GUILTY UK - Bernadette Walker, 17, left parent's car, Peterborough, 21 July 2020 *Arrests* #5

Discussion in 'Trials' started by RobinCAL, Sep 12, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dunkley

    dunkley "Coincidence doesn't exist"

    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Sadly, Tortoise, none of that amounts to evidence. It is all hearsay, albeit fairly consistent and damning.
    Certainly enough for the Suspicion.
    Nothing that emanated from a mobile phone - particularly given the circumstances of *this* case - could be given credence.
    The general rule of thumb/evidence is that unless whoever is making the witness statement can say, "I saw", or "I heard", or "I felt (in a physical sense)" it is hearsay.
    There is no formal complaint or statement from the aggrieved - ie Bernadette. And, sadly, nothing to prove - or DISPROVE - that it happened.

    It's damned frustrating.

    Totally MOO
     


  2. Ruthbullock

    Ruthbullock Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    6,609
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I can’t get over the passwords lie- she was 17, who asks their 17 year old for access to all their SM accounts????? Yet doesn’t notice they have sold the house Xbox and has to be informed by the brother. Wasn’t ScW also on the same college course and would have known the surnames of some of these friends, and certainly been in the same group chat (why did he not answer on the phone call). IMO SW is the coercive one- if someone asked me questions that only my partner would know the answers to, I would just say hang on a minute he can tell you himself.
     
  3. Ruthbullock

    Ruthbullock Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    6,609
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Double post DBM
     
  4. worth2

    worth2 Active Member

    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Will try later on tonight!
     
    jackal67 likes this.
  5. Tortoise

    Tortoise Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    18,690
    Likes Received:
    82,157
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not certain but I don't think so.

    look at this case for example -

    "A lodger who killed a 13-year-old girl to stop her from exposing him as a sex abuser has been found guilty of her rape and murder.

    Stephen Nicholson, 25, stabbed Lucy McHugh in a "vicious" attack near Southampton Outdoor Sports Centre.

    He first raped Lucy, then aged 12, while living at her home, and abused her again before her death last July.

    Jurors at Winchester Crown Court found him guilty of three charges of raping Lucy.

    [...]

    Two of Lucy's schools contacted Southampton City Council's social services after reports from pupils, including a student at Redbridge Community School who said Lucy had told them she was "having sex" with someone called "Stephen".

    Social services later ruled there was "nothing to substantiate" that, jurors heard.

    Ms White was visited but was "unconcerned" and was later "confrontational and angry" over the referral, a teacher told the trial."

    Lucy McHugh: Stephen Nicholson guilty of murder and rape
    -----------------

    "Lucy had tried to tell her mother about her relationship with Nicholson, a father-of-one, but she was dismissed and told to 'get back to her fantasy land.'

    In harrowing diary entries, Lucy described how Nicholson took her virginity after the pair played a video game together at her home, and detailed how she locked herself in the bathroom to avoid having sex with him. "

    Tattoo artist, 25, is found GUILTY of raping and murdering schoolgirl Lucy McHugh | Daily Mail Online

    ---------------------

    Exceptions to the hearsay rule for unavailable witnesses

    The first category of exceptions to the hearsay rule concerns specific circumstances where the prosecution or defence have the witness’s statement in written or recorded form, but are unable to get the original witness to court.

    Section 116 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 permits a judge to allow hearsay evidence only where:

    a) the evidence would have been admissible if given by the witness at trial (i.e. an account which is relevant to what it is being used to prove and would have been permitted if the witness was available); and

    b) the person who made the statement is identified to the court’s satisfaction (i.e. an anonymous statement would not be permitted); and

    c) any one of the following 5 five reasons for the witness being unavailable is satisfied:

    1) the witness is dead;

    [...]

    4) the witness cannot be found, although such steps as it is reasonably practicable to take to find them have been taken;

    Hearsay — Defence-Barrister.co.uk
     
  6. RusselSprout

    RusselSprout Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    642
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It really seemed to me they were trying to make the police not go visit Luke. Possibly because B had told him about the SA?
    And then really tried to divert the police to, was it a guy shes spoke to on tiktok, was it warren? That seemed like total diversion to me (and nonsense) and they really didn't want the police speaking to Luke. MOO
     
    jackal67 and Scorpiette like this.
  7. Ruthbullock

    Ruthbullock Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    6,609
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Can anyone remember who were the witness friends in court- Luke, Warren or Chloe- or all 3? Thanks
     
    jackal67 likes this.
  8. KarenUK

    KarenUK Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Lucy's case was awful. It wasn't covered much by the media, and when they did there was a lot of victim blaming.
     
    Kitkat28, jackal67 and Tortoise like this.
  9. Tortoise

    Tortoise Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    18,690
    Likes Received:
    82,157
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Luke and Warren testified. Chloe gave a witness statement.

    sources -
    LS ,
    WN,
    Chloe

    eta sources
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2021
  10. dunkley

    dunkley "Coincidence doesn't exist"

    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Lucy McH had left detailed allegations in her diary, and had also outlined the offences to independent Third Parties. There was also the evidence of 'similar fact' where testimony had come from another young girl who had been assaulted at the same location.

    AFAIK Bernadette had left nothing tangible that specifically stated that ScW had raped her. The best I can find is her reference to 'Ten out of ten serious".

    I *think* that (c) 1 and 4 might be applicable if tangible or irrefutable evidence is available. Or verbal testimony to a Third Party whose integrity is undisputed. Maybe.
    ScW was not charged with any sexual offences.

    If there was a suggestion of rape, and remains were found, for example with anything that could be DNA tested, that *could* support a charge. However, if the victim were over the age of 13, the fact of consent would be argued. Again, there is no evidence to prove or disprove consent. All the evidence would show is that intercourse took place.
    Even if that were to happen in the future with Bernadette, would it be in the public interest to try someone who is already serving a life sentence for a far more serious offence?

    Just MOO, and definitely not arguing or criticising. They are interesting questions.
     
    Kasmeer and SaintMoore like this.
  11. SaintMoore

    SaintMoore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    452
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Probably why she did the interview anonymously
     
  12. Mercsw

    Mercsw Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    2,759
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I think it’s clear we haven’t had the full set of charges and just another example of her being let down. There was more than enough evidence to throw sexual abuse and rape at the dad.
     
    Bluedaisy100, elliefant and Tortoise like this.
  13. Tortoise

    Tortoise Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    18,690
    Likes Received:
    82,157
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But you argued it was the hearsay rule which would preclude it, now you're talking about the quality of evidence.

    Bernadette's texts to her mum haven't been reported in full, neither have her online discussions with W.

    The bathroom camera admission backs up part of her allegations, and the murder is good evidence that she was silenced to stop her reporting him. The diary is the best evidence for the truth of the matter, rather than detail, IMO. I can't see what she had to gain by lying to herself in a private diary.

    What is your source for information about 13 year olds coming from? A child can't consent to intercourse with a 50 year old man, goodness me. I don't think there is any question that it's in the public interest to charge him with sexual offences against a child. Just my personal view.
     
    scapa, mrazda71, elliefant and 8 others like this.
  14. SaintMoore

    SaintMoore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    452
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Scott is clearly coersive and controlling.
    The police even arrested him for it

    And his ex wife now says as much.

    That's two MSM sources.

    There's no MSM source for Sarah being Coersive to Scott.
    And he was also almost 40, when he met her in her mid 20s with several small children. This shows to me that he selected an easy target.


    There's definitely reason to suspect Sarah is manipulative and controlling towards her kids.
    But I see no evidence of her being so towards Scott.
    It seems people are assuming this. Just because she has a boyfriend, that she must 'wear the trousers' with men.

    And I'm not so comfortable with him being seen as 'just a big softie who loved Sarah deeply'
    When he's a convicted killer, with now 2 people accusing him of sexual abuse.
    Both B and his Exwife
    His ex said he would just do what he wanted to her sexually regardless.
     
    Kasmeer and Dotta like this.
  15. SaintMoore

    SaintMoore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    452
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Sex with an under 14 is automatic rape.
    But 14 and over isn't automatically so, legally.
    Age 14 and 15 is the grey area they can try and legally squirm out of.
     
    dunkley likes this.
  16. RusselSprout

    RusselSprout Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    642
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Nobody sees Scott as 'just a big softie'
     
    Bethan, Kangsul, mrazda71 and 2 others like this.
  17. SaintMoore

    SaintMoore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    452
    Trophy Points:
    63
    .
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2021
  18. SaintMoore

    SaintMoore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    452
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Of course it should be treated as rape morally, I certainly think so.

    But this isn't about what we think.
    Its how things work.

    In this country the automatic rape law is for adults engaging with an under 14s.

    For an adult with a 14/15 it's absolutely atrocious and disgusting.
    But as the guy said, it's not an automatic rape charge unless the victim does a rape report.
     
    dunkley likes this.
  19. SaintMoore

    SaintMoore Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    452
    Trophy Points:
    63
    .
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2021
  20. MIdge28

    MIdge28 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I can only say what I saw with my own eyes.
     
    Bethan, elliefant and Legally Bland like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice