they've found two if they find a few more and he was in the area at the time it won't be a great surprise... with each one they find it starts to close in on him ... they'll get this **** imo
evidence. n. every type of proof legally presented at trial (allowed by the judge) which is intended to convince the judge and/or jury of alleged facts material to the case. So if the judge thinks that a person was in 100 locations where 100 people where killed at the same time. I’m pretty sure that the judge would allow the evidence. The jury would then listen to both sides and make their own decisions.
I would worry mate they've got more on this arsehole than has been released to the press.... theyre looking at every move this ****s made and every missing person reported on his vicinity... the potential of this child rapist murderer of no fixed address driving around Europe in his camper van his whole life is incredible imo .
And I’m pretty sure all evidence is circumstantial in nature because of this all which are allowable in the court of law! Common examples of circumstantial evidence include: Evidence that establishes a motive Evidence of an opportunity to commit the offence Evidence of the accused’s state of mind when the offence was committed Evidence of the accused preparing for the crime Evidence of the accused having items that could be used to commit the offence Evidence of identification, for example, the accused’s DNA, fingerprints or mobile phone records Evidence that the accused committed similar crimes around the same time the alleged offence was committed Evidence of the accused giving different versions of events
The burden of proof is on the Prosecution. That burden in a criminal case is beyond reasonable doubt. It is not always that black and white but in the vast majority of cases it is. In your example case it would be as above. The Defence doesn’t have to prove anything when a case starts. If the only evidence you have is that this person was in the same town as this crime occurred but you have nothing else tying him to the crimes whatsoever that would simply not satisfy the burden of proof. The Defence would apply on close of the Prosecution case to throw the case out and for me it would succeed. You have to have something more concrete to tie that person to the offence. Clever dick Defence lawyer question to Police. Is it possible one other person was also in the 100 places on the same 100 occasions Each of the crimes occurred. The only answer is yes it is possible. Unlikely but it is possible. The Police don’t know the answer as they otherwise would have had to establish who everybody else who was in each of the 100 towns on each of the relevant dates. A task they are not going to be able to do. Not 100% of people. There’s your reasonable doubt if you have no other evidence.
absolutely , but we're assuming that's all they have... put it this way they have became aware that the person in question could be responsible for countless child disappearances , so this ****er will be investigated beyond belief.. I believe this has the potential to involve large numbers not just Maddy
It could open a mahoosive can of worms. He’s totally ****ed but how many cases can they link to him now. If there’s any more abductions where he’s been in the country or area they will definitely link it to him. Look I’m not going to lie. And I still think there’s something fishy with the family. But I did think and still wonder if something happened prior to this **** getting involved.
And I hope so aswell. The mans in jail and if I was him I would literally be saying look I will tell you everything so I can stay in Jail. Because if he comes out I give him 48 hours.
So you agree that they committed a crime and should have been prosecuted for it. Glad we got there in the end
Yes you can. It’s unusual and rare but it is possible. I can easily think of situations. Person is seen and filmed pushing living person into an incinerator where the fire consumes the body. Are you saying they wouldn’t be able to prove murder because the body is incinerated?
I know and I agree on that tbh.. I have a feeling they'll uncover one of the worst serial killers in history with this guy. I would make a prediction that hrs responsible for numbers of missing children all over Europe
And at this point it’s already in the court where the jury are thinking. What’s the ducking chances of him being in the same place at the same time for 100 murders. Fingers ready press your button. Guilty guilty guilty . When the evidence is overwhelming the jury convict. In situations like this where we all have families they convict. Theres not a lawyer on earth that can deflect overwhelming evidence. Your initial argument was lack of evidence. The evidence my friend is already there. I rest my ****ing case!
nah these people like control and they never like admitting the crime. He will say nothing unless it benefits him in some way.. these people are proud of their achievements and crave power.. withholding is the last but of power they still hold over the victim. I would also say that to walk into a hotel room and snatch a child would come after a few years of experience snatching then off streets ... I'm convinced this guy will have numbers of victims
So basically someone films someone killing someone. Then takes the body. And hides it. No one ever finds it. The fact that it’s recorded and on film. Family says they have not heard from Him since. But the jury go ah but... no body no evidence no conviction. Come on mate just admit your just being a dick!
