GUILTY UK - Tia Sharp, 12, New Addington, London, 3 Aug 2012 #1

[fabgod]

Re: the police searches: man in another online forum claims he grew up in a flat virtually identical to the grandmother's terrace house and claims there is nowhere within them to hide anything - not even a smutty magazine a boy might try to hide from his parents

If in fact there exists water-tanks/butts in the roof space of the grandmother's house, what would the water be used for ? It couldn't just sit there or would stagnate and cause disease as well as overflowing. Wouldn't be for drinking, surely? For showering -- and if so, wouldn't it require considerable filtration? And wouldn't a body in a water tank prevent free flow of the water regardless of what it was used for?

In my house and quite a few I have worked on, the lofts or roof spaces have one or two water tanks, they are fed by mains water and are expansion tanks for things like gravity fed showers or top up tanks for central heating etc and sometimes toilets, as far as I know they are never used for drinking water supplies because as you mention, they could stagnate if corrupted with mice etc.
I am not saying that this is the case here but they very often are metal or plastic and have kids or sometimes are sealed units.

 

[Sooner Fan#1]

Thanks. Harrington has my full support. I believe him.

OT for a second: in 2000 I came across an Australian government piece of legislation online stating collecting or using water from streams, ponds, springs etc. on one's own land to be an offence. I was new to internet, trusted the government, wasn't familiar with the so-called conspiracy sites and hadn't seen or read anywhere that collecting/using water on one's own land was any sort of offence. As a child in the country we'd had water tanks. Thousands of Australian homes still had them. I saved the document but lost it when I had to get a new computer. Tried to find the government document again in order to save it on my new computer, but couldn't find it. Knew I hadn't imagined it. Then twice since then, have encountered others online who had seen the same item of legislation, which, according to the document I'd seen, had been passed by the Australian parliament in 1995

One of those online who were also aware of the legislation explained it was a 'sleeper' item of legislation which had been passed by parliament and of which the vast majority of the population was oblivious. It was explained to me that such items of legislation slip under the public's radar and are passed well in advance, making them 'ready to use/enact' at some unspecified time in the future. Disturbing .... And the case linked re: Harrington in the US is an indication of just how disturbing that future may be

I fear I am venturing way O/T here (sorry nurse) but what is the guy gonna do? Sell the rainwater? I would guess he was preserving resources and utilizing it for feeding animals...watering gardens? And he was fined $1,500 and jailed for it. My grandmother use to collect it to wash my hair...was a wonderful feeling.

Ok no more O/T for me lol

 

[Crazy Mama]

I *think* that he did something very sick....as he called her 'babes' in his interview...and I don't think it was in a nice way. He looked to DS a lot in that interview for back up....and where is DS now?

 

[Fishzilla]

What breaks my heart is that in the week since Tia has been missing SH and Nan (and I use the term Nan loosley) had enough time to clean that house 100 times over. I really hope that this is not the case and the guilty party does not get off lightly because of the lack of evidence.

On another note, most houses that I have seen in Croydon, definitely the ones on my street, have a back door. I wander if the press/police/neighbours were keeping an eye on the front door only. I say this because I do believe that the culprit certainly had the time to move a body - even though I dont believe that they actually moved the body.

 

[Karenlisam]

Link to a local paper describing how a hair dresser spotted him and called the police

The wording in the article seems to imply SH was handing out leaflets rather than hiding
Odd . There could be more of a time lapse between the hairdresser seeing him and then seeing on the news he was wanted than it sound in the article

http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk...6689478-detail/story.html?588362321=410464974

 

[laurauk1]

What breaks my heart is that in the week since Tia has been missing SH and Nan (and I use the term Nan loosley) had enough time to clean that house 100 times over. I really hope that this is not the case and the guilty party does not get off lightly because of the lack of evidence.

On another note, most houses that I have seen in Croydon, definitely the ones on my street, have a back door. I wander if the press/police/neighbours were keeping an eye on the front door only. I say this because I do believe that the culprit certainly had the time to move a body - even though I dont believe that they actually moved the body.

It looked to me (although could be wrong) like there was footage of both the back and the front of the house. There was what looked like mattresses outside it today in one shot of the houses when the cordons being put up. I presumed that was the back of the house. It also looked like neither the back or front of the house were far away from the footpath so I'd imagine the press would be close to both.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

Well spotted
I wonder what counts an extraordinary and why he can tweet that but "can't say too much " . Weird

I guess "legal" reasons.

I will refrain from speculating any more because I think this case is now sub judice.

 

[laurauk1]

Link to a local paper describing how a hair dresser spotted him and called the police

The wording in the article seems to imply SH was handing out leaflets rather than hiding
Odd . There could be more of a time lapse between the hairdresser seeing him and then seeing on the news he was wanted than it sound in the article

http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk...6689478-detail/story.html?588362321=410464974

Wow - I read it that way as well - as though he was searching for her at the time the police turned up. If that is the case, I presume he had not heard they'd found the body at that time and that he was a wanted man.

Could he have somehow been set up? Perhaps by someone else in the family such as the uncle who has been quite prevalent throughout all the investigations. Blood is thicker and water and all that that - if something had happened/gone wrong between Tia and another blood relation such as an uncle - the Grandmother's son, would the family 'shop' that person. Would they feel more loyalty to the blood relative than SH? I have to say, this seems like a long shot but the journalist on Twitter said that the circumstances surrounding the arrest were exceptional. Maybe there is a lot more to come out and perhaps SH wasn't involved.

 

[wfgodot]

Evening Standard has a timeline of events up till now: Tia Sharp: developments as they unfold

 

[fabgod]

It looked to me (although could be wrong) like there was footage of both the back and the front of the house. There was what looked like mattresses outside it today in one shot of the houses when the cordons being put up. I presumed that was the back of the house. It also looked like neither the back or front of the house were far away from the footpath so I'd imagine the press would be close to both.

I saw that too, i think it was next door to the Sharp house though and it was definitely the front of the house (not a great advert for the area I suppose)

The back of that house looked pretty smart from the aerial shots, decking and quite well cared for, the Sharp house at the back had two dogs that were running to the back of the garden when police were walking past

 

[Skigh]

If this report is true it makes it even more confusing.

 

[laurauk1]

I saw that too, i think it was next door to the Sharp house though and it was definitely the front of the house (not a great advert for the area I suppose)

The back of that house looked pretty smart from the aerial shots, decking and quite well cared for, the Sharp house at the back had two dogs that were running to the back of the garden when police were walking past

Thanks- I've just looked again. You are right it is the front.

I guess maybe the people with the beds in the garden have been decorating or something and are throwing out some stuff...especially if the back of their house looks quite nice.

 

[KR1]

Hello and welcome to WS, Inge Jones.

Ditto Inge J

 

[KR1]

If this report is true it makes it even more confusing.

Our media here has such a habit of confuzzling and obfuscating, across the board, it's difficult to tell Skigh, don't you think!

 

[Skigh]

Does any one else think that Granny is involved in this?

 

[laserdisc10]

Time and again we see those who're so quick to take someone else's life -- only to fight like rats to preserve their own liberty

It would be refreshing every now and again (for to hope for more would be pushing it) for a killer to come right out and admit what they'd done instead of putting the victim's family through hell and costing the public millions it could be spending on something worthwhile

 

[laserdisc10]

Our media here has such a habit of confuzzling and obfuscating, across the board, it's difficult to tell Skigh, don't you think!

Been that way since the death of true/independent journalism at the hands of 'media magnate' scum

I mean, will someone try to explain to me why the size of Kardashians' fat bums is considered news these days?

 

[laserdisc10]

Does any one else think that Granny is involved in this?

Well I'd never cast her in the role of Snow White

 

[Paulette]

I guess "legal" reasons.

I will refrain from speculating any more because I think this case is now sub judice.

This is an American website - we don't have sub judice here, we can say what we like. Now again, I don't know if transmitting data from the UK to the US is subject to sub judice.

 

[Inge Jones]

This is an American website - we don't have sub judice here, we can say what we like. Now again, I don't know if transmitting data from the UK to the US is subject to sub judice.

Even here in the UK, I think sub judice only begins when someone is formally charged. But of course we still have libel laws to consider.