General Chat

would like your views.to charge someone with murder without a body????xxxxxxxxxx(:

they must have very good grounds to be able to bring the charge. Like the chap that was found guilty of murder last week (?) - they never found a body, but the girls blood was found in his car...

if there is evidence, like paul mentioned, then fair enough but each case is so different its hard to comment really.

it's a bit strange, but i suppose it depends on how much evidence is avaliable. but then again if they are found innocent and they had done it, it would take substantial evidence to retry them. cos of the duble jepordy rule. interesting question.

the reason why i was asking is that the earl of shaftsbury 's third wife and brother have been pulled in for his murder.he has been missing for many months.do you think the police sometimes get it wrong and pull in and lock up the wrong person??xxxx(:

In this case the woman went to the police and confessed

yes, like in the case of the Gill Dando murder, i don't tink the guy did it, i covered it in psychology, he's the wrong personality type. I think sometimes there is so much pressure on the police to get a result that they find a suitable suspect and try to build a case around it.

Yes, just imagine being accused of a murder you did not commit? no body just someones IDEA? What an horrendous experience. Deanna

a confession pretty much closes the case doesn't it ? lol as to the previous question - yes, there's no doubt that the police do occasionally get it wrong. but thats a minority of cases.

That's why we have jury trials: to obtain a conviction the prosecution must prove their case beyond all reasonable doubt. (As opposed to Clarke's proposal to intern 'terror suspects' as defined by himself, on his own say-so).

yes, 'beyond reasonable doubt' is the key phrase. I do think though, that the lack of a body shouldn't mean no conviction - otherwise you could literally get away with murder just be disposing of the body well, even if you were subsequently found covered in the victims blood etc...

yes clarks proposal is a bit like a dictatorship, how do we know that his prejudices won't get in the way of his impartiality.

my brother was pulled in for a crime he didn't commit he had witnesses who said he was working on the day the crime took place but he was chucked in the cell for two days.someone that knew him said that he fitted the e fitxxxx(:

A confession does'nt mean a thing! Many people admit to things they did'nt do. Its quite common. Deanna

and yes, Deanna, it is a horrible feeling being accused of something you didn't do, I know that from experience (although thankfully it wasn't murder !!)

in certain legal systems though a body is required, i think it's the american. or is it that a body part has t be found.

There have been many cases over the years where a charge has been made without the body being found. That must be even worse for the victims's family, not being able to hold a funeral and have some form of 'closure'.

a fight broke out at my brother-in-laws local and he was dragged in even though he wasn't involved.he admitted that the police interigated him.had interviewed him for hours on ened until he was so tired that he didn't care what he said,my brother has told me that aswell.they try to force a confession even if you haven't done it.in few caes this happens not allxxxx(:

if they have the evidence then yes limmie xxx

The body of Muriel McKay was never found, yet two people were found guilty of her murder. I think the very scary thing about courts is that if I were on a jury and the prosecution called Dr/Professor Bloggs, the world's leading expert on bloodspots/fingerprints/DNA testing whatever, how on earth would I know whether what he said was right or not? At the beginning of the 20th century, Sir Bernard Spillsbury was a forensic pathologist. He was famous and gave evidence at many capital trials. My father said that such was his reputation that if he was called for the Crown you could guarantee the bloke would be found guilty. Now there has been a lot of doubt cast on his findings. He committed suicide. But if you are told someone is an expert and they present info about which you know nothing, who are you to question it - what if the defence counsel are useless? Look at the people involved in the Orkney child abuse cases and the recent overturning of convictions of mothers accused of killing their babies. nell