Wayne Couzens pleads guilty to rape and kidnap of Sarah Everard, but not her murder

[Cwenthryth]

Sarah Everard: Wayne Couzens admits rape and kidnap www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57399170

He “accepts responsibility” for her death but didn’t enter a plea for the murder charge.

I do wonder how much pressure the CPS feel to accept a manslaughter plea and spare the family a full trial with all the details
That shouldn't be a factor for the CPS. In one sense, it has nothing to do with a victim's family and their feelings, since it is the crown that brings the case, with charges based on the evidence available and an evaluation of how likely a conviction will be for each specific charge.

Scott Christy-Jones reports that despite Couzens admissions today he is currently still on full salary and pension.

twitter.com/TheChristyJones/status/1402305460049485834

twitter.com/TheChristyJones/status/1402260091764674567

If he goes for a psychiatric defence, I wonder if Couzens will be retained on sick pay during any period of detention?

There are two parts to the cos charging standard. The other is - is it in the public interest. Both have to be met (first - is there a realistic prospect of securing a conviction, and then additionally this)
It s the decision of the cps lawyers re charge and then counsel for crown liaises Re charges once the case is being readied for plea/trial. Whether the counts are appropriate. Also whether pleas are acceptable and whether some counts can be dismissed (either because def pleaded guilty to an alternative form (as may happen here if there is a guilty plea to manslaughter, murder may not be pursued) Things such as effect on witnesses/victim/quality of evidence if live/age and health and location of witnesses etc does come into the mix in the second part.

There are special measures (trial arrangements) the court can order to help with some eg depending on the case - remote evidence, screens, reporting restrictions, defendant not permitted to cross the victim (rape triAls) in person only through counsel, etc.

Ta, HeronLanyon. But where family are not witnesses in the case, is the probable impact on them weighed in the public interest side of the evaluation?

That’s complex - generally the more serious the alleged offence the less that affects the decision. Eg I have represented those who have caused death by dangerous driving - death of eg partner or spouse or very close life long friend. Family of victim in these circs frequently ‘beg’ fir the case not to be pursued or for the sentence not to be custodial. The seriousness of the allegation or offence (if guilty plea) means such almost always has a vanishingly to no effect at all on decision or sentence.
Also sentence will be taken into account. To huge extent the sentence for murder/manslaughter -in these circs - is likely to be the same and this goes into that second consideration.

This almost certainly isn't his first offence, offenders build up to this sort of thing. In all likelihood there will be a string of women flashed at, sexually assaulted, raped, beaten by this man, a serving police officer. Their stories will never be heard.

My heart goes out to Sarah Everard's family, and to all those other women.

@Postdatedpandemic

Wayne Couzen's barrister shares chambers with John Broadhurst's barrister.

What a surprise

Given that they are both from a chambers which specialises in criminal cases, this seems fairly standard to me and I don't know why the implication is there's something unsavoury or sinister going on in said chambers.

Barristers cannot refuse cases, unless they lack the expertise or don't have capacity to handle the case.

Everyone, regardless of what they've done, is entitled to a defence in court.

lockheart agreed - I’m defence. I’ve represented clients charged with eg murder and rape - sometimes at trial sometimes for sentence following guilty plea. Defence role is to represent and ensure sentence is correct lawful and at trial to ensure prosecution have established the case - it’s for the prosecution to prove. If they can’t it will be not guilty. We are all - every one of us - safeguarded by that burden of proof.
Having been at the bar for a while I do understand the confusions about this from this who are not.

@HeronLanyon

lockheart agreed - I’m defence. I’ve represented clients charged with eg murder and rape - sometimes at trial sometimes for sentence following guilty plea. Defence role is to represent and ensure sentence is correct lawful and at trial to ensure prosecution have established the case - it’s for the prosecution to prove. If they can’t it will be not guilty. We are all - every one of us - safeguarded by that burden of proof. Having been at the bar for a while I do understand the confusions about this from this who are not.

I'm not at the bar or in the legal profession (I work on Chancery Lane but that's as close as I get!) but I was in a relationship with a barrister specialising in human rights for several years, so picked up a lot from him.

I think there is a perception from the public, aided by certain sections of the tabloid media, that defence barristers are scheming moral degenerates desperate for any excuse not to send their client to prison.

Which is very, very far removed from their actual role as you have summarised!

Defence barristers have a vital and awfully underappreciated (by the public) role in the legal system. But everyone would want one if they ever found themselves on the wrong side of the law.

Yes. Think something I fully understood only day one of pupillage is that we (both pros and def) are not anything at all to do with belief in a position. We are not the jury (or mags) whose job that is. Nor the sentencer. I have not even thought about the ‘truth’ or otherwise of a clients instructions fir decades. Only how or if that affords a defence and how it is likely to affect the case against them then advise and act accordingly. Sometimes the advice is to plead guilty (where there is no defence). Sometimes to plead not guilty as their account is a defence and then to talk through weight of evidence. Decision is always the client’s. Etc.

@PearPickingPorky

I knew he would have raped her before killing her, but I find myself particularly gutted that it's been confirmed. Her poor family, it's so unbearably awful.

Yes, I feel exactly the same I heard it on the radio as I was shopping and it made me feel sick.

It's one more case in addition to many but I feel exhausted with hopelessness and impotent with rage in knowing that nothing will ever really change. Her poor parents.

I know, Can. It's the realisation that, no matter what we do or what laws we have or what teaching is given to boys, that men will always be able to do this, if they want to. They can just randomly choose to rape a woman, and end her life in the most brutal way, and there is nothing we can do about it.

Twelve officers investigated over matters relating to Sarah Everard’s murderer Wayne Couzens

www.itv.com/news/2021-07-09/twelve-officers-investigated-over-matters-relating-to-sarah-everards-murderer-wayne-couzens?utm_source=upday&utm_medium=referral

Twelve police officers are being investigated by the Independent Office for Police Conduct over matters relating to the case of Sarah Everard’s murderer Wayne Couzens, the watchdog has said.

The IOPC said it had served 12 officers from several forces with gross misconduct or misconduct notices with multiple investigations ongoing.

One gross misconduct notice and six misconduct notices relate to a probe into allegations officers from “a number of forces” breached standards of professional behaviour by sharing information linked to the prosecution of Couzens via a messaging app.

Sign In
open mobile menu
ITV News logo

Your Area

Topics
BREAKING NEWS

Twelve officers investigated over matters relating to Sarah Everard’s murderer Wayne Couzens
LONDON
IOPC
Friday 9 July 2021, 1:24pm

Twelve police officers are being investigated by the Independent Office for Police Conduct over matters relating to the case of Sarah Everard’s murderer Wayne Couzens, the watchdog has said.

The IOPC said it had served 12 officers from several forces with gross misconduct or misconduct notices with multiple investigations ongoing.

One gross misconduct notice and six misconduct notices relate to a probe into allegations officers from “a number of forces” breached standards of professional behaviour by sharing information linked to the prosecution of Couzens via a messaging app.

Wayne Couzens pleaded guilty to murder.
Credit: Metropolitan Police
Gross misconduct notices have been served to three officers over an investigation into a probationary Met Police constable who allegedly shared an inappropriate graphic relating to the Sarah Everard case with officers over social media before subsequently manning the cordon at the scene of the search for her.

A probe into the Metropolitan Police’s alleged failure to investigate allegations of indecent exposure linked to Couzens in February 2021 continues with two officers being investigated for possible breaches of professional standards that may amount to misconduct.

A separate investigation is also ongoing into claims Kent Police failed to investigate an incident of indecent exposure in 2015, but no notices have been served by the IOPC to officers over this.

An investigation into how Wayne Couzens sustained head injuries while in custody on both March 10 and March 12 following his arrest has almost concluded, the IOPC said, with all officers involved treated as witnesses.

The IOPC said the serving of misconduct notices does not necessarily mean that disciplinary proceedings will follow.

The IOPC said the serving of misconduct notices does not necessarily mean that disciplinary proceedings will follow.

Why not?

And what is it with the police sharing inappropriate graphics/images with their mates?

And why have no notices been served to the Kent police for not bothering to investigate a previous incident of indecent behaviour.

And most confusing of all, why after that particular act in 2015 was this revolting man allowed to be a police officer?

No idea why he won't accept murder, he can be sentenced to life for the rape alone.

Kidnapping then can be a aggravated charge.

Murder/manslaughter doesn't matter.

Possibly want to argue for his minimum custodial tariff but still I'd hazard 8 for rape and 6 for kidnapping served consecutive giving him 14 years plus then the aggravated charge giving him an extended sentence of 4/5 years meaning he'd have to make parol and serve 2/3 rd.

And that's all without manslaughter or murder added in to the mix.

Man's going down he knows that, his legal team know that, the general population won't care about any mental health son story he can come up with.

He kidnapped, raped and killed a woman.

@Cwenthryth

Manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility is different to manslaughter on the grounds of "it was an accident". Yes, but is “I only meant to rape her and just choke her a little bit like they do in porn, I just happened to choked her to death but I didn’t mean to” an accident?

^^

“Yeh, I did kidnap and rape her, but I draw the line at murder”
#violencewithintegrity

@TheDinosaurMum

No idea why he won't accept murder, he can be sentenced to life for the rape alone.

Kidnapping then can be a aggravated charge.

Murder/manslaughter doesn't matter.

Possibly want to argue for his minimum custodial tariff but still I'd hazard 8 for rape and 6 for kidnapping served consecutive giving him 14 years plus then the aggravated charge giving him an extended sentence of 4/5 years meaning he'd have to make parol and serve 2/3 rd.

And that's all without manslaughter or murder added in to the mix.

Man's going down he knows that, his legal team know that, the general population won't care about any mental health son story he can come up with.

He kidnapped, raped and killed a woman.

He has pleaded guilty now

That piece of shit pleaded guilty to her murder this morning. Before he adjourned the court, the judge was asking for guidance on whole life sentences. I bloody hope he hands one down in this case.

The WhatsApp messages were reported at the time. I posted a link on the WC thread in chat.
metro.co.uk/2021/03/17/sarah-everard-officer-sent-meme-of-guide-to-abduction-and-murder-14257085/

The misogyny of the police knows no bounds.

[quote Ooodlesofboodles]The WhatsApp messages were reported at the time. I posted a link on the WC thread in chat.
metro.co.uk/2021/03/17/sarah-everard-officer-sent-meme-of-guide-to-abduction-and-murder-14257085/[/quote]
Oh my god that is vile.

It was probably that that brought him under suspicion so quickly.
For justice for Sarah the whole system needs to be gutted, not just this individual.
He will get life but that doesn't seem fair as hers was stolen.
Her poor family and partner. I hope at least his admitting it brings some kind of closure.

The two previous offences of exposing his genitals appear to have been ignored as a marker which it is well known leads to more serious offences ( though I believe they are are serious offences, despite them happening so frequently) I only wish some people would see why most women don’t want to open the door to include any males who could do this.