Thoughts on Conspiracy Theories

Bloodhound wrote:http://laidbareblog.blogspot.ie/2015/04/unreliable-dogs.html

According to this link it was human error, the dogs did alert and were ignored.

Our posts crossed BH. I hadn't read that before but it puts a different slant on it to a degree.
If the dogs didn't go in the attic, I wonder if the 2 teams before them did.

I doubt it Chirpy, they were afraid of the dogs stamping through the ceilin. According to this they made changes because of this case so that's a good thing. I'm glad the police handlers did not get sacked but at least in future they have been trained to be more active in following through with dog alerts, even if it takes them to awkward places

http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/tia-sharp-met-officers-missed-schoolgirl-s-body/story-17372278-detail/story.html

According to this the attic was searched, well half searched by an officer, he said his legs were dangling down so I assume he didn't go in and just glanced around. This also admits to human error. Yep it's th daily mail but looks like a good report and gives the impression dogs alerted to the attic each time.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html

I think none of them wantEd the bother of climbing into and searching a small attic, if it's anything like mine it's a big chore.

Bloodhound wrote:According to this the attic was searched, well half searched by an officer, he said his legs were dangling down so I assume he didn't go in and just glanced around.  This also admits to human error. Yep it's th daily mail but looks like a good report and gives the impression dogs alerted to the attic each time.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html

Thanking you for finding all the info Bloodhound

You're welcome Candyfloss.

I love reading about these cases, this is a great thread, I'm spoilt for choice on which one to look up next unfortunately. I've made up my mind Tia's step granda is guilty, I have no doubts. I wonder did he ever tell how he murdered her like he said he would in his letter. Mind you his letter seems to be self serving and he just wants money for fags.

Ha Bloodhound, that's exactly what I thought, money for cigs, what an ass

Bloodhound wrote:You're welcome Candyfloss.

I love reading about these cases, this is a great thread, I'm spoilt for choice on which one to look up next unfortunately.  I've made up my mind Tia's step granda is guilty, I have no doubts. I wonder did he ever tell how he murdered her like he said he would in his letter.  Mind you his letter seems to be self serving and he just wants money for fags.

I wonder if the autopsy report was deliberately kept a bit vague. I think it said she may have been smothered. I realise there was decomposition but forensics can usually find a probable cause of death.

If it was a trap to catch him out only they would know how she had died but Hazell, not knowing what they knew, might have dropped himself in it.

poster wrote:

PMR wrote:Not all police dogs react to cadaverine, in Huntleys case it might not have had time to develop and in the Tia Sharp case the land sharks were probably looking for a live scent to track

Hmm....sorry, nice try....rubbish

Please don't dismiss other people's views as rubbish, Poster.

Believe me, it's tempting to say that about some of your ideas but most of us can I hope debate without the need to be rude.

After your negative experiences elsewhere, I am surprised that you do the same thing.

unreorganised wrote:I'm surprised there are no Moors Murders conspiracies. Not because I have any doubts over the convictions, but because I never cease to be amazed by people's capacity to find "angles" in these high profile events.

Very true.

Levi Bellfield wasn't born then so we can safely rule him out. Or can we.

There seems to be a few people on here then that think Ian Huntley is innocent.

May I ask is it because of what has been written on this 'just justice' blog/website thing....?

Any other sources...?

And how can you verify what's been said in these blogs has any truth in it at all.....

Just asking....

Count me out of the thinking he is innocent Andrew. But it is yet another high profile case that needs to be dissected. I am beginning to wonder if there are any "cut and dried" cases left.
If we are to believe all these patsy stories then just about every police force is corrupt. Yet I can't believe that career policemen with years of service behind them could "fit up" so many innocent people for the sake of a collar.
Do we really think that someone who joined the force as a fresh faced rookie maybe 20 years before, wanting to nail the bad guys and see justice served, could have become the hard-nosed, cynical man we are being told exists?
I believe there are bent coppers just like there are bogus salesmen and cowboy builders but if the whole edifice is rotten to the core then there is no hope because any one of us could become the next victim of a miscarriage of justice.

Freedom wrote:Oh really, Poster, Tia Sharp was found hidden in her grandmother's house.

Do you really think that someone other than Stuart Hazell could have hidden her there!!!!

I didn't believe a word of his interview about the events of the last day that he supposedly saw Tia.

Here he is talking to the Brain of Britain Mark Williams Thomas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8E_dTHeeszA

Does anyone remember this case? It got enormous coverage at the time but I reckon that most of you won't remember it now. It's not mentioned on this link but the victim was heavily pregnant which made the random attack even more horrific.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/herefordandworcester/content/articles/2008/05/14/m50_marie_wilks_timeline_feature.shtml

If Stuart Hazell had really done something to Tia why on earth would he hide the body in her grandmother's house?! That alone tells me he didn't do it. Surely no murderer is quite so stupid as to hide the body in a house which is going to immediately searched by the police?

I just don't agree with you about not believing a word of what he says. I think he comes across as genuine. Why would he go on and on about the phone charging scenario if he was really guilty? The way he describes this is exactly how a frustrated parent would describe how they tried to get their child to charge the phone and then leave with the charged phone.

In other words, to ensure that Tia could be contacted by making sure her phone was charged and then taking it with her.

There is nothing in his body language or indeed the words he uses that make me believe he is lying.

And, as already stated, if he really was the killer hiding the body in the grandmother's house was not exactly the actions of someone who didn't want to be caught.

Poor guy was stitched up, imo. Because he looks a bit rough and because he would probably be deemed by Daily Mail readers to be 'working class' he was a convenient patsy.

So who really did it I wonder?

IMO only of course.

Ha! Blue ink time!!

Freedom wrote:

Andrew wrote:Hi Poster...

Out of curiosity really, can you name some 'high-profile' cases where you're convinced they actually have it right...?

He (apologies if you're female, Poster) does seem satisfied with the convictions of the vile monster Levi Bellfield but that appears to be the only one.

Not at all. I'm sure there are loads of rightful convictions. But there are also some wrongful convictions - and they tend to be more interesting and more emotionally laden for obvious reasons. Levi Bellfield probably carried out many more attacks and murders and it is possible that in some of them others were wrongfully convicted.

It doesn't inspire confidence in Poster's opinions that he muddles up the names of victims and convicted killers. Also, he keeps referring to Stuart Hazell as Tia's stepfather when he was the boyfriend of her grandmother.

I've cleared up the muddles as far as I know. But I don't really care whether people have confidence in my opinions or not to be honest. What I do care about is abuse of power. The opinions I have the least confidence in are the McCanns and their ilk. As far as I know Hazell went out with both the daughter and mother and I think this was used as a slur against his character in the MSM. I suppose I used the expression 'step-father' loosely.

Some reports have said that he was previously also the boyfriend of her mother but that may not be true.

Indeed. It may have been an attempt to undermine his credibility and slur his character. But so what if he went out with both? It hardly makes him a child murderer.

Poster - this is what you said about Mark Williams Thomas - it doesn't sound as if you're aware of his belief in the McCanns and their drivel. He is a complete idiot, there's no doubt of that, with a very suspect employment record and qualifications.

Interesting. I do remember he did a bit of an 'about-turn' when the questionable photos of Madeleine were released but that is all I know about him.


"That interviewer (in the first link) is a complete .....well, I can't think of any words to put together....

Obviously he thinks he is superior to the person he is interviewing...

He is wrong, as so many people who work especially in the BBC but also other media outlets think".

With regard to the bolded part above. I hadn't seen him doing an interview before. I think he comes across as a supercilious, pompous, snobbish, deceitful arse. There were/are quite a few in the BBC - particularly the BBC - and media generally. Less intelligent than Stuart Hazell in actual fact who I think is (wrongly) very trusting of the interviewer. Because Hazell comes across as a decent bloke who is telling the truth. Whereas the interviewer comes across as a total plonker. Hazell should have told him where to go, imo.

Wasn't SH put under house arrest? If so, he'd no chance of getting the body out! IMO, Tia was hidden in the attic and that was where she had to stay because of house arrest.

dogs don't lie wrote:Wasn't SH put under house arrest? If so, he'd no chance of getting the body out! IMO, Tia was hidden in the attic and that was where she had to stay because of house arrest.

Well, he could hardly be put under house arrest until the police found the body, could he? Which was quite some time after she disappeared...plenty of time to move a body.

But what I find of greater interest is that the highly respected (so it would seem) police officer SIR/b]Bernard Hogan-Howe who this Spring was reported as saying that he was ending the Madeleine McCann investigation 'unless new evidence comes to light' (   ) was also in charge of the Tia Sharp investigation.

Snipped from link below:

On 10 August, a body was discovered in a black bed sheet in a black bag in the loft of the home of Sharp's grandmother, after police searched it for the fourth time.[12][13]

On 23 August police commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe addressed his force's failure to find Sharp's body. He said the error could not be attributed to a single officer. He wanted "to understand what processes and management decisions we've made that led to that failure."[23]

So Tia disappeared from her home where she lived with her grandmother Christine and Christine's then boyfriend Stuart Hazell on 3rd August. A whole week later, during which police had searched the house FOUR times, police find a body in the attic.

Hmmmm........


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3559134/Police-say-investigation-missing-Madeleine-McCann-end-soon.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Tia_Sharp

Bernard Hogan Howe is the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police. Essentially he is responsible for every investigation the force carries out. That doesn't mean he has input into any

@Poster, if you watch the vid on the previous page, SH was put under house arrest before Tia was found and whilst the police were still searching for her. You can also read about the vid which explains this aswell just under the YouTube vid. Tia was yet to be found and he was under house arrest.

... SH was too thick and stupid to do anything but sadly hide the corpse in a panic situation.

The Police initially messed up, but got it right in the end.

Can't believe folk think the evil, horrible tosser, SH is some sort of snow white.

Bump.

Bit of a non-starter but anyone else got some onions on this....

Not sure if Levi was involved though 'poster'.

A bit of fishy one anyway.... imo.

It's not something I want to think about too much but how, particularly in hot weather, even if the house was an absolute rubbish dump, the smell went unnoticed for so long; that is the only thing which I find perplexing about the case.

However, I am still 100% sure that Stuart Hazell was responsible.

His explaination for the phone was muddled and a lie and he didn't speak with a clear confident truthful answer. He had to give a reason why she left home without it. Teenagers don't even go to the bathroom without their phones never mind go shopping.

I think he did smother her, and that's how her glasses got broken. He wrapped her up in a sheet then in plastic tightly and shoved her in the attic because he had no time to do anything else but had likely planned to move her.
But he was put under house arrest, and was there during the searches, he must have been so relieved to have seen the dogs alert to the attic and the police to ignore them.
One officer did peep in and check and left again, I'm betting after the first or second alert as there was yet an odour.
One story I read said the house did stink when they eventually got off their lazy asses and went into the attic with the dogs.

He never got a chance to get rid of the body, he knew it was a matter of time before the smell leaked out, he's a liar and a murderer imo, and to me his video on that interview is very deceitful as I explained earlier on a previous page.

His confession to his father or whoever he wrote it to seems to be a genuine letter from him, if it was forced written there would be more detail and written differently.

The confession is mostly about him and his feelings and needing money for fags.

He does look to be a bit of a chav, and also wether he had relationship with Tia's mother and grandmother did not sway me in the least in making my opinion, but his video did, his house arrest, the alerts in the attic which were ignored, having no chance to move it. And his genuine confession, which of course was written for sympathy for himself and to beg for money. Teenagers do not go anywhere without their phones, ever, it's something they don't forget. His excuse was lame, they phone still charges while it's been played with if it's plugged in.

I'm with you on the phone thing BH. You are so right that kids go nowhere without and any dutiful parent would make sure they had it on them.
It reminds of a case in Scotland. A girl called Jodi Jones was murdered not far from my home town. Her 15 year old boyfriend Luke Mitchell was charged and found guilty.
What alerted my radar was that he said he had texted her once to ask why she was late. That seemed odd. Teenagers live by text and I doubt there would only be one message. Odd what jars with us.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Jodi_Jones&ved=0ahUKEwj37JmCgvXNAhUPM8AKHZwTCvsQFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNGMQ2dq1t-vRuD1YkpP2mWJ-HBkGg

I may have been misremembering how the phone thing went but I found this which is at odds with Mitchell later telling a friend that Jodi wouldn't be coming out that night even though he had been told she was going to meet him.

Events prior to the murder

[10] The deceased's freedom to go out of an evening was restricted by her mother in the weeks prior to her death, but she was released from that restriction on the afternoon of the murder. She arrived home at around 1605 hours. At 1635 she used her mother's mobile phone to send a text message to the appellant. The appellant responded at 1636. A further text was sent by the deceased to him at 1638. The terms of these text messages were not preserved. The deceased left her house at about 1650, informing her mother that she was going to meet the appellant and would be "mucking about up here". At 1654 a call was made from the appellant's mobile telephone to the speaking clock. Between about 1705 and 1720 Leonard Kelly was cycling along the path from the west to the east end, and heard a noise, which he described as "a strangling sort of sound, a human thing", coming from the far side of the wall. John Ferris and Gordon Dickie rode a moped along the path at about the same time. They did not hear anything of the sort described by Kelly. They did not see him, nor he them.

The discovery of the deceased's body

[11] The appellant telephoned the deceased's house at 1732, but received no reply. At 1740 he called again, and spoke to Alan Ovens, asking if the deceased was in. He was informed that she had left to meet him. He replied, "OK, cool". Ovens informed Judith Jones about this call. The deceased was due to return home by 2200, but did not. At 2241 Judith Jones sent a text to the appellant's mobile phone, indicating that the deceased was again grounded. The appellant then telephoned Mrs Jones, informing her that he had not seen the deceased. At 2300 a search party, consisting of the deceased's grandmother, Alice Walker, Janine Jones and her boyfriend, Steven Kelly, left the deceased's house and began walking along the path from the Easthouses end heading west. The appellant, accompanied by his dog, walked from the west end of the path heading in the opposite direction. He met the rest of the search party near the east end of the path. Thereafter all the members of the party headed west along the path.

I've never heard of that murder. But one thing that struck my was the lad was questioned without a lawyer present. When that happens alarm bells go off in my head. I need to read more about this case.

And would a 15 year old be clever enough to call her home to ask for her after he killed her?
He still said he is innocent on that link and applied for many many appeals.

I'm not saying he didn't kill her. I need to read more about it.