Found Deceased UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London - Clapham Common area, 3 March 2021 *Arrests* #14

[Megnut]

The thing I find a little strange is Sarah was missing from the 3rd but he has been charged with rape between the 2nd and 10th?

Is it possible he held her captive for some days?

My heart goes out to Sarah's boyfriend and family and friends.

I just don't understand how there can be such wholesale depravity, for one person to do such a thing to another person....

May her light still shine on.

JMO

 

[Skigh]

Sarah Everard: Wayne Couzens admits rape and kidnap
rbbm.
''PC Couzens was wearing khaki trousers and a grey sweatshirt as he appeared by video link from Belmarsh jail.

He pleaded guilty to kidnapping Ms Everard "unlawfully and by force or fraud" on 3 March.

He also pleaded guilty to a second charge of rape between 2 and 10 March''

''The court heard that he had accepted responsibility for the killing but medical reports were awaited.

The next plea hearing is due to take place on 9 July.''

is this the first time it has been officially stated that he did rape Sarah?

 

[JuicyLucy]

is this the first time it has been officially stated that he did rape Sarah?

Yes.

 

[Kitkat28]

Why are people surprised that he admitted guilt? He did it, he knows he did it, what’s to be gained by saying he didn’t?

 

[HollyHunter9]

Interesting that he has pleaded guilty to rape as this was not originally a charge by the police (I'm guessing because there was not enough evidence to prove it) so he has admitted that part himself. I do think he will admit to the murder too but more for his own sake (I don't think he wants the full details of his heinous crime made public). MOO

 

[Alyce]

PC Wayne Couzens pleads guilty to kidnap and rape of Sarah Everard

I didn't expect this news. I saw that Wayne Couzens was down for mention at the Old Bailey today but thought it would be for some kind of procedural detail.

My expectation is that he will plead guilty to the murder in due course and I'm interested to know whether the detail of the case against him will then ever be disclosed in full, or whether no trial = no public disclosure. If this was the US, he would perhaps be required to allocute, but not here afaik. Arguably, that would be easier for Sarah's family, although arguably not.

I'm also interested to know the implications of this for the disclosure of any other crimes he may have been suspected of committing, which would ordinarily have been suppressed until after the trial, as far as I understand.

Hopefully some legal peeps will be along soon to educate us.

All JMO.

ETA: Thanks for reopening the thread given the circs!

if he pleads guilty to murder and there is no trial, then we will receive some details via the Judge’s sentencing remarks

 

[Alyce]

As a former police officer he will know the benefit of putting in a guilty plea as early as possible.

 

[Pinkizzy]

They will publish sentencing remarks when there is no trial - details of the kidnap and murder etc
Sorry - posted without reading the thread...

 

[minneolo]

I am surprised that WC decided to plead guilty - but I am so happy this avoids the circus of a trial for Sarah’s loved ones.

My own speculation:

WC apparently gave a (spontaneous?) confession of rape without LE having specific evidence and admitted to “being responsible” for her death, but has not yet entered a guilty plea on her murder.

Therefore, I think his goal was rape and kidnap - maybe didn’t even think through what he would do “after”. Perhaps his goal was even to keep her for a period of time. I don’t get the sense in this case that murder was the goal - rather that WC caused Sarah’s death at some point in his chosen crime.

Also let me be clear that this does not change his culpability at all - WC should be held fully accountable for Sarah’s death. If he killed her in the commission of rape and kidnap, he is guilty of murder.

I too am curious what WC will need to admit, given the difference between US allocation laws vs. UK laws.

 

[Skigh]

Interesting that he has pleaded guilty to rape as this was not originally a charge by the police (I'm guessing because there was not enough evidence to prove it) so he has admitted that part himself. I do think he will admit to the murder too but more for his own sake (I don't think he wants the full details of his heinous crime made public). MOO

It could be that forensic test results had recently come back and the rape was going to be added to the charges against him so he was pushed into deciding to confess . Given the amount of cctc evidence he could not deny the kidnap charge so has had to admit to that.

 

[SBops]

I am surprised that WC decided to plead guilty - but I am so happy this avoids the circus of a trial for Sarah’s loved ones.

My own speculation:

WC apparently gave a (spontaneous?) confession of rape without LE having specific evidence and admitted to “being responsible” for her death, but has not yet entered a guilty plea on her murder.

Therefore, I think his goal was rape and kidnap - maybe didn’t even think through what he would do “after”. Perhaps his goal was even to keep her for a period of time. I don’t get the sense in this case that murder was the goal - rather that WC caused Sarah’s death at some point in his chosen crime.

Also let me be clear that this does not change his culpability at all - WC should be held fully accountable for Sarah’s death. If he killed her in the commission of rape and kidnap, he is guilty of murder.

I too am curious what WC will need to admit, given the difference between US allocation laws vs. UK laws.

You are more generous than I. IMO, he killed her to cover up the kidnap and rape or because he had a fantasy of strangling someone during sex.. I don't believe for one moment he killed her accidently while raping her.

 

[ShamelessObserver]

Does anyone know why

the charge of rape was between 2 March to 10 March ?

she was kidnapped on the 3rd of March so I don’t get why they’re specifying the day before???

 

[SBops]

Does anyone know why

the charge of rape was between 2 March to 10 March ?

she was kidnapped on the 3rd of March so I don’t get why they’re specifying the day before???

Because he hasn't told them all the details, I would think.

 

[JuicyLucy]

Does anyone know why

the charge of rape was between 2 March to 10 March ?

she was kidnapped on the 3rd of March so I don’t get why they’re specifying the day before???

Other news outlets may have different wording, but if you look at this one from the BBC, what they have said about what he has admitted to is actually quite ambiguous and suggests - perhaps - to me that he has admitted to an additional charge of raping a second victim sometime between 2 and 10 March. I've snipped and bolded for clarity but haven't excluded anything that could change the sense. It is definitely unclear though, as 'second charge' may mean 'subsequent to the first charge which is kidnap' or may mean second charge of rape. If the latter, it would explain the issue with the dates.

Sarah Everard: Wayne Couzens admits rape and kidnap

"Appearing at the Old Bailey via video-link, PC Wayne Couzens, of Deal, pleaded guilty both to kidnap and rape.

"The court heard he also accepted responsibility for Ms Everard's death but did not enter a plea on the charge of murder.

"He pleaded guilty to kidnapping Ms Everard "unlawfully and by force or fraud" on 3 March.

"He also pleaded guilty to a second charge of rape between 2 and 10 March."

JMO

 

[Kitkat28]

You are more generous than I. IMO, he killed her to cover up the kidnap and rape or because he had a fantasy of strangling someone during sex.. I don't believe for one moment he killed her accidently while raping her.

Exactly, and having done it that’s it. Fantasy fulfilled, game over. The whole thing is just so cold and utilitarian.

I truly believe poor Sarah was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Any woman would have done the ‘job’.

 

[SBops]

Other news outlets may have different wording, but if you look at this one from the BBC, what they have said about what he has admitted to is actually quite ambiguous and suggests - perhaps - to me that he has admitted to an additional charge of raping a second victim sometime between 2 and 10 March. I've snipped and bolded for clarity but haven't excluded anything that could change the sense. It is definitely unclear though, as 'second charge' may mean 'subsequent to the first charge which is kidnap' or may mean second charge of rape. If the latter, it would explain the issue with the dates.

Sarah Everard: Wayne Couzens admits rape and kidnap

"Appearing at the Old Bailey via video-link, PC Wayne Couzens, of Deal, pleaded guilty both to kidnap and rape.

"The court heard he also accepted responsibility for Ms Everard's death but did not enter a plea on the charge of murder.

"He pleaded guilty to kidnapping Ms Everard "unlawfully and by force or fraud" on 3 March.

"He also pleaded guilty to a second charge of rape between 2 and 10 March."

JMO

I don't want to even think about what that might mean.

 

[Pinkizzy]

Other news outlets may have different wording, but if you look at this one from the BBC, what they have said about what he has admitted to is actually quite ambiguous and suggests - perhaps - to me that he has admitted to an additional charge of raping a second victim sometime between 2 and 10 March. I've snipped and bolded for clarity but haven't excluded anything that could change the sense. It is definitely unclear though, as 'second charge' may mean 'subsequent to the first charge which is kidnap' or may mean second charge of rape. If the latter, it would explain the issue with the dates.

Sarah Everard: Wayne Couzens admits rape and kidnap

"Appearing at the Old Bailey via video-link, PC Wayne Couzens, of Deal, pleaded guilty both to kidnap and rape.

"The court heard he also accepted responsibility for Ms Everard's death but did not enter a plea on the charge of murder.

"He pleaded guilty to kidnapping Ms Everard "unlawfully and by force or fraud" on 3 March.

"He also pleaded guilty to a second charge of rape between 2 and 10 March."

JMO

The rape may refer to another victim

 

[Alyce]

The March 10 date is used because that is the date that Sarah's body was found.

 

[LucyRocket]

They always put between (date prior to anything having happened - date body found). Because any offences had to have taken place BETWEEN those dates.

His defence team have to do their best on his behalf so they'll be waiting for the medical reports into his state of mind at the time of the offence before he enters a plea on the murder charge, in case there's a defence to raise within the report

 

[JuicyLucy]

They always put between (date prior to anything having happened - date body found). Because any offences had to have taken place BETWEEN those dates.

His defence team have to do their best on his behalf so they'll be waiting for the medical reports into his state of mind at the time of the offence before he enters a plea on the murder charge, in case there's a defence to raise within the report

BBM

Is that so? Well, that would explain it then. It seemed odd to me, as we can be sure, I think, that nothing happened to Sarah on the 2nd. Thank you for explaining that.