police will continue to carry out activities across the area whilst their enquiries progress.'

A car linked to Couzens - thought to be a hire vehicle - was reportedly picked up on a motorist's dashcam near to the spot where Sarah disappeared last Wednesday.

One source told MailOnline: 'If they identified his car from the bus, they will have been able to see him driving all the way home on London and Highways England's network of cameras.

'If she was in the car, they will have footage of him with her'.

Detectives also probe whether the suspect used his warrant card to lure her into his car after leaving work guarding the nearby US Embassy, it emerged today.

Scotland Yard are also said to be investigating whether Couzens, 48, used the current Covid-19 lockdown rules to stop the missing woman as she walked home to Brixton from her friend's home in Clapham, south-west London on the evening of March 3.

Police have ramped up their operation at the rural crime scene this afternoon, setting up a mobile headquarters and sending in a diving unit as well as more officers in multiple riot vans.

Forensic officers in blue boiler suits were seen entering the woods with tripods, cameras and possibly equipment to scan the soil.

MailOnline believes that the woods where the remains were found were known to him because Couzens' Ukrainian wife and their two children had visited for walks.

Couzens was working at the US Embassy just three miles from where Sarah vanished and knocked off work around 90 minutes before she was last seen.He was working there as an armed guard.

Aerial footage shot by the BBC shows the back of the garden complete with a pool apparently covered over by investigators

Police have today expanded their presence at the site in Ashford where human remains were found last night, including a mobile HQ (pictured being dropped into place) and a diving unit.

Officers made the horrifying discovery at the disused Great Chart Golf & Leisure Country Club near Ashford (pictured today)

Couzens' home in Deal is surrounded with metal walls and is swarming with forensics officers

Police also searched the suspect's family's former garage in Dover, which is now disused and abandoned

There is so much information to unpack here. Much more at link:
Sarah Everard: Police officer arrested over 'kidnap and murder' found in cell with head injuries'

 

[stephaniejanes]

I suggest IOPC referrals for the following

Referral 1 - Police investigation regarding indecent exposure report
Referral 2 - Conduct of police during missing person investigation for SE, subsequently a murder investigation
Referral 3 - Serving police officer arrested for serious crime
Referral 4 - Person in custody (WC) coming to harm in this case requiring hospital treatment

I suspect 2-4 are standard practice in all police forces in England and Wales.

Spot on, exactly as I read it.

 

[missmargot]

I have read the different news reports and I’m unsure how to interpret them. Is it the case that a complaint was specifically made against WC for indecent exposure, or was a complaint made of indecent exposure which, if investigated, would have led them to WC?

 

[Nikynoo]

Woah this is big.

Doesn't specifically mention the report was against WC though does it? I hope not, and it's been linked back to him afterwards. Not that that makes it okay but think it's an important distinction.

Unless I have misunderstood your post, I think it does - IOPC investigating conduct of MPS officers after indecent exposure reported | Independent Office for Police Conduct.
The IOPC’s investigation follows a conduct referral from the MPS in relation to two officers, received last night, which is linked to four other referrals. They are all connected to the arrest of a serving MPS officer on suspicion of kidnap, murder and a separate allegation of indecent exposure.

Our investigation will look at the actions of the MPS after police received a report on 28 February (2021) that a man had exposed himself at a fast food restaurant in South London.

Yesterday (Wednesday) we determined that two conduct referrals relating to kidnap/murder and indecent exposure allegations against the arrested officer should remain under local investigation by the force.

We are still assessing a mandatory referral in relation to the actions of police after they received a report that Sarah Everard was missing.

A fifth mandatory referral was received from the MPS today in relation to police contact with the arrested officer who was treated in hospital after sustaining a head injury while in custody yesterday afternoon. That referral is also being assessed to determine what further action may be required from us.

 

[Officer Dibble]

May relate to how they handled the incident reporting. Hope they didn’t brush it off/attempt to protect ‘one of their own’ JMO

That is how I see it JMO MOO

 

[Annabel8999]

I'm sorry if this has been stated but I did look on the front page and this thread is moving very fast - are there no known social media accounts of WC?

I saw one a few days ago. It said age: sex: yes please’ no posts since 2012.

Moo.

 

[Columboshound]

I have read the different news reports and I’m unsure how to interpret them. Is it the case that a complaint was specifically made against WC for indecent exposure, or was a complaint made of indecent exposure which, if investigated, would have led them to WC?

And was he wearing Uniform at the time of the exposure? Much more identifiable etc if so and zero excuse for Met not acting immediately

 

[ScottishWebsleuth96]

I wonder if the 2 people referred to IOPC are going to be the people you would expect to govern the behavior of an officer: the Sergeant and the inspector of the unit.

 

[Officer Dibble]

it doesn't say if they knew it was him who had flashed on 28 Feb or whether they just had a description of a man who they did not know was him. If it is like a lot of flashers , do they really take those things that seriously ? do they have the resources to look into those in any great depth when there are numerous other serious crimes in London atm like the many stabbings?

As we know from the recent Libby Squire case, its not taken seriously. This has got to change. Its usually a precursor to escalating behaviour JMO MOO

 

[misscandle]

"Our investigation will look at the actions of the MPS after police received a report on 28 February that a man had exposed himself at a fast food restaurant in South London."Our investigation will look at the actions of the MPS after police received a report on 28 February that a man had exposed himself at a fast food restaurant in South London."

Note the official IPCC statement (my bold) says 'at' not 'in'- a small pendantic point, but one that makes a difference to likely amount of CCTV available

I think it’s likely he was inside IMO. Also- if he was outside the fast food restaurant, wouldn't it say he was outside?

 

[CuriousObserver1]

He may still have been in London - he could be one of those people who follows a routine even if they lose their job. Would probably not have been Sarah but may well have been someone else. Moo.

He would not have access a badge/warrant card though if it turns out he used that to trick her into stopping and not walking straight away

 

[Richard Yokely]

Is this not the same as Maxine Carrr though? It's perverting the course of justice. Was she bailed? I find that hard to believe.

It’s a bit different, Maxine Carr I believe provided a written statement which would trigger the Pervert the course of justice offence. It’s likely at this point no statement was given by WCs other half.

 

[KensingtonandChelsea]

Also, in regards to his head injury in custody.

I had the misfortune of being stuck in a relationship with one particularly nasty piece of work some years ago.

Whenever he'd done something to me or anybody else that meant the police would be called (like smashing up the house we shared) he would hit himself in the head/face over and over - or make a ton of superficial cuts to his arms in advance of the police attending. This was, in my experience, designed to make himself look mentally ill.

Such theatrics from him worked and instead of being carted off to the police station on several occasions he was taken to the mental health unit for assessment and later discharged with no repercussions.

Any 'normal' person would have been arrested.

With the benefit of hindsight and some newer understanding of psychology it's clear that he had a pretty severe personality disorder.

It could be the case that WC is laying the groundwork for claims that he's not criminally responsible.

Of course it could also be a suicide attempt, but anybody with much sense would know that you're not going to succeed committing suicide in police custody (which is alot different to prison in terms of how frequently you're checked on - especially being the suspect in such a high profile case)

Just my take anyway.

Fred West managed to commit suicide at Winson Green while awaiting trial if I'm not wrong. However I think you're right, I think he's trying to formulate a defence of insanity/diminished responsibility so he can get the charge reduced to manslaughter. IMO that's not going to happen, I think the hire car shows evidence of malice aforethought. If he was cruising the area looking for a sex worker to pick up and happened upon Sarah and decided to kidnap her, this also doesn't help his insanity defence. Not to mention he would have had to be vetted to receive a firearms licence and patrol parliamentary and diplomatic buildings so the Met must have screened his mental health prior to this. I'm not saying you can't lie about mental health problems but the fact that the Met ticked the box and said he was fine to continue will work against him.

The fact that EC has been bailed until April makes me wonder whether she'll be allowed to have contact with her children at all. I won't mention them on this site but I assume at least one is old enough to grasp the gist of what's going on. It seems her offence wasn't as grave as some people imagined?

I see a lot of people saying that Sarah wouldn't have just gotten in an unmarked police car because she was too professional or savvy or whatever. Aside from being victim blaming, respectfully, none of us (I think) knew her and we can't assume from what we've seen in the media about her background that she would respond a certain way when confronted by an authority figure telling her to do something. Women are raised to be polite and nice and not rock the boat, even if we're independent, successful women so a natural reaction to authority may be to just do what they say or trust them implicitly.