Human remains found on Saddleworth Moor

[Namechangedforthisonetoday]

Human remains, believed to be part of a child’s skull have been found on Saddleworth Moor. Please god let this be Keith Bennett. That poor child can hopefully finally be laid to rest in eternal peace with his mother.

I think he means that the body has completely decomposed and is now a part of the soil. It's not a term I've heard used in that sense before today though.

With my cynical head on I think it's so he can claim to have found Keith with absolutely zero physical evidence. I wouldn't put a thing past him, he has form for portraying deeply suspect science as absolute fact.

I presume he means an 'imprint' in the soil (discoloration or whatever) in the shape of a body, even if the actual remains have gone.

But considering Saddleworth is peat and peat preserves better than most soils, I think whatever he means he's demonstrated he is talking out of his arse and would be better off shutting up.

Thanks for the explanations above.

We all wished you could be laid to rest next to your mum Keith, you are not forgotten.

That poor family, still not being able to reunite Keith with his Mum.

The police have rightly come in for criticism recently, but Greater Manchester Police deserve credit for not closing the case and giving up on Keith and his family.

I have one question (and apologies if anyone else has mentioned it, I've lost track of all the posts), Brady's solicitor holds some briefcases that he refuses to release to the police. Whether or not these contain information only he will know, but why can't the police get a warrant to seize them? I seem to remember reading they tried but it was refused by a judge as there would be no conviction.

I can see no reason for keeping them to be honest, Brady's dead, he won't know what is done with the contents, I don't think there is anyone alive now who could claim ownership of them like family members or anything. If it could help the police with their enquiries why not hand them over? Doesn't make much sense to me.

Choosing a solicitor that would hold on to those suitcases was just Brady’s way of prolonging his games at the families’ expense.
There will be nothing of value in them. Certainly no clues as to where any of his victims were buried. They should be cremated and scattered overboard from a boat just like his remains were.

I can't understand this either. Even if they were made available to forensic psychiatrists/psychologists to give an insight into the minds of these people. I can understand them not being made available to the general public - only the prurient would want to step into the mindset of someone like Brady or Hindley.

Surely it's in the public interest to make them available for scientific study - and if there were any clues in there to the whereabouts of Keith (or, God forbid, anyone else) then that information could be given to the police and families.

I absolutely horrified that someone was sick enough to do this.

I just googled and it sounds like the solicitor might still be practising? Have his firm. I wonder if there's something around that.

Link to GMP statement
GMP close scene after no remains are found

Link to MEN report re. ‘evidence’
Manchester evening news

As a solicitor he would be in breach of professional rules if he just handed them over.

GMP press conference

As a solicitor he would be in breach of professional rules if he just handed them over

Ah! That explains that then!

Even if the client is dead (thankfully)?

I don't understand why the police were refused a warrant because there was no chance of a conviction. What on earth has that got to do with it? The Bennett family's right to know if there's anything in those briefcases about Keith's grave is far more important than Brady's rights - he shouldn't have had anything other than basic human rights once he was convicted.

I just googled and it sounds like the solicitor might still be practising?

Why would anyone want to use a solicitor who was happy to represent scum like Brady?

It’s such a shame that the solicitor is such a stickler for (not fit for purpose) legislation and couldn’t have reported the briefcases stolen and then oh, look, they’ve turned up dumped in a bush! Oh well, I can dream.

Why would anyone want to use a solicitor who was happy to represent scum like Brady?

I don'r object to this- even the vilest of people is entitled to lethal representation - that's a solicitor's and barrister's job - but I can't understand why the judge didn't make the papers available to the police and to psychiatrists.

Exactly. Although solicitors aren't subject to the cab rank rule in the same way as barristers are, nevertheless it is a basic principle (particularly for those practising in criminal law that you take on whoever comes through the door, irrespective of what you are accused of. People who don't understand it: suppose you were wrongly accused of an absolutely revolting crime - do you think it would be OK for every solicitor to refuse to represent you just because of he accusation involved?

As for any duty expiring when the client is dead, no. Again, if you left instructions with your solicitor to be carried out after your death, how would you feel if s/he cheerfully said "Snuffed it, I'm going to do whatever I choose now". The duty can be overridden by court order, but the chances are that all that has been left is a load of utterly irrelevant stuff that would help no-one.

I believe Brady chose the perfect solicitor to carry out his wishes. As I am choosing my words carefully.

Just noticed i typed "lethal representation" Freudian slip . . .

Wise choice of words indeed.

I agree that everyone is entitled to fair representation but why do the likes of Brady need a solicitor once they have been found guilty? Who was paying for this? It's not as though he was ever going to be able to appeal and be found not guilty.

Regarding wishes after death, there's a huge difference between carrying out the wishes in a will and potentially withholding evidence of where the body of a murder victim is buried. In the latter case I believe anything is fair game, no matter what the thankfully dead murderer wants. The judge in this case was a disgrace.

People don't just need solicitors for criminal charges. I suspect that this solicitor is his executor.

Oh and I agree whatever is left is probably irrelevant as Brady was a sick, manipulative bastard but until the police are granted access to the briefcases we'll never know.

Regarding wishes after death, there's a huge difference between carrying out the wishes in a will and potentially withholding evidence of where the body of a murder victim is buried. In the latter case I believe anything is fair game, no matter what the thankfully dead murderer wants. The judge in this case was a disgrace.

What evidence is that Brady left any information about where Keith Bennet was buried? It's a virtual certainty that he didn't.