and the site receives a small commission
Tia Sharp: police find body at home of grandmother
- Thread starter Just Dave
- Start date
mxfun
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,242
- Name
- Sean Logie
- Edit My Images
- Yes
this thread is ridiculous now ,all this who knows what rubbish .
At the end of the day a CHILD !!! has lost her life .....can you all just leave it for a change ,what's there to be gained from this silliness i read .
At the end of the day a CHILD !!! has lost her life .....can you all just leave it for a change ,what's there to be gained from this silliness i read .
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,158
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Tezz450D
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,036
- Name
- Tezz
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Poor Tia, RIP little one.
I have been following this story and I was saddened to hear that a close family member is responsible, sadly, that is true in many cases, and not just of a child, often spouse/long term partner is found to responsible in a murder case.
Don't believe many murders are carried out by "random strangers"
The mother looked totally devestated on the tv and i am glad the tv cameras didnt focus on her too long
An absolute tragic ending to a young life
I have been following this story and I was saddened to hear that a close family member is responsible, sadly, that is true in many cases, and not just of a child, often spouse/long term partner is found to responsible in a murder case.
Don't believe many murders are carried out by "random strangers"
The mother looked totally devestated on the tv and i am glad the tv cameras didnt focus on her too long
An absolute tragic ending to a young life
McShug
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 505
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
Officers had previously conducted a full search of the house and a second sweep using dogs trained to detect dead bodies. Colleagues suspect the body was behind a door connecting the loft to that of an adjacent property.
Sources claimed a team who spent two hours searching the property last Sunday did not check the neighbouring loft space because they needed a search warrant.
A further search of Sharp’s house began on Friday morning when a junior officer insisted a sniffer dog was ‘indicating’ towards a bedroom ceiling. The officers themselves could also smell decomposition.
Initially a senior officer co-ordinating the search said the loft had already been checked but was persuaded to change his mind.
Colleagues lifted the loft hatch and saw a large ‘container’, possibly a rigid suitcase, containing Tia’s body with her arms and legs sprawled outside.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...breaks-house-body-lay-week.html#ixzz23QbezbHg
So sad reading that article, the end of that poor girls life, is to end up wrapped in a black sheet, and stuffed in a black bag.
Sources claimed a team who spent two hours searching the property last Sunday did not check the neighbouring loft space because they needed a search warrant.
A further search of Sharp’s house began on Friday morning when a junior officer insisted a sniffer dog was ‘indicating’ towards a bedroom ceiling. The officers themselves could also smell decomposition.
Initially a senior officer co-ordinating the search said the loft had already been checked but was persuaded to change his mind.
Colleagues lifted the loft hatch and saw a large ‘container’, possibly a rigid suitcase, containing Tia’s body with her arms and legs sprawled outside.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...breaks-house-body-lay-week.html#ixzz23QbezbHg
So sad reading that article, the end of that poor girls life, is to end up wrapped in a black sheet, and stuffed in a black bag.
- Messages
- 18,340
- Edit My Images
- No
gramps said:
If it's quoted from the Daily Heil then I'd not believe a word. Best seek a credible source.
whatdoesthisbutt
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 405
- Name
- Gav
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As an atheist events like this make me want to believe theres a nicer place when we go
I'd like to think Tia is there, rather than imagine her last few moments.
Whoever turns out to be responsible for her demise, its hard to think any human bieng could be capable of harming a child.
I'd like to think Tia is there, rather than imagine her last few moments.
Whoever turns out to be responsible for her demise, its hard to think any human bieng could be capable of harming a child.
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Bernie174
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,719
- Name
- Bernie
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Garry
I'm glad that some of the detail of where the body was has come out, it was one of the 2 stories I'd heard. (The other was her body was in a water cistern).
What I take issue with is this statement of yours.
And my reasons are very simple. This was a missing person, not a murder investigation. So at least initially, the search was for a live breathing child. So, no reason, nor in all probability power to look inside a bag, this was a child not a member of MI6. So no lazy, nor incompetence there.
Later searches, one of which was conducted by a dog, also failed to find anything. Well, to be honest, if mutley didn't find anything then its hardly a surprise that a human didn't.
Perhaps the dog was being lazy too?
Again, I don't know, nor do you what state the body was in, inside the bag, and the size of it. Draw your own conclusions, but this time with some flexible thinking, not a hard and fast assumption.
Lastly, I've dealt with the APCO (CT Commanders are members of ACPO, and any Met Rank above Ch Supt is referred to by that title, because proper police officers find the term 'Senior' in relation to ACPO ranks insulting!) apology. As I said, they apologise for everything, the Norman invasion, the second world war, and everything else they can think of. It looks good on their promotion portfolio. But in the end, it's meaningless, and to be fair, made without bothering to find out anything more than the briefest details.
I'm glad that some of the detail of where the body was has come out, it was one of the 2 stories I'd heard. (The other was her body was in a water cistern).
What I take issue with is this statement of yours.
And my reasons are very simple. This was a missing person, not a murder investigation. So at least initially, the search was for a live breathing child. So, no reason, nor in all probability power to look inside a bag, this was a child not a member of MI6. So no lazy, nor incompetence there.
Later searches, one of which was conducted by a dog, also failed to find anything. Well, to be honest, if mutley didn't find anything then its hardly a surprise that a human didn't.
Perhaps the dog was being lazy too?
Again, I don't know, nor do you what state the body was in, inside the bag, and the size of it. Draw your own conclusions, but this time with some flexible thinking, not a hard and fast assumption.
Lastly, I've dealt with the APCO (CT Commanders are members of ACPO, and any Met Rank above Ch Supt is referred to by that title, because proper police officers find the term 'Senior' in relation to ACPO ranks insulting!) apology. As I said, they apologise for everything, the Norman invasion, the second world war, and everything else they can think of. It looks good on their promotion portfolio. But in the end, it's meaningless, and to be fair, made without bothering to find out anything more than the briefest details.
DemiLion
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 13,016
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Not all Seniors are members of ACPO.
Cmdr N Basu is one of them.
The statement was issued on behalf of the MPS and has sod all to do with ACPO.
Stop blustering.
acetone
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,327
- Edit My Images
- No
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I get the impression from the quick skim of the thread, that some people believe that if one of your family members goes missing then the police should automatically rip your house apart looking for the missing family member just in case.
Well without strong evidence that would seem very brutal to me. How would you feel is your granddaughter went missing and the police tore your house to bits, just because you knew her.
The police have to tread a fine line between getting the search done and not putting to much distress on what could be innocent family members.
Of course the police have apologised, what do you expect them to do. Say **** you, we did all we could.
Well without strong evidence that would seem very brutal to me. How would you feel is your granddaughter went missing and the police tore your house to bits, just because you knew her.
The police have to tread a fine line between getting the search done and not putting to much distress on what could be innocent family members.
Of course the police have apologised, what do you expect them to do. Say **** you, we did all we could.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not sure that a thorough check of the loft amounts to "rip your house apart" though.
but like i said earlier where do you draw the line
if the loft is clear do you take the side panels off the bath
if that doesnt yeild results how about ripping the bottom off the sofas and beds
still not found her, lets take some floor boards up
nope - i know lets lift the patio
still nothing - lets get the ground penetrating radar in and dig up the garden
oh dearie me seems she isnt here - sorry about the house, but i'm sure you understand these things are necessary....
srichards
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 10,968
- Name
- Suz
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The loft should certainly be checked as that is an excellent place for a child to hide voluntarily! It's not destructive to go in there.
Bath panel is another if there are any signs of entry or suspiciously fresh sealant around it. Otherwise it's probably best ignored.
If your child is missing and the police are looking for clues would you mind a bit of mess if you were a decent parent? I think not. There's a big difference between ripping the house to shreds and looking in a few likely places that can be returned to normal without much cost and minimal inconvenience.
Bath panel is another if there are any signs of entry or suspiciously fresh sealant around it. Otherwise it's probably best ignored.
If your child is missing and the police are looking for clues would you mind a bit of mess if you were a decent parent? I think not. There's a big difference between ripping the house to shreds and looking in a few likely places that can be returned to normal without much cost and minimal inconvenience.
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
clues are one thing - but would you be happy to feel that they suispect you or killing them and hiding the body ?
The poor child was clearly not so visible the first time they searched - I assume she was moved when they thought the police weren't coming back.
I imagine the police did everything they could - what that poor child must have gone through in her short life - murder is the end not the beginning.
I imagine the police did everything they could - what that poor child must have gone through in her short life - murder is the end not the beginning.
Sonriendo
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,070
- Name
- Sarah
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Do you have children of your own?
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't but i have a nephew and I can easily imagine how frantic we'd be if he went missing - i'd certainly have no problem with cops looking in every likely place he might be hiding , but if they started ransacking the house patently looking for a body I'd have a major issue with anyone thinking i might have harmed him
I'd be saying , get the **** out there and find my nephew - you're wasting time in here.
- Messages
- 114,434
- Name
- The real Chris
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think that the point Moose, I bet the guilty party said that too
I'm sure they did - but my point was that one reason the police don't ransack the house on every missing child report is sensitivity to the parents feelings - this one was a bit different as hazell had form for violent misconduct - and once they started searching the house with dogs it was pretty clear what they were looking for and why - but the first responders wouldnt have searched the place beyond making sure she wasnt hiding
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Some of these comments are getting just plain silly. Rest assured the police would have had grave misgivings about this case from the outset and that would be based on their impressions of the family and the fact that the girl spent the last night alone all night with a man not her natural father who was the last person to see her . Now this isn't pre judging the issue or any sort of social prejudice, it's based on experience and using the good judgement we pay them to use and would expect of them.
Regardless of what suspicions they had they need evidence, and at that point it would be perfectly normal to search the premises with the householders permission, No reasonable person is going to say "You can search the house but not the loft" and that certainly wasn't said in this instance as it would have been obviously suspicious to say the least. In short you can take it that the searches which were carried out were all done with the householders consent - in fact it just isn't in question.
To those who'd throw a benny if the cops started searching their loft etc... I'd have to say grow up. The fact is that in the vast majority of suspicious missing person/child cases which subsequently prove to be homicides of some sort, it's immediate family or friends who prove to be responsible. You'd be a legitimate suspect at least in the very early stages, and you simply need to let the cops get on with their jobs and eliminate you as a suspect. You've nothing to hide and everything to gain by co-operating.
Regardless of what suspicions they had they need evidence, and at that point it would be perfectly normal to search the premises with the householders permission, No reasonable person is going to say "You can search the house but not the loft" and that certainly wasn't said in this instance as it would have been obviously suspicious to say the least. In short you can take it that the searches which were carried out were all done with the householders consent - in fact it just isn't in question.
To those who'd throw a benny if the cops started searching their loft etc... I'd have to say grow up. The fact is that in the vast majority of suspicious missing person/child cases which subsequently prove to be homicides of some sort, it's immediate family or friends who prove to be responsible. You'd be a legitimate suspect at least in the very early stages, and you simply need to let the cops get on with their jobs and eliminate you as a suspect. You've nothing to hide and everything to gain by co-operating.
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I totally agree - and like i said i'd have no issue with them searching the loft or any other place a child might reasonably be - my point was in response to those who seem to think the police should respond to every missing child call by imediately ripping the parents house apart, which they don't.
the point being that the first search would have been for a living child , not a cadaver , and thus the fact they didnt find her does not indicate laziness or incompetence on the part of the searchers. Why they didnt find on on later searches is open to question, but none of us know the answer so even those with police experience shouldnt be 'convicting' the searchers of incompetence on limited evidence.
Last edited:
I am quite sure the police would not 'rip' apart anything....in fact I bet they would carefully remove and dismantle items to try and protect evidence if there is any. (front doors are a different matter)
You over dramatise things as usual, BSM.
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
ignoring the insult - i'm sure they would do too (it wasnt me that used the phrase 'ripping apart' orriginally ) but as anyone who's ever done any ammount of refurbishment will know its not practical to take up carpets, remove floor boards, take the bottom off furniture etc without causing some damage - which is why the police use cadaver dogs to pin point likely areas , and is also why the first responders wouldnt have conducted a massively thorough search - because regardless of gut suspicions they'd have basically been looking for a living child not a corpse.
Where is the insult? Do you understand English?
Coming from the building trade, I always take extra care not to damage any property when renovating so your assumption of damage is incorrect.
As for your point about not letting the authorities thoroughly search your house, it would be on my list of priorities to prove that the said child was NOT on the premises and therefore the police and other agencies could concentrate on the search elsewhere.
Coming from the building trade, I always take extra care not to damage any property when renovating so your assumption of damage is incorrect.
As for your point about not letting the authorities thoroughly search your house, it would be on my list of priorities to prove that the said child was NOT on the premises and therefore the police and other agencies could concentrate on the search elsewhere.
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
the bit about over dramatising things as usual, along with you more recent 'do you understand english - either you are being deliberately insulting in an attempt to start an argument, or you have such an abrasive posting style that you don't realise you are doing it
okay - enlighten us all as to how you remove a tightly laid floor without causing any damage ? - I'm sure you and all responsible contractors make good your damage but that isnt the same thing. Also I've seen police search teams in action and I know for a fact that they cause some damage, understandably because their priority is to find evidence.
where did I say I'd not let the police search the house ? I'd be happy for them to search the house well enough to convince themselves that nothing untoward had happened and that the child wasnt hiding - which is all the police actually do in the first instance unless they have evidence pointing to the need for a more indepth search. What I said was that i'd be outraged at the suggestion that i'd harmed a child. As I suspect would most other people in this thread - although its much easier to say ' oh no , i'd be calm and reasonable' on an internet forum from the comfort of your armchair.
Anyway this is going round in circles now and i'm not taking any further part in the discussion until some more actual facts come to light.
- Messages
- 13,060
- Name
- Sarah
- Edit My Images
- No
And let that be the end of that.
It's an emotive topic and it's only natural that people will have opinions and want to discuss it - but can we please keep on the right side of the line when it comes to bickering amongst ourselves?
It's an emotive topic and it's only natural that people will have opinions and want to discuss it - but can we please keep on the right side of the line when it comes to bickering amongst ourselves?
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes- keep it civil guys, no need to get your knickers in a ruck. 
The cops weren't really looking for a living child in these searches although it's no doubt the reason they gave for the request. At 12 years of age she was older than kids who are likely to crawl into airing cupboards and confined spaces - it's usually younger kids and toddlers particularly who are likely to do that. Suspicions would have been very high from the outset.
Just to cut the cops some slack on the failed searches ......
I suppose a lot depends on the nature of the loft - they vary from the ones you can walk around in with proper flooring to the very common type where you have to walk on the joists - avoiding the plaster board in between the joists if you don't don't want to go through the ceiling. With the latter type it's understandable to a degree if they just got head and shoulders through the loft opening and shone a torch around. We'll probably never know and thankfully the job is cleared up now. I'm sure butts have been kicked.
The cops weren't really looking for a living child in these searches although it's no doubt the reason they gave for the request. At 12 years of age she was older than kids who are likely to crawl into airing cupboards and confined spaces - it's usually younger kids and toddlers particularly who are likely to do that. Suspicions would have been very high from the outset.
Just to cut the cops some slack on the failed searches ......
I suppose a lot depends on the nature of the loft - they vary from the ones you can walk around in with proper flooring to the very common type where you have to walk on the joists - avoiding the plaster board in between the joists if you don't don't want to go through the ceiling. With the latter type it's understandable to a degree if they just got head and shoulders through the loft opening and shone a torch around. We'll probably never know and thankfully the job is cleared up now. I'm sure butts have been kicked.
Garry Edwards
Moderator
- Messages
- 13,475
- Name
- Garry Edwards
- Edit My Images
- No
Let's try to get some perspective on this...
When a child (or vulnerable adult) is reported missing the police take it extremely seriously and allocate ever-increasing resources to it as time passes.
The first step is to interview the guardians and search the house and any outbuildings. The child may be hiding, they often are. They may have left a 6' square notice in their bedroom saying that they have run away and the mother may not have noticed it. There may have been any number of obvious indicators as to what may have happened, these things don't always get noticed. They are not looking for a body and they can't be criticised for not finding one that isn't in plain sight.
As the hours pass, more and more resources are allocated, and checks are made. The police would become aware of any criminal history within the household, and as, sadly, the vast majority of these cases that end badly (most don't and the child is found safe and well very quickly) involve the partner of the mother, uncle or family friend, the police will interview anyone about whom they have suspicions. And experienced police officers usually know exactly who they should interview in depth.
At this point, there is good reason to carry out a detailed search, either with the permission of the householder or without, if the suspect has been arrested. Maybe the search wasn't detailed enough, this seems to be what the police have apologised for.
I've said it before, the police, as an organisation, did everything right but it looks like an individual officer did less than he or she should have done. This has caused avoidable stress for the loved ones, a waste of police resources and a waste of all the time that the public spent helping to look for her, but it made absolutely no difference to the victim, who I think it's safe to assume, was already dead.
I think that there is just one person on this thread who feels it necessary to defend the police (or at least their junior officers) at all times, in all situations, irrespective of what they may or may not have done, but he is wasting his time because, as I keep saying, the police seem to have done everything properly and nobody is critical of them, as a service.
Edit: Crossed with CT
When a child (or vulnerable adult) is reported missing the police take it extremely seriously and allocate ever-increasing resources to it as time passes.
The first step is to interview the guardians and search the house and any outbuildings. The child may be hiding, they often are. They may have left a 6' square notice in their bedroom saying that they have run away and the mother may not have noticed it. There may have been any number of obvious indicators as to what may have happened, these things don't always get noticed. They are not looking for a body and they can't be criticised for not finding one that isn't in plain sight.
As the hours pass, more and more resources are allocated, and checks are made. The police would become aware of any criminal history within the household, and as, sadly, the vast majority of these cases that end badly (most don't and the child is found safe and well very quickly) involve the partner of the mother, uncle or family friend, the police will interview anyone about whom they have suspicions. And experienced police officers usually know exactly who they should interview in depth.
At this point, there is good reason to carry out a detailed search, either with the permission of the householder or without, if the suspect has been arrested. Maybe the search wasn't detailed enough, this seems to be what the police have apologised for.
I've said it before, the police, as an organisation, did everything right but it looks like an individual officer did less than he or she should have done. This has caused avoidable stress for the loved ones, a waste of police resources and a waste of all the time that the public spent helping to look for her, but it made absolutely no difference to the victim, who I think it's safe to assume, was already dead.
I think that there is just one person on this thread who feels it necessary to defend the police (or at least their junior officers) at all times, in all situations, irrespective of what they may or may not have done, but he is wasting his time because, as I keep saying, the police seem to have done everything properly and nobody is critical of them, as a service.
Edit: Crossed with CT
Last edited: