mathew hamlen

[Steve_uk]

Bamberette i dont who you have been talking t but i havent had a sex change.

His mother had been bludgeoned and stabbed so I suppose he assumed she was dead. I don't see any great mystery there.

[nugnug]

His mother had been bludgeoned and stabbed so I suppose he assumed she was dead. I don't see any great mystery there.

there other witnesses the paramedics dident know she was dead and they see more dead body's than most of us they don't know but harry Edmonds does.

people have had simler injurys and survivd.

[nugnug]

At the time of the finding of the body, neither he nor Ian Wrightson knew anything about stab wounds. According to Ian, his initial thought was that Mrs E had fallen and hit her head on the counter as she fell. It was only Harry who thought it looked like she had been hit over the head and that was a conclusion he drew within seconds of seeing his mother's body on the floor.

He didn't check to see if she was breathing or if she had a pulse before concluding, in the first minute, that she was dead and had been murdered. Even as Ian checked to see if he could find a pulse, Harry was more concerned with contaminating a crime scene than finding out if his mother showed any signs of life.

Whatever your thoughts on how the case developed, those are strange conclusions to draw so quickly - even the paramedics thought so.

well even if it was bvios she hd been atacked and it wasnt thats still no reson to think shes dead.

[Steve_uk]

Well I'm sorry about the aunt's hairdressing business. Of course I would feel differently if another person confessed; I am not without feeling.

[nugnug]

now the killer hasn't plenty of time to look in the handbag while they are inside the house so why would they wait till they wre outside the house to look inside it.

[Steve_uk]

Well you're making a lot of assumptions there. I'm not in favour of vigilantism or vindictiveness.

[nugnug]

But, of course, we now know that this man wasn't rifling through the handbag, because the police were told exactly what he was doing. He was committing a sex act on himself, in full view of passers-by. No handbag in sight.

if it was a robey I cant for the life of me understand why the rober would throw the phone away the only thing in the bag that's really worth anything.

the fact had to chck what was missing shows it wasn't obviously a burglary.

[nugnug]

Vigilantism or vindictiveness? Where did that come from? Assumptions - that a murderer would want to get away from the scene asap. Facts - the man police claimed might have been "rifling through the handbag" was, in fact, committing a sex act in full view of passers-by.

am i right in thinking that this allged buglery happend in daylight.

[Steve_uk]

Vigilantism or vindictiveness? Where did that come from? Assumptions - that a murderer would want to get away from the scene asap. Facts - the man police claimed might have been "rifling through the handbag" was, in fact, committing a sex act in full view of passers-by.

I was referring to the impact on the family business which you are harping on about, despite it being irrelevant to the crime. I also didn't wish anyone to be vindictive to Hamlen within or without prison even if they have just cause.

[nugnug]

and there also seems to be no sighn of forced entry meaning mrs edmounds would of had to have let this burglr in.

the other thig is unless mrs edmounds knows this burglr he has no reason to kill her the only reson a theif would is if you could identify then and if u dont know  them you couldent.

[nugnug]

There were two unlocked doors and an unlocked groundfloor window - the killer could have let himself in through any of them. I'd imagine, though, he wouldn't have expected to find an unlocked property empty of people, in which case, you'd imagine he would at least attempt to cover his face. In fact, the prosecution case tried to suggest that ATM man was wearing a balaclava under his hood.

Since their case was that he was the killer, it would seem more than a little odd that he'd not worn a balaclava in the cottage, but had donned one to hide his face when he tried to use the ATM? But if he had worn a balaclava in the cottage, Mrs Emonds could not possibly have identified him, so what was the reason for killing her?

seems rather odd that yu would take an atm card without knowing the pin number

especaily when theres cash lying about.


also seems od that he would have one go at entring the pin then throw the card away.

I mean if you've killed to killed to get the card you are not going to give up after one go.

[nugnug]

There were two unlocked doors and an unlocked groundfloor window - the killer could have let himself in through any of them. I'd imagine, though, he wouldn't have expected to find an unlocked property empty of people, in which case, you'd imagine he would at least attempt to cover his face. In fact, the prosecution case tried to suggest that ATM man was wearing a balaclava under his hood.

Since their case was that he was the killer, it would seem more than a little odd that he'd not worn a balaclava in the cottage, but had donned one to hide his face when he tried to use the ATM? But if he had worn a balaclava in the cottage, Mrs Emonds could not possibly have identified him, so what was the reason for killing her?

and if your so keen not to be seen at the cahpoint why wear a hi viz jacket.

[nugnug]

sandra can we be certan then man in the woods was masterbating couldent it he was just piising it a distance one act could be mistaken for the other..

[nugnug]

I don't suppose anyone could ever be certain, nugnug, but the two women who gave statements to the effect that he was masturbating seemed pretty sure. He was quite close to the road and it's not a road you can speed on, so I'm assuming they got a reasonable look at him and what he was doing. But, yes, it's also possible he was having a pee - still a bit odd in full view of passing cars, facing towards the road, though!

could it be somone who stoped there care to have a pee though in wich case they would be near the road.