Found Deceased UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London - Clapham Common area, 3 March 2021 *Arrests* #10

Status
Not open for further replies.
Found it:

'His charge sheet alleges he "unlawfully and by force took or carried away Sarah Everard against her will".' - it's from the Daily Mirror's account of court proceedings today. The fact it's in quotation marks suggests it's a direct transcription of the charge sheet. As a reminder, UK definition of kidnap is "to take by force or by fraud" - the fact the charge sheet specifically states she was taken "by force" seems to me to rule out that she was taken by fraud - ie, she wasn't coerced or tricked into getting into the car - she was physically forced into it.

This makes sense to me. He's a bulky, muscular guy, and she's a slight woman - he'd have no need to come up with some detailed plan about how to convince her to get in the car - much easier, and quicker, just to physically force her in there. As someone else has pointed out, it'd be over in seconds. As they say, the simplest explanations are usually the correct ones.

To me that fully answers the question of how she got in the car - he put her there.

Link: Police officer accused of abducting and murdering Sarah Everard appears in court

Thank you for posting this. It's a horrible, sick reality which happens over and over IMO and I just wish people would realise that a non-suspecting person, walking along like Sarah Everard can be totally subdued within seconds. It's extremely sad because it happened again and only now there seems to be a debate around it.
 
Well thank you, I appreciate it x
I lost someone very very close and dear to me from covid, its all still a bit raw, so really haven't been interested in ambulances or shouting neighbours, it's been a struggle, but I'm getting there, just wished I had set up security cams, kicking myself over it(had them at old place, didn't think I'd need them here) - I set them all up when this broke, so I'm safe lol xx
Sorry to hear that LL, you’ve been an absolute star with all this and it’s been greatly appreciated. Sending you a massive virtual hug xx
 
Did anyone else get the advice as a kid, “if you’re out on your own and get lost or need help, look for a policeman”?

Gradually over the years as police resources dried up and the ‘Bobby on the beat’ disappeared, this changed to “look for someone with children”. I’d tell my daughter, look for somebody with children with them - a mum or a dad.

It’s chilling to think that WC was both of these things, and that actually we have zero ways of ever knowing whether somebody else is remotely safe.
 
I think as a matter of law, she could have got into the car voluntarily (eg for a lift home (not saying this happened)) but he drives past her area, she asks him to stop, he doesn’t, I think that at that point the criminal act starts - the “force” element would be the use of a car the victim can’t escape from. In my view, Just because a victim does one voluntary act, doesn’t mean that the criminal act can’t start at another related point.

Exactly this !
 
I can tell you right now that is not always the case. In strange scenarios your instincts don't always immediately kick in - you may be baffled as to why the car has stopped so suddenly and that's all your assailant needs. I doubt Sarah was expecting this to happen and so she may have been startled and her instinct to run delayed.
I think someone earlier speculated that it's likely he would have pulled up behind her which may be a bit harder to notice, I'm not really sure
I also think it's a case where we think we may do one thing but if it actually happened we wouldn't do it. Sort of how some people carry weapons and freeze when there's a situation they need to be used in
 
Wrong, they are from me on my phone in my flat, there's no communal area at the front lol, as stated you can see it's from inside, tiles in my kitchen, and my balcony-yes with fairy lights!, ridiculous
I’ve just googled the road and there do seem to be many buildings opposite which have communal halls and stairways. This does make me uncomfortable...
 
Can’t believe this has to be said but sleuthing other members is a violation of TOS. If you don’t like someone, put them on ignore and you never have to see their posts. But trying to identify or discredit or intimidate another member is obviously out of line.
 
They likely know her cause of death but have chose not to make it public.
One of the journalists (bylines in Mirror, Metro and Gay Star, but not a verified account) in court today tweeted that much was said that they're not allowed to report at present, but that what was alleged, what the press heard, was "scary". MOO but it may be that the police know cause of death, but that it can't be reported right now. He later linked to this guide from the BBC which explains what can and cannot be reported from these types of hearings, and why. Contempt and reporting restrictions - BBC Academy
 
I think as a matter of law, she could have got into the car voluntarily (eg for a lift home (not saying this happened)) but he drives past her area, she asks him to stop, he doesn’t, I think that at that point the criminal act starts - the “force” element would be the use of a car the victim can’t escape from. In my view, Just because a victim does one voluntary act, doesn’t mean that the criminal act can’t start at another related point.

No way. She was coerced into the car, thought he was taking her home, he drove past her home, she realised, asked him to stop, and that's when "force" element kicks in? No way. For one, how would the police know this?? Sorry, but this is a ridiculous theory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
190
Guests online
4,411
Total visitors
4,601

Forum statistics

Threads
592,462
Messages
17,969,261
Members
228,774
Latest member
truecrime-hazeleyes
Back
Top