GUILTY UK - Sarah Everard, 33, London, Clapham Common area, 3 Mar 2021 *Life sentence* #16

Status
Not open for further replies.

infinit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
681
Reaction score
4,103
I'm sure it said somewhere that before his arrest officers were outside his house for about two hours. Why did they wait so long? At this point there was a possibility Sarah was still alive somewhere. Surely every second could have been crucial in any attempt to find her

It's interesting to me that the bodycam footage of them in the house begins around 19:40. It was around 16:30 that afternoon that the forensic teams closed off the specific section of Poynders Road. My assumption is that he didn't see the Police at his house, and instead saw on the news where the forensic activity was taking place and realised they must have something leading to that specific area, which led him to resetting his phone. My further complete assumption is that the officers outside his house knew of the ongoing forensic activity and were there waiting to see if he would do anything e.g. get in the car and drive to the location of the body in panic to move it again. As at that time Sarah had still not be found.
 

tallmansix

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2014
Messages
169
Reaction score
767
I'm sure it said somewhere that before his arrest officers were outside his house for about two hours. Why did they wait so long? At this point there was a possibility Sarah was still alive somewhere. Surely every second could have been crucial in any attempt to find her

The police started searching the scene of the abduction at Poynders Court that afternoon, I'm guessing they delayed the arrest until that search was concluded to see if there was any substantial evidence. It was widely broadcast on news / TV and for the killer it would have been the moment he knew they were on to him.

I guess they wanted to make sure he didn't make a run for it whilst buying some time to gather a bit more evidence.
 

kittythehare

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
12,335
Reaction score
64,155
As much as this is the most sickening crime imaginable, to my knowledge it has never happened before in my living memory by a serving police officer.

There are many occasions where a lone male police officer either in uniform or plain clothes has to arrest/detain a female suspect without delay, e.g. a female carrying a weapon for a gang to/from a planned/commissioned attack, females carrying drugs/cash for gangs, soliciting, shoplifting, violent/aggressive individuals, Mental Health Act. The police could not do their job without being to execute their powers freely, yet lawfully, proportionately and with necessity.

Yes, the police service in conjunction with other agencies/organisations need to look at and greatly improve all the aspects that have promoted/enabled WC and other men to commit such awful crimes, together with the alleged indecency offences and particularly where there is such a heinous abuse of a position of trust. However, it is essential to have perspective and clear-headed thought rather than knee-jerk reactions as 'solutions'.
I agree with you fully.
The knee-jerk response is invariably unworkable.

Met did a superb job here. Congratulations and Respect to you all for that.
I doubt a single stone was left unturned.

I'm glad for Sarah and my hope is that it will lend catharsis to her courageous and wonderful family. May they receive comfort and the beginning of a healing from this.

He didn't just brutally abuse her and take her life, he also took the life of the children he had planned on having.
I don't believe he has shown genuine remorse, only basked in self-pity like a cornered rat.

Are people like him rehabilitated in prison? Like , really? I reckon he'd spend the full 30 years planning another- future dangerousness .
To that end and for the reasons I've stated, I believe a whole of life sentence is appropriate, if unprecedented.

And for the lives he has destroyed and shaken to breaking point
Sarah Everard murder: Victim impact statements in full
 

Kaykedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2017
Messages
623
Reaction score
3,235
Thanks for your kind words Juicy Lucy. I dip in when I can, usually when a UK case is high profile.
Can you dip your toe in more often please Whitehall 1212?!
Did you notice on the CCTV that he swiped his Clubcard when buying those hairbands at Tescos? Got to collect those points.....
Every little helps!
 

Whitehall 1212

Verified Law Enforcement and SAR (UK)
Joined
Aug 29, 2019
Messages
529
Reaction score
3,962
I'd love to know what was said between 19.41.48 (flat denial) and 19.43.00 (cooperation, albeit a pack of lies, after admitting that he did take her), where the first edit is. Whatever it was, it had an effect.

The investigators asked if he'd had any interactions with Sarah, which he initially denied. Then he became concerned that they knew something they were not revealing about his contact with Sarah and so he brought in plan B......the people trafficking gang from Eastern Europe, to account for the kidnap but claiming she was alive when he handed her over.

Fortunately this pathetic creature was nowhere near the same league as the investigators and they blocked him in to a cul-de-sac with all his increasingly desperate and phoney answers to their questions, which they could then disprove!
 

Willowy

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2021
Messages
22
Reaction score
80
The twisted morals that come out in his lies here are very telling and troubling.

In the footage he seems relatively confident in his belief that kidnapping a young woman (for pressumed sexual exploitation) in order to protect his family is an acceptable and plausible explanation. It was mentioned in press coverage yesterday that he said he'd 'do it again' if it protected his family and got him out of trouble.

What he's really saying is that the life of a woman is a worthy trade off (or worse, means nothing) to get what he wants.
 

Willowy

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2021
Messages
22
Reaction score
80
The investigators asked if he'd had any interactions with Sarah, which he initially denied. Then he became concerned that they knew something they were not revealing about his contact with Sarah and so he brought in plan B......the people trafficking gang from Eastern Europe, to account for the kidnap but claiming she was alive when he handed her over.

Fortunately this pathetic creature was nowhere near the same league as the investigators and they blocked him in to a cul-de-sac with all his increasingly desperate and phoney answers to their questions, which they could then disprove!

Just a quick question out of curiosity... I thought when questioning, investigators have to be somewhat up front about what they know? Does it depend on the circumstances?
 

lensamps

Active Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2021
Messages
23
Reaction score
178
What I am confused about now thinking back on it, is why the Met police were making a big song & dance about combing Clapham Common pond for days, when at that point they were already zoning in on Couzens so knew about his car etc and therefore it not being a rape & murder on the common.
 
Last edited:

infinit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
Messages
681
Reaction score
4,103
The twisted morals that come out in his lies here are very telling and troubling.

In the footage he seems relatively confident in his belief that kidnapping a young woman (for pressumed sexual exploitation) in order to protect his family is an acceptable and plausible explanation. It was mentioned in press coverage yesterday that he said he'd 'do it again' if it protected his family and got him out of trouble.

What he's really saying is that the life of an innocent woman is a worthy trade off (or worse, means nothing) to get what he wants.

He's a complete idiot because even if his fantasy story was true, it still wouldn't absolve him.

Failure to Seek Police Protection against the Threat
It is essential that the threat should have been effective at the time the offence was committed. In R v Hammond [2013] EWCA Crim 2709, the defence of duress was held to have been correctly withdrawn from the jury because the evidence could not satisfy the requirement that the threat must be imminent or immediate and have been operating on the actions which constitute the criminal conduct.

It is always open to the prosecution to prove that the defendant failed to avail himself of an opportunity which was reasonably open to him to render the threat ineffective. Upon that being proved, the defendant can no longer rely upon the threat in question: R v Bianco [2002] 1 Archbold News 2 CA. In R v Hasan [ibid], Lord Bingham stated that if the threat is not such as he reasonably expects to follow immediately or almost immediately upon his failure to comply with the threat, there may be little if any room for doubt that he could have taken evasive action, whether by going to the police or in some other way, to avoid committing the crime with which he is charged.

This was confirmed in R v Batchelor [2013] EWCA Crim 2638, when it was held that the defence of duress was correctly withheld from the jury where the defendant could have gone to the police at any time over a period of two and a half years and he could not reasonably believe that the execution of the threat was imminent and immediate.

Defences - Duress and Necessity | The Crown Prosecution Service
 

kittythehare

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
12,335
Reaction score
64,155
What I am confused about now taking back on it, is why the Met police were making a big song & dance about combing Clapham Common pond for days, when at that point they were already zoning in on Couzens so knew about his car etc and therefore it not being a rape & murder on the common.
I believe they were searching for evidence.
They acted wholly professionally IMO.
They left no stone unturned.
Praise when it's due.
 

Tullyjune

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2021
Messages
43
Reaction score
364
I can’t imagine what will be presented in the way of mitigation today.

Surely a whole life tariff is in order?

- He purchased items to carry out the offence well in advance.

-He was a serving police officer who used his warrant card and cuffs to deceive Sarah into his car (which he had hired specifically to abduct a woman in).

-The fear and distress he intentionally inflicted while driving those 80 miles would have been extreme.

-He then raped her and killed her by strangling (with his police belt)

-Then he mutilated her body by burning and concealed it in water.

I will be stunned if the Judge doesn’t sentence him to a whole life tariff.

What time do proceedings start today?
 

Kapiti

New Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2021
Messages
1
Reaction score
11
Nothing of value to add other than to say how devastated I am for Sarah’s family and friends - to read the circumstances and the way this monster planned days in advance what he was going to do. Poor Sarah was certainly in the wrong place at the wrong time and that’s the tragedy of it. Watching CCTv images of her earlier in the evening walking to her friends, buying the wine in Sainsbury’s Balham Hill, and the chilling shot of the “arrest” chill me to my bones. The family are in my thoughts
 

cestmoi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2015
Messages
42
Reaction score
263
I'm expecting today they'll try to present him as being a victim himself - of pressures (e.g. work responsibilities, financial problems, erectile dysfunction, etc). And then sprinkle in some claims maybe about him being abused himself at some point in life (not aware of any evidence of this, just wondering if they will pull something out today - the psychiatric report would explore any relevant social history), all culminating in him being turned on by sexual deviance and thus committing these crimes. NONE of that would justify what he has done or make it any more acceptable.
 

CuriousObserver1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2019
Messages
153
Reaction score
966
I really think that he never actually considered CCTV in passing buses and cars capturing the EXACT moment he stopped and took her and hence how quickly they tracked him, unless he wanted to be caught - but given how he tried to cover his tracks with thought out effort, I don't believe he did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top