true but its an indication you think the parents are up to no good - its not like a kid could get up there unaided so you can't cover it under " we just want to check little jonny isnt hiding"
which while its easy to say if they are inocent they have nothing to fear , the average parent who hasnt harmed their child is going to be outraged at the suggestion that they have - and if combined with local poor relationships with police could easily be enough to kick off.
Also where do you draw the line - if the roof space is clear do you start ripping up floor boards, taking the side panel off the bath, lifting the patio , taking furniture to bits ?
Police have now indicated 'Human Error' in not finding body earlier and have apologised.
I'm sure the report I read initially said he'd been arrested - but if he wasn't then fair enough - there was no power to search.CT
Chummy wasn't arrested, he was taken to the police station to make a statement. There's a big difference. Because he'd not been arrested a proper search couldn't take place against the wishes of the guardians.
Linton
They often, depending on the mutt and the handler, get the toy when they finish work as well. Sometimes the same toy they get when they find, and sometimes a different one, depends on the dog but I think you're reading too much into that.
The problem here isn't police per sae, it's powers of police. On the one hand most of those who are howling outrage are the same people who are outraged by proxie when they think police search a photographer without powers.
Unfortunately, the powers to search are limited, missing kid or not. Yes, you can read into a refusal by the guardians of a child to allow a search what you like, but thats not evidence. A search in those circumstances is by permission only. There's no obligation to allow it, so thats the end of the matter.
It matters not one way or the other in this case, she was undoubtedly dead from then start, nothing's been lost. Police didn't kill her, either she died through natural causes, which is still a possibility, or she was killed, if its the former, it happens, the latter, then it's the person who killed to blame.
As for not searching every nook & cranny, then blame yourselves for that, Parliament passed the legislation, not police officers.
CT
Chummy wasn't arrested, he was taken to the police station to make a statement. There's a big difference. Because he'd not been arrested a proper search couldn't take place against the wishes of the guardians.

It's Lynton not Linton(it's there, big and blue on the left!!)
Don't recall where I ever mentioned powers to search.... :shrug:
Bernie174 said:I don't yet know what there is to be defended, I don't know the circumstances so it's difficult to blame police for anything as things stand at the moment. On the face of it, it seems difficult to understand for some, but the simple version peddled by the press is rarely the full story.
Police yesterday admitted "human error" and apologised to Tia's parents for the delay in finding the body - seems like an admission that it was a clear case of not doing it right.
:
Yeah I can see how that might go
" we're very sorry we didnt find your daughters body sooner , of course had your step dad - you know the guy you used to go out with before he dumped you for your mum - not hidden it in the water tank, quite possibly with your mums knowledge, and had family members not then lied to us about the last time they saw her , we'd probably have found it earlier... "
If an individual officer made a mistake or wasnt competent then fair enough he should be warned/disciplined , but the human error displayed by the force is considerably smaller than that displayed inside the family both in leaving a 12 year old in the charge of someone with previous for dealing drugs and possession of a machette , and by those family members who then appear to have tried to help him escape the consequences
It's Lynton not Linton(it's there, big and blue on the left!!)
Don't recall where I ever mentioned powers to search.... :shrug:
I don't imagine anyone is saying that anyone other than the perpetrators of this terrible act are those responsible for it ... you note I say "act" as at this moment in time we do not know how Tia died, much less if anyone murdered her, or if so which of the three people arrested in connection with the case is/are responsible and for whatever 'act'.
Despite that it is a serious failure not to have found the body in three searches - the individual officers concerned (of course not the whole force) bear responsibility for that error.
of course its easier just changing the theme being used to view the forum.... personally i prefer seeing you lot in grey of course its easier just changing the theme being used to view the forum.... personally i prefer seeing you lot in grey
![]()
![]()

Come on you're just green with envy![]()
Her Gran boyfriend has been charged with murder,all very sad![]()
Considering all the stuff written in this thread, I believe I am due an apology from TP especially a certain Mod accusing me of trolling when far worse has continued in the so called chest thumping stakes. I have continued to view the thread without further contribution due to the fact of being fed up of certain people unable to distinguish of what a discussion is.
What happened to the respect for Tia part, has the time limit expired for that?
I don't expect an apology though.
of course its easier just changing the theme being used to view the forum.... personally i prefer seeing you lot in grey
![]()
![]()
So you've decided to hijack this thread for a gripe with the moderating team?
If you have an issue with the moderating of this site, use the Contact Us button as per site rules. :rules:
Not an attack, violence is not my nature. I had the same done to me by a mod but is that different?
Attack? Were have I said "attack". Read my post agan.
Bernie,
You're defending the indefensible yet again. There really is nothing to defend here, the police have admitted 'human error' and apologised. I think that any reasonable person would accept that these things happen and move on.
If a person resident at that property had in fact been arrested then the police had powers of search. It's clear (to everyone else) that even if they didn't have the power in this situation then they had permission from the person in control of the premises, which I assume to be the grandmother, otherwise they couldn't have carried out the first two searches - and yet they failed to find anything. This indicates that someone was lazy and didn't do his or her job properly, pretty well confirmed by the police apology.
So, why are you still defending the actions (or inactions) of the police? It seems to me (and everyone else) that the police did everything right, but were let down by one of their staff.
I'm doing nothing of the sort. I fully accept that the press often make it up as they go along, I also fully accept that, for the most part, all I know is what I have seen/heard in the media.Garry
You don't know anything more than what's in the press. This is the same press who are shown time and time again to be grossly inaccurate.
The rest of what you've said, is assumption and opinion. For example do you know what state the body was in? So you can't know what sort of container it was in. Because you can't know that, you can't know if it was somewhere a live child could be, remember this was for the first few days at least a missing person, not a murder.
A large number of people claim to have seen her, well, proves my point about witness reliability from our last discussion, so why would Police search in say, a water cistern. To assume that is lazy or incompetence I'm afraid shows your over use of hindsight, nothing more.
As for an ACPO apology, it's meaningless, ACPO have spent the last 15 years appologising for everything from Slavery to global warming. It's interesting, and again wouldn't be something you'd know, that there are far more cases where they have apologised and a subsequent inquiry has exonerated police of any blame than there are the opposite. Just take my word for it, it is an automatic default position for the Met Senior management.
In short, no I am not defending the indefensible, I am not bowing to the press and allowing them to do my thinking for me. I am not drawing conclusions based on flimsy or non existent evidence. Nor am I assuming the wrong doing without the inconvenience of any investigation. All of those things are exactly what you are doing.
They blame the grandmother, her boyfriend, her daughter, her neighbour....
That's a pretty high proportion of the general male population, but it's probably true to say that the percentage is likely to be much higher in some parts of society and much lower in other parts of society. I'm not justifying any decisions that the family may or may not have made, but if it's normal to have a criminal record then maybe it's also normal to disregard it.This 27% covers only ‘standard list’ offences, which include “all indictable and certain of the more serious summary offences”, but exclude cautions, reprimands, final warnings, or informal methods of dealing with offenders”.