Alice Gross Murder Suspect

arran77

http://news.sky.com/story/1348502/alice-gross-murder-suspects-body-identified

Right, after the roaring success of the last Alice Gross thread :roll: what do people make of police identifying the body of the main suspect in her murder?

I personally think if he was guilty then he got what he deserves but then would it have been more justice for Alice's family if he was tried and sent to jail?

In jail I guess at least he would have got what he deserved every day from the other inmates.

It's tricky to know which would give the most closure for Alice's family, one things for sure though they'll sadly never have her back :roll:

ballysmate

Don't know what 'closure' parents of murdered children can ever attain. Can't begin to imagine how they would feel.
Investigations will probably end with the hanged suspect being assumed guilty. Let's hope that he was actually guilty.

mamba80

Ballysmate wrote:

Don't know what 'closure' parents of murdered children can ever attain. Can't begin to imagine how they would feel.
Investigations will probably end with the hanged suspect being assumed guilty. Let's hope that he was actually guilty.

^this, lets see what evidence there is against this man, he may simply have killed himself after being named as suspect (I don't kno the time line of these things though) and his criminal past.

I agree that there is no closure for the parents but hopefully, in time, they ll be able to build a life around their grief.

arran77

Ballysmate wrote:

Don't know what 'closure' parents of murdered children can ever attain. Can't begin to imagine how they would feel.
Investigations will probably end with the hanged suspect being assumed guilty. Let's hope that he was actually guilty.

Totally agree with you Bally, I doubt there is any real closure as such but I'd imagine that one outcome or another would offer them a better chance to be able to continue with their lives as best they can.

The thing with death and the human mind is that it's one of the few things that our minds aren't able to fully process and find a final answer to hence why following death of a loved one it can often lead onto periods of depression.

If however you are able to more sensibly reason through a situation with answers your mind is more able to deal with it and finalise things for you hence why I wondered what would offer the family 'more closure' because this would be the way in which they are able to continue as best they can.

Pross

Maybe it wasn't him and he topped himself after being named as prime suspect. Doubtful I know but possible.

arran77

Pross wrote:

Maybe it wasn't him and he topped himself after being named as prime suspect. Doubtful I know but possible.

Bit like that woman who killed herself at the weekend after Sky News confronted her about trolling Madeleine McCann's parents......maybe the press shouldn't be allowed to be involved until a person is found guilty?

DeVlaeminck

Hopefully it was him and hopefully that can be proven. Hard to speculate but I suspect it's easier to know the murderer is dead than still alive and maybe allowed out again one day. I really don't know how a parent copes with the deliberate death of a child but hopefully they can.

ugo.santalucia

Probably worth clearing the air: The suspect was reported missing BEFORE being publicly named as a supect... I'd say there is at least a week between the two events... so unless he wandered for a week for no apparent reason in the large forest which is Boston Manor park, it is unlikely that he hanged himself in shame of being named as a suspect

ballysmate

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Probably worth clearing the air: The suspect was reported missing BEFORE being publicly named as a supect... I'd say there is at least a week between the two events... so unless he wandered for a week for no apparent reason in the large forest which is Boston Manor park, it is unlikely that he hanged himself in shame of being named as a suspect

Doesn't alter the fact that the evidence can't be presented and rebutted so that there is no doubt as to whether he was guilty, so the conclusion will be unsatisfactory.

arran77

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Probably worth clearing the air: The suspect was reported missing BEFORE being publicly named as a supect... I'd say there is at least a week between the two events... so unless he wandered for a week for no apparent reason in the large forest which is Boston Manor park, it is unlikely that he hanged himself in shame of being named as a suspect

No, it's probable he was guilty and decided to take the cowardly way out rather than face justice :roll:

ugo.santalucia

Ballysmate wrote:

Doesn't alter the fact that the evidence can't be presented and rebutted so that there is no doubt as to whether he was guilty, so the conclusion will be unsatisfactory.

Should suspects be named? NO... of course not... I think he was named as they knew he had disappeared and in fact he was first named as a missing person... only later as a suspect, mainly in view of his past conviction.
I think the MET police by their own admission were a bit out of their depth on this and clueless on where to find this man and were hoping by naming him, someone from the public would come up and help

arran77

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

Doesn't alter the fact that the evidence can't be presented and rebutted so that there is no doubt as to whether he was guilty, so the conclusion will be unsatisfactory.

Should suspects be named? NO... of course not... I think he was named as they knew he had disappeared and in fact he was first named as a missing person... only later as a suspect, mainly in view of his past conviction.
I think the MET police by their own admission were a bit out of their depth on this and clueless on where to find this man and were hoping by naming him, someone from the public would come up and help

Police named him the 16th September in relation to her disappearance, prior to that they had arrested a 51 year old and a 25 old.

He was reported missing on the 5th September but it wasn't all made public by the police until the 16th when he was a suspect in her murder.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-29221600

veronese68

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Should suspects be named? NO... of course not...

There was an interesting debate about naming suspects on Radio 4 some time ago. The chief of police in Bristol and the landlord that had been named, wrongly, and then tried by media for a girls disappearance were on. It was a remarkably civil discussion considering what the guy had been through and he agreed that sometimes it is important to name suspects as it can bring out more victims and information. The biggest problem was the way the media acted.

Anonymous

I really do not get why some of you guys seem to be sticking up for a child killer :shock:

Even if he did not kill the girl, he still killed his wife in Latvia, and had some other accusation against him dropped here in the UK.!
See nothing wrong with him being guilty until proved innocent under the circumstances.

This country is such a soft touch lol.
Convicted murderers allowed to come here to live, kill a child, and then get a load of cyclists sticking up for them even though the circumstantial evidence is pretty obviously incriminating.

Do you guys sticking up for him have children?

At least some scumbag defence lawyer will not be able to make a tonne of cash out of it now he is dead.

I am not religious, but hope there is a hell.

arran77

Carbonator wrote:

I really do not get why some of you guys seem to be sticking up for a child killer :shock:

When was his trial and guilty verdict for the murder of Alice then?

I'm certainly not defending him.

As a parent it was the question I sort of first asked really, what would give you the most closure in such a situation, for me I don't know if I'd rather he was dead or he stood trial and justice was done knowing that in all honesty it would probably only be a couple of decades before he was out of prison. Very difficult.

Anonymous

arran77 wrote:

Carbonator wrote:

I really do not get why some of you guys seem to be sticking up for a child killer :shock:

When was his trial and guilty verdict for the murder of Alice then?

I'm certainly not defending him.

As a parent it was the question I sort of first asked really, what would give you the most closure in such a situation, for me I don't know if I'd rather he was dead or he stood trial and justice was done knowing that in all honesty it would probably only be a couple of decades before he was out of prison. Very difficult.

So you are sticking up for him then?

Yes or No?

arran77

Carbonator wrote:

arran77 wrote:

Carbonator wrote:

I really do not get why some of you guys seem to be sticking up for a child killer :shock:

When was his trial and guilty verdict for the murder of Alice then?

I'm certainly not defending him.

As a parent it was the question I sort of first asked really, what would give you the most closure in such a situation, for me I don't know if I'd rather he was dead or he stood trial and justice was done knowing that in all honesty it would probably only be a couple of decades before he was out of prison. Very difficult.

So you are sticking up for him then?

Yes or No?

Anonymous

Was the question too difficult?

veronese68

It would appear the answer was. Clue in the bit in bold.

arran77

Veronese68 wrote:

It would appear the answer was. Clue in the bit in bold.

Anonymous

If you think we need to wait for a trial of a convicted murderer who was cycling behind a missing school girl that was later found murdered (who then went missing before being named I believe), then you are sticking up for him.

Pretty sure he will be found guilty pretty soon. At which point you will have stuck up for a child killer.

As a parent, you should know which of the two options would bring the most closure.
Personally I would want a third option, but guessing you would not think that fair on the child killer.

Paulie W

Carbonator wrote:

If you think we need to wait for a trial of a convicted murderer who was cycling behind a missing school girl that was later found murdered (who then went missing before being named I believe), then you are sticking up for him.

Pretty sure he will be found guilty pretty soon. At which point you will have stuck up for a child killer.

As a parent, you should know which of the two options would bring the most closure.
Personally I would want a third option, but guessing you would not think that fair on the child killer.

Few would doubt that he was the killer given his record, given he was in the immediate area at the time of the murder and given the aftermath. No-one has any sympathy for him in this or is 'sticking up for him' (whatever the feck that means) from what I've read. DNA and other evidence may emerge that makes his guilt certain (as opposed to highly, highly probable). Currently the evidence is no more than circumstantial. The point here is that his suicide has opened up the possibility that that certainty may never come to light and for some that might add to already unimaginable pain.

The real issue here is how the hell did this guy only get 7 years for killing his wife - luring her into the woods, stabbing her and putting her in a grave he'd already dug. Whatever you want to say about the UK justice system the Latvian system would also appear to have problems.

arran77

Carbonator wrote:

If you think we need to wait for a trial of a convicted murderer who was cycling behind a missing school girl that was later found murdered (who then went missing before being named I believe), then you are sticking up for him.

Pretty sure he will be found guilty pretty soon. At which point you will have stuck up for a child killer.

As a parent, you should know which of the two options would bring the most closure.
Personally I would want a third option, but guessing you would not think that fair on the child killer.

You clearly do not know very much about me at all if you think any of that applies in my case

As for the closure thing, have a read what I've already said about it, heaven forbid that anyone on here might know what they're talking about but in this case I can assure you that I do.

simonhead

OK the guy was "probably guilty" given his history but that has sweet FA to do with it. He had history and was in the right place for it to appear that he is the suspect but thats it, he was a suspect. As stated its circumstantial at the moment and if people end up "hanging" without the full evidence being presented we are no better than a 3rd world country.

Closure is one thing and i hope its proven that the chap did it but if there is doubt there will always be uncertainty by the parents and no closure.

ugo.santalucia

Veronese68 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Should suspects be named? NO... of course not...

There was an interesting debate about naming suspects on Radio 4 some time ago. The chief of police in Bristol and the landlord that had been named, wrongly, and then tried by media for a girls disappearance were on. It was a remarkably civil discussion considering what the guy had been through and he agreed that sometimes it is important to name suspects as it can bring out more victims and information. The biggest problem was the way the media acted.

I remember that case... appalling... don't seem to remember he receiving apologies from the press

ballysmate

Ballysmate wrote:

Don't know what 'closure' parents of murdered children can ever attain. Can't begin to imagine how they would feel.
Investigations will probably end with the hanged suspect being assumed guilty. Let's hope that he was actually guilty.

I didn't post this to stick up for anyone. If he is assumed to be guilty and the investigation stops without proving that he was in fact guilty, there is a chance that there is still a child killer out there.

mamba80

I ll stick up for Arran here, there was absolutely nothing in anything he has written that justifies saying he is backing a child killer, at this moment in time, we simply do not know who is guilty of what or how.

as for the parents of poor Alice, who here is to say what can possibly bring them any form of closure?
My friends son was murdered as a teenager and his family got no closure with the court verdict, everyone is different and perhaps only time allows a life to built round the pain in their lives.

imposter2.0

Carbonator wrote:

If you think we need to wait for a trial of a convicted murderer who was cycling behind a missing school girl that was later found murdered (who then went missing before being named I believe), then you are sticking up for him.

A perfect, if somewhat ironic, illustration of why we need to maintain the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' - regardless of the suspect.

arran77

Imposter wrote:

Carbonator wrote:

If you think we need to wait for a trial of a convicted murderer who was cycling behind a missing school girl that was later found murdered (who then went missing before being named I believe), then you are sticking up for him.

A perfect, if somewhat ironic, illustration of why we need to maintain the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' - regardless of the suspect.

Quite.

If you take Carbonator's stance then we might as well do away with our judicial system and let the media and the public decide the outcome of such cases.

We have innocent until proven guilty and our judicial system so that on the whole mistakes are not made and justice is served.

ugo.santalucia

A spanner in the works and one for the lapidator-Carbonator:

The last CCTV footage shows the girl passing a section of the canal, but later there is no sign of the suspect crossing the same section, as an indication that he must have cut out of the canal path before that point. The chances of the two meeting at a later point are not that high, as all the side paths bring back to residential areas and not back onto the canal. This is just one of the many mysteries this story seem to have. There is a more than zero chance that a third person(s) is involved.

In other words, there is still a lot of investigative work to do and the reconstruction is by no means conclusive

imposter2.0

ugo.santalucia wrote:

A spanner in the works and one for the lapidator-Carbonator:

The last CCTV footage shows the girl passing a section of the canal, but later there is no sign of the suspect crossing the same section, as an indication that he must have cut out of the canal path before that point. The chances of the two meeting at a later point are not that high, as all the side paths bring back to residential areas and not back onto the canal. This is just one of the many mysteries this story seem to have. There is a more than zero chance that a third person(s) is involved.

In other words, there is still a lot of investigative work to do and the reconstruction is by no means conclusive

Too late Ugo - carbonator has already convicted the suspect, using nothing but circumstantial evidence.