Can you dip your toe in more often please Whitehall 1212?!Thanks for your kind words Juicy Lucy. I dip in when I can, usually when a UK case is high profile.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Can you dip your toe in more often please Whitehall 1212?!Thanks for your kind words Juicy Lucy. I dip in when I can, usually when a UK case is high profile.
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
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
I agree with you fully.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'.
Can you dip your toe in more often please Whitehall 1212?!Thanks for your kind words Juicy Lucy. I dip in when I can, usually when a UK case is high profile.
Every little helps!Did you notice on the CCTV that he swiped his Clubcard when buying those hairbands at Tescos? Got to collect those points.....
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.
Whatever the tariff tomorrow I don’t think he will be alive in 18 months.
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!
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.
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.
I believe they were searching for evidence.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 have seen this comment a lot online regarding this case. What makes you say that?