5 yr old girl "snatched" in Wales

[mumblechum1]

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

Let's all keep our eyes peeled

Alion

I don't think so. Once they charge him, the questioning has to stop. By law. So they may have stacks of forensic evidence which convinced them he did it, but they wanted / needed to keep questioning him in the hope of getting onfo on her body.

They may well have found her bloodied clothes in his car...but they did not charge because they wanted the max time to question him.

If the police had had sufficient evidence to bring a murder charge earlier, no way would they have strung it out just for the sake of being able to interview him for longer. They would bring the charge as soon as they had the evidence- for the sake of the victims family apart from anything else

yes, I know all of that Fob. But also the 11th hour charge is a reason to undermine the confidence in the belief they have the right person and enough evidence.

Not necessarily janey

The cps have said with the evidence that has been put before him he has advised them to charge him, they could have also been waiting for forensic results to come back.

janey68

'for the sake of his victim's family'??
They need some sort of closure. Without a body, there's a lifetime of hope and uncertainty ahead of them. Like the McCanns.

The police will do whatever they can to retrieve the body for this readon AND because there's a better chance of conviction with a body.

He's been charged.

if there was sufficient evidence to bring a charge they wouldn't have been able to continue questioning him on extention after extention after extention.

It's worth bearing in mind that they could have brought charges for abduction and then re-arrested for murder thus still being able to question him as it was a different charge iyswim.

I saw it as them wanting to question him for as long as possible.

As he has been charged with perverting the course of justice it seems likely he has been providing them with false info. maybe that she was alive? Or that she was in a certain area when she is infact somewhere completly different.

Seems like they dont have enough on him and no body.

Hope they have the right person but somehow im not so sure! It feels like he is the odd person in the village and the police just want to find something that points to him with asking public about his whereabouts and communication ad then the charges and holding him for so long.

If they have the wrong man she might still be alive and out there somewhere.

I just hope if he did it he is brought to justice with a proper sentance and that April is found so her family can at least find some peace in that.

wannabe - the thing about re-arresting him wouldn't have re-started the clock. It's the same enquiry so the clock still moves on toward 96 hours.

"If they have the wrong man she might still be alive and out there somewhere." There has to be extremely compelling evidence to bring murder charges if you don't have a body. the cps wouldn't allow charges to be brought if there wasn't sufficient evidence that a body exists as the likelyhood of a successful conviction is low anyway without a body...

That doesn't mean that this man is the guilty party - he is still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, but tbh as soon as this child disappeared the likelyhood of her ever being found alive was extremely tiny anyway..

If there had been evidence to bring a murder charge on Tuesday, he would have been charged then. Clearly there wasn't. The police clearly had to meet the criteria to apply for extensions, but equally clearly they didn't have sufficient evidence to charge him. The police can't just decide that even through evidence sufficient for a murder charge exists, they'll wait a few days and apply for an extension!!

In the light of it all, I am pretty sure it was only when the arrest on suspicion of murder happened that the police were sure they were looking for a body. Up to then I really believe they thought there was a chance she had been taken but was still alive.

There is something very odd about it all.

From what I understand, I'm not sure he was the odd person in the village, that's the chilling thing for me. Some reports have said that April played with his children and he took her to the beach on a trip with them not very long ago. She was in and out of his children's house on the estate and in his car on a ride around the estate with his daughter a couple of days ago. All seemingly innocent.

As someone said earlier on in this thread, unfortunately I think this will make a lot of parents think carefully about the adults our children are left alone with.

My heart goes out to April's family.

The CPS have made the decision to charge him and they only do that if there is sufficient evidence for a conviction. I don't know what "perverting the course of justice" means in this case, and I don't think anyone else does, so I'm not sure speculation is helpful.

I assume he is going to plead not guilty and that is why he won't say where the child's body is, as that is tantamount to admitting guilt. He may during the lengthy period of time that he is remanded in custody, change his mind onthat and "go guilty" as they say in court, in which case there would be a possibility that he may say where the body is.

It is unbearable for any of us to think what April went through and the state her parents and close relatives must be in.

yes exactly. When applying for extentions the police have to justify why charges cannot yet be brought. and more time to question the suspect so he might reveal where the body is is not one of them.

the perverting the course of justice charge is strange, and I agree it's impossible to speculate on that.

There is of course a chance the body will be found in the meantime, probably by a dogwalker or similar...

no doubt it will all come out in the trial.

Isn't it enough to say it's perverting the course if he doesn't reveal where she is??

I hope the family have answers soon.

We MUST be careful what we say now but I'm not sure where the boundaries lie, as to what is acceptable and what is not.

Perhaps we ought not to discuss it at all? I don't know - perhaps MNHQ could post to set out what's allowed and what isn't.

Perverting the course of justice could mean loads of things, from disposing of evidence to obstructing in other ways

I don't for a moment think though, as some people seem to believe, that the police had sufficient evidence for a murder charge several days ago but continued to allow volunteers to search for the girl. No way. I think it has genuinely taken this long for the CPS to agree there is sufficient evidence to bring the charge .

It is a really strange case. I also think the forensic side must be incredibly complex since the suspect was known to the girl and there would presumably be forensic evidence of her in his vehicle/house for quite legitimate reasons.

This is such a strange , strange case