The Suffolk 'Ripper' - Page 5

punky · 18-12-2006, 12:01

They have to be careful they don't prejudice the case against him...

etccarmageddon · 18-12-2006, 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

What are they doing naming him? I dont see in the news any information about him being charged. The police must have a very strong case but naming him before being charged? that cant be right surely

obviously it's legal but it's not right. I dont care how strong they (believe) the case is against him - that is irrelevant as it is upto a jury to decide his guilt.

18-12-2006, 12:11

Its trial by the press again. As said the case needs to be water tight we will now hear all things about this guy in the press every little aspect of his life will be open to ponder. Problem with that is how could a jury of his peers be impartial.And the fact he hasnt even been charged yet...

Wicked_and_Crazy · 18-12-2006, 12:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

Its trial by the press again. As said the case needs to be water tight we will now hear all things about this guy in the press every little aspect of his life will be open to ponder. Problem with that is how could a jury of his peers be impartial.And the fact he hasnt even been charged yet...

They may be looking for more evidence and by releasing a name the public "may" provide this information. The question is do you think this is an ethical approach or not

Mr_love_monkey · 18-12-2006, 12:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wicked_and_Crazy

They may be looking for more evidence and by releasing a name the public "may" provide this information. The question is do you think this is an ethical approach or not

Yeah, but if it's not him, his life is effectively ruined now - people will always look at him and wonder, even if someone else is caught for the murders.

Mud sticks.

Wicked_and_Crazy · 18-12-2006, 12:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr_love_monkey

Yeah, but if it's not him, his life is effectively ruined now - people will always look at him and wonder, even if someone else is caught for the murders.

Mud sticks.

Totally agree but i would hope the police wouldnt do this unless they're 100% sure but just need more evidence to be able to prosecute

peanut · 18-12-2006, 12:50

For them to come out and name him so quickly must mean they have got some undeniable proof like their clothing or something from his house.

Shaun · 18-12-2006, 13:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

And hopefully thats the end of it. I also hope in vain they dont release pictures or his name until convicted so we can avoid a draw out media goverage of the case and so on.

Too late :

Quote:

Mr Stephens is in custody at an unnamed police station in Suffolk

Mr_love_monkey · 18-12-2006, 13:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by peanutkp

For them to come out and name him so quickly must mean they have got some undeniable proof like their clothing or something from his house.

Lets hope so, and lets hope they're not bluffing...

r1ch · 18-12-2006, 13:18

It sounds like they've arrested him in response to this interview that he gave to the Sunday Mirror claiming that he's innocent but under suspicion:- http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/t...name_page.html

So I guess that he really outed himself in this case...

18-12-2006, 13:55

Quote:

Supermarket worker Tom Stephens was arrested by police at his home at Trimley St Martin, near Felixstowe.

He is being held on suspicion of murdering prostitutes Gemma Adams, Anneli Alderton, Tania Nicol, Paula Clennell and Annette Nicholls.
Mr Stephens is in custody at an unnamed police station in Suffolk.
He is due to be questioned by detectives later on Monday.

Speaking in an interview with BBC News last week for background purposes, Mr Stephens said he had known Miss Adams for about 18 months - "about as long as I've known any of the girls".
He added: "Tania I've only known for about six months but in the end I did actually get to know Tania better than I knew Gemma.

"I didn't know Anneli at all, I've only every spoken to her since both Tania and Gemma went missing, partly to say, if you know anything, please talk to the police and if you won't talk to the police, please talk to me and I'll talk to the police.

That's it then...trial by media as already stated by etc...

Derek · 18-12-2006, 14:56

I'm just curious as to why he's put himself in the spotlight

A: Because he didn't do it and is looking for the publicity
or
B: Because he did it and is hoping the media pressure helps him in any court case. He could have had plenty of time to dispose of evidence by now and putting himself up could allow him to claim police are victimizing him by grabbing the first suspect.

orangebird · 18-12-2006, 15:01

I think he was a little foolish to speak to the press... it's a bit like Ian Huntely talking about Hollie & Jessica..

Aragorn · 18-12-2006, 15:12

Maybe he enjoys the attention - it's his 'fifteen minutes' - or maybe he's hoping that press coverage will prejudice the trial.
Don't forget, the 'rationality' of someone who kills five people is somewhat different from ours.

Mr_love_monkey · 18-12-2006, 15:14

unless the profilers are correct and he's taunting the police - after all what better way to do it?