Miscellaneous Criminal Cases

I'd actually read somewhere that the child got into the car and were chatting whilst driving, but above says she was put into the boot? Both very wrong anyway.

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/11886351.MANHUNT__Six_year_old_girl_abducted_____sexually_assaulted____and_dumped_in_street/?ref=rss

More information here.

Freedom wrote:http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/11886351.MANHUNT__Six_year_old_girl_abducted_____sexually_assaulted____and_dumped_in_street/?ref=rss

More information here.

Thanks Freedom, hope hes caught soon, poor child.

http://m.lep.co.uk/news/local/man-in-court-over-abduction-of-lancashire-six-year-old-1-7182786
Sounds like the police might've known where to look

Coming up this year on the 25th anniversary of a crime that few of you will be familiar with, although it remains County Durham's only unsolved murder. I am constantly reminded of it as I pass by the house - it is now a boarding kennels - a couple of times a week.

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/2043009.Having_an_affair_doesn_t_mean_my_father_is_guilty_of_murder/

I'd never heard of this case before.

Here is a slightly more recent interview with the victim's daughter.

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/local-news/ann-herons-daughter-speaks-20-3700024

Not heard of this either. Just been reading up about it.

The despicable murder of an 18 month old child is of no interest to our broken judiciary system, his father is asking for people to sign his www.change.org petition (link at the bottom of this page).  I'm not on Twitter or Facebook so please could posters circulate the link, i've already signed the petition.  What a disgraceful country we've become when these two people can carry on their normal lives with no police record and can even get a job in the future caring for children -

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/one-two-people-killed-boy-5950026

'One of two people killed my boy but I can't get justice': Dad's court fight for tragic toddler

A dad whose toddler was killed in the care of his ex and her new lover has been told neither face charges because they blame each other for the death.
Tragic toddler Sam Harry died of terrible head injuries after being smashed against a surface with the force of a 60mph car crash.
But despite being in the care of mum Deanna Buffham and her new lover Ryan Bate at the time of the horrific attack, neither will face charges because they blame each other.
And although police accept at least one of them was responsible for the ¬19-month-old’s death, that means under the law they cannot be prosecuted on a “joint ¬enterprise” basis as detectives cannot prove which one it was.
Both went out separately during that fateful day, making pinning the crime on one or the other even harder.
The child’s grieving dad Nick Harry has branded the decision “absurd” and called for justice for his son, who died in hospital four days after the assault.
He told how he received a letter from chief prosecutors outlining why the case was dropped allowing Buffham, 28, and 23-year-old Bate, who had been arrested on ¬suspicion of murder, to walk free.
It read: “One or both of them must have been responsible for [your son’s] injuries... it would not be possible to prosecute the suspects on a joint enterprise basis simply because we know that one of them must be guilty of the offence.”
Furious Nick, 30, said: “I believe one of them has literally got away with murder.
“The detectives know that one of them did it because they were only two people present when Sam was injured.
“But they can’t prove which one it was. They are now free with no criminal record and nothing to stop them from working with children or being around children.
“They have both escaped without a single charge when a child died in their care with signs of aggression.
“They can’t charge them with joint enterprise because at various times both of them went out of the house.
“Even though the police know one of two people killed my son quite brutally we are unable to have any sort of justice I want justice for my son and whoever did this to him needs to be punished.
"If the case went in front of a jury at least it would be up to them to decide.”
Buffham and Bate were remanded on police bail after Sam’s death in April 2013. But they were released without charge last November.
Nick, of Houghton Regis, Beds, appealed the Crown Prosecution Service decision to drop the case, but that was rejected in January.
He has started a Justice for Sam campaign in a bid to overturn the outcome. It has 12,000 signatures but needs 100,000 to have a chance of being handed to Parliament.
Nick added: “It’s just unbelievable the case has now effectively been closed and there is no justice for my son.
"The major crime unit was investigating for a year and a half but they couldn’t pin it on either of them. I feel powerless, I have explored all the avenues I can go down.
"Myself and my family are finding it very hard to accept this and move on. I’m putting all my energy into fighting for justice for my son.”
The CPS letter to Nick reads: “Neither suspect accepts that they caused Sam’s injuries... each now asserts that the other must have been responsible given the medical findings.
“Although each blames the other, they are unable to give any material evidence to substantiate their belief.”
And the letter rejecting his appeal said: “Although I readily understand your frustration over the fact no one is to face ¬prosecution over Sam’s death, I hope you understand that my role as a prosecutor is not to decide whose version of events I prefer but rather to decide whether there is a realistic prospect of conviction on the evidence before me.”
Sam suffered a brain ¬haemorrhage in the attack at the home Buffham and Bate shared. Tests showed the injuries must have occurred in the 11 hours before paramedics were called. It is believed they and Sam were the only people in the house.
The tot was taken to Addenbrookes Hospital in Cambridge. Surgeons tried in vain to save him with an operation to relieve the pressure in his tiny head.
Nick, who maintained a vigil at his son’s bedside in intensive care, said: “I couldn’t bear to see his head after the operation. That image of him lying there will stay with me forever.
“I have a picture of Deanna cradling him in hospital. At that time I had no idea how his injuries occurred.”
Buffham and Bate could have faced charges of murder, manslaughter or causing or allowing the death of a child.
Nick, who split from Buffham shortly after Sam was born, believes prosecutors should also have considered the lesser offence of misleading justice.
The CPS said: “The charges of murder, manslaughter and causing or allowing the death of a child were ¬considered.
"However, there is insufficient evidence to prove either suspect caused the boy’s injuries, or to prosecute them both on a joint enterprise basis.
“A review determined the original decision to take no further action still stands.”
Nick has been told the case may be reopened every two years to see if forensic tests can provide any more evidence.
Bedfordshire Police said the force is “not currently looking at anyone else” in connection with Sam’s death.
But a spokeswoman added: “No murder investigation is ever closed, each is subject to regular reviews, including this one.
"If information becomes ¬available that enables us to put an offender or offenders before court, we will always do so.”

• To support Nick’s campaign please visit: www.change.org/p/david-cameron-mp-protect-our-children-from-known-child-killers

I thought that the law had been changed to cover cases like this where suspects blame each other.

PeterMac, can you assist please? I can't think of the wording.

Joint enterprise I think it's called.

Horrendous article and very sad indeed.

Freedom wrote:I thought that the law had been changed to cover cases like this where suspects blame each other.

PeterMac, can you assist please? I can't think of the wording.

I saw the original article on the Daily Mail last night but couldn't find it again this morning but found the Daily Mirror one this morning.  On the DM comments section people were responding with outrage that this ridiculous law opens a precedence for others to commit crimes and if 2 people were involved they can blame each other and literally get away with murder.

What a twisted, messed up PC country we live in when 2 evil criminals can do such an horrendous thing to a young innocent child and can just carry on as if butter wouldn't melt in their mouths, are able to walk among us and even get a job at a children's nursery or as a nanny having no criminal record on their CV.

Freedom wrote:I thought that the law had been changed to cover cases like this where suspects blame each other.

PeterMac, can you assist please? I can't think of the wording.

***
I remember reading that several years ago. The essence being that if a household member is suspected, but not sure which one and no-one confesses ALL members of the household are suspects.

Andrew wrote:Joint enterprise I think it's called.

Horrendous article and very sad indeed.

This is what wiki says about it.


English lawEdit

In English law, the doctrine derives from R v Swindall and Osborne (1846) 2 Car. & K. 230. Two cart drivers engaged in a race. One of them ran down and killed a pedestrian. It was not known which one had driven the fatal cart, but since they were encouraging each other in the race, it was irrelevant which of them had actually struck the man and both were held jointly liable. Thus the parties must share a common purpose and make it clear to each other by their actions that they are acting on their common intention, so that each member of the group assumes responsibility for the actions of the whole group. When this happens, all that flows from the execution of the plan makes them all liable. This is a question of causation, in that oblique intention will be imputed for intermediate consequences that are a necessary precondition to achieving the ultimate purpose, and liability will follow where there are accidental and unforeseen departures from the plan, so long as there is no novus actus interveniens to break the chain.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Freedom wrote:I thought that the law had been changed to cover cases like this where suspects blame each other.

PeterMac, can you assist please? I can't think of the wording.

I saw the original article on the Daily Mail last night but couldn't find it again this morning but found the Daily Mirror one this morning.  On the DM comments section people were responding with outrage that this ridiculous law opens a precedence for others to commit crimes and if 2 people were involved they can blame each other and literally get away with murder.

What a twisted, messed up PC country we live in when 2 evil criminals can do such an horrendous thing to a young innocent child and can just carry on as if butter wouldn't melt in their mouths, are able to walk among us and even get a job at a children's nursery or as a nanny having no criminal record on their CV.

Or 2 parents could each deny the death of their child and as long as neither broke the pact.....Wonder if that law applies in PT.

chirpyinsect wrote: Or 2 parents could each deny the death of their child and as long as neither broke the pact.....Wonder if that law applies in PT.

That was what I was alluding to chirpy but didn't want to make it too obvious.

You know, I had to read this THREE times yesterday to actually take it in, and the baby was handed straight back to the so-called mother!

This was on the same news site, I can't copy the computer-generated photo of the girl over, I don't know how to.  How sad and frightening that so many young children come to such a terrible and gruesome end:

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/mystery-of-young-girl-found-dead-in-bag/ar-AActVwT?ocid=mailsignoutmd

Police are trying to identify a mystery girl who was found dead in a plastic bag.

The child was discovered in the bag along a Boston Harbour shoreline last week but it is not known how she died, police said.

Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel Conley told a news conference on Deer Island that the girl's identity was unknown.

A computer-generated image of the child has been created by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Officials believe the brown-haired, brown-eyed youngster was about four-years-old.

Her body was found on 25 June inside a bag that also contained a black and white zebra-print blanket.

Authorities also released photos of the blanket and white leggings with black polka dots the girl was wearing.

I saw that. How the poor little soul hasn't been reported missing I don't know.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3149204/Criminologist-says-mystery-four-year-old-girl-washed-ashore-Deer-Island-probably-killed-FAMILY-MEMBER.html

Poor, poor little girl.

How can the Mail not fail to draw the parallels?

Horrible reading, but heck don't they emphasise on a family member
R.I.P little one, hope those responsible are caught and locked up soon.

dogs don't lie wrote:Horrible reading, but heck don't they emphasise on a family member
R.I.P little one, hope those responsible are caught and locked up soon.

I watch the late night USA real crime story programmes, and one I have seen a few times is a husband/father (Christian Longo) who killed his wife and 3 very young children because he got into such terrible debt and wanted to start a new life. The wife and children were found in separate suitcases stashed under a marina, the husband was long gone and was eventually found after some years living a new life and had fled to Cancun. I've found one of the internet links -

http://truecrimecases.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/murder-too-harrowing-to-believe.html

I watch a lot of these programmes on YouTube and I remember that one. 

It's the so-called nearest and dearest responsible in the majority of them.

Here's a bizarre case from the 1980s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EadgwUuyyV0

Hundreds of police officers convicted in past three years

At least 309 police officers and police community support officers in the UK have been convicted of offences in the last three years, figures show.

The offences that led to convictions include sex crimes, assaults and possessing indecent images of children.

However, only 25 of the 45 forces gave figures to the Press Association after a Freedom of Information request.

A Home Office spokesman said measures had been introduced to improve standards of behaviour in the police.

The 20 forces that did not provide information either said they could not reveal the number of convictions because of the cost of retrieving the information, or did not respond to the request.




Police Scotland and the Police Service of Northern Ireland were among those not to provide the information.

Separate figures obtained from 18 forces showed that there are at least 295 officers and police community support officers (PCSOs) with convictions who are currently serving with the police.

'Appropriate action'

The Home Office spokesman said: "The vast majority of police officers in this country do their job honestly and with integrity. They put themselves in harm's way to protect the public.

"But the good work of the majority threatens to be damaged by a continuing series of events and revelations relating to police conduct.

"Over the last two years the Home Office has introduced a programme of measures to improve standards of behaviour in the police, including making the disciplinary system more independent and transparent through introducing hearings in public, preventing officers resigning or retiring to avoid dismissal, and - from next year - introducing legally qualified, independent chairs on misconduct hearing panels."

Police forces did not tell the Press Association the names of officers who had been involved in crimes, saying that it would breach data protection laws to identify them.

Among the forces to provide figures to the Press Association:
◾The Metropolitan Police, the UK's biggest force, said 178 police officers were convicted between 2012 and 31 March 2015 - while it refused the FoI request on costs grounds, it had already published this data. Of those, 54 were still serving, including 10 awaiting the conclusion of misconduct review hearings. Convictions in 2014, involving 46 officers, included two sexual offences, three thefts and 19 traffic offences.
◾Greater Manchester Police said 12 police officers and five PCSOs had been convicted since 2012. These include a male sergeant convicted of misconduct in public office, a male inspector convicted of fraud and a male PC convicted of possessing class B drugs, with other offences including perjury, theft and possession of offensive weapons. Five police officers and five PCSOs currently serving have previous convictions.
◾Devon and Cornwall Police said five police officers and five PCSOs had been convicted since 2012, with one officer convicted of possessing indecent images of children and two convicted of indecent exposure. A total of five had convictions committed before they were recruited.
◾Durham Constabulary said a male police constable was convicted of possessing indecent images of children in 2012 and that a male PCSO was convicted of common assault on a female member of the public while on duty in 2013.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33635962

(photograph snipped from the Daily Mail)


www.nickdavies.net/1993/08/.../kidnap-murder-and-justice-in-the-algarv

I've always found this a desperately sad case -

- her poor, poor mother.