5 yr old girl "snatched" in Wales

[mumblechum1]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-19795761

Let's all keep our eyes peeled

I am pleased that the police have been able to now arrest him on suspicion of murder rather than abduction, because of forensic evidence, which is of course of huge importance in these kind of cases. Thanks Perceptionreality for pointing that out. I didn't know either that Roy Whiting was convicted on forensic evidence alone.

Headinhands I think the thread has changed from criticising the parents, so not sure why it has been brought up again.

Pumpkin I think to say that he is guilty because he looks evil is a bit out of order to be honest. I know of course that feelings are running high at this awful incident.

I would hope that they charge can come quite soon if there is forensic evidence.

The point all along is that a child is far more likely to be harmed by someone they know well, Danielle Jones for example.

I think this man (if guilty) had been planning this for some time. It would have been much easier for him to take a child with whom he previously built a relationship of trust. Same with Ian Huntley - he was known to the girls and they therefore thought they could trust him. Complete stranger abductions are rare.

"He looks evil, everything points to him" yeah, that's such a persuasive argument you have there... I'm now completely convinced of his guilt. In fact why on earth haven't they charged him seeing as he looks so evil?

Jesus.

It was just reported on the news that forensic evidence led to the murder investigation.

Woman batterers look normal and charming.So people on the outside world thinks his a lovely bloke.Just because someone looks normal doesn't mean they are.Its all in the head

Oh for god's sake, do we have to do the collective moronic 'he looks like a wrong 'un you know' AGAIN???

There is a mere fag paper between some of you lot and the mob who tried to lynch that paediatrician sometimes, I swear.

no, perceptionreality, I don't think that - I was responding to some who apparently do, & said he looks evil

Yes, sorry ponders I've just realised the wider context of your post. I don't understand why anyone thinks anyone could look evil or good - equally can't understand 'looks evil'!, especially these days - the way he looks is not relevant. He will have been detained due to evidence that he was involved.

Its my opinion, im entitled to it and if they didn't have anything on him he would not still be detained.

If they had sufficient to charge him I don,t think they would still be appealing to the public for info re his last movements it is very odd a bit like the man in the bristipol case where they extended questioning twice but had nothing and he was innocent.

I thought anyone could be arrested on reasonable suspicion but need hard evidence to charge?

noddy, a couple of posters have said that once he's charged they can't question him any more, & they need to find out where she is. the appeals to the public re his movements after she disappeared are also all about finding her body

For the magistrates to have authorised the extension of his detention, the Bench has to be satisfied that there is the makings if a case against him (and the nature and strength if that has obviously not been released) and that there is a realistic prospect of securing more relevant evidence in the extra time. That might be further forensic results as well as information from sightings (they had over 2500 calls from the public to process).

If he is to be charged, we'll probably know by mid-afternoon (or if released, he'll be quietly out before the deadline so he move to somewhere where he will not be in immediate danger).

Appeals for sightings may assist the search. It's also important to any future case, for if he is claiming he was doing something unconnected to April's disappearance, he will not have to opportunity later to state that his version of events was not adequately investigated.

His been charged.Scum evil evil scum

they're charging him with perverting the cause of justice too

because he won't tell them, presumably

Charged with abduction, murder and perverting the course of justice.

Why.Why would someone murder a defenceless child.Poor little girl she must have been so frightened.I feel so sad for her family

I don't think it's as clear as some people think. IF the police had convincing evidence they would have charged him a looong time ago.

4 days later and it's a last minute effort.

I imagine that more forensic evidence becomes available over time.

Its very strange- they would have charged him at any point up to now if they had enough evidence. So it's odd that it's so late in the day. Clearly they must have sufficient evidence to bring charges, but I pray to god they have the right person, otherwise someone is still out there who did this

Oh my! What horrible news. I really hope they find her soon, although since he's been charged i guess the police are pretty sure she wont be found alive. Heartbroken for her poor family and friends.

If they had already charged him, then they wouldn't have been able to interview him anymore. I think they have been hanging it out to try and get him to say where she is, he has probably lied over and over as to the whereabouts of her body that would maybe why he has been charged with perverting the course of justice, because he won't be honest

Her poor family, and most of all little April, who didn't deserve to have her life taken by an evil monster.

it is extremely difficult to secure a conviction without a body.

perverting the course of justice sounds more like trying to bring enough charges to make a conviction stick - most murderers don't disclose the whereabouts of their victims and yet perverting the course of justice isn't a common charge that goes alongside murder.

Most murderers don't have a choice about saying where the body is - it's usually in the house, on the street etc.

Words can't express how awful this must be for the people who love April, my heart goes out to them all. I shall light another candle for April tonight :(