24 hours in police custody...

[randomuntrainedcuntowner]

Do you think he did it?

I am very suspicious of a man who would take on an alcoholic and the ration her alcohol. It's very controlling. And he is so odd.

Wow, didn't see that coming, what a very sad story.

I didn’t think he’d done it all the way through.

It’s very telling though that even though all the evidence pointed to suicide many posters are still adamant he played some part. No wonder he had to move away, guilty even when proven innocent.

I said from the get go he didn't do it. Yes he was a bit odd and obviously had his own drinking issues but that doesn't mean he killed her. As for the spreadsheet- his friend that was interviewed said he did one when they went on holiday together. The relationship was toxic but she was obviously troubled and I think he was trying to help her by monitoring the medication as she's been suicidal in the past and took a overdose before

Ok let's all pretend that it wasn't a controlling relationship. Alarms set on his phone for when she could have another sip of alcohol, telling ambulance control he was a Dr when he wasn't, keeping a spreadsheet of her life, being too concerned she might overdose to let her have access to her medication but then allowing her to leave the house alone despite his precious concerns about suicide?

I thought he had. Did anyone notice his controlling behaviour towards his dog...very strange the dog looked like it hated him.

I missed it.

Her own family believes the real cause of her suicide were her issues with alcohol and drug addiction and the lack of adequate support for such people.

I only had half an eye on the telly but some of these responses are

So he shouldn't have let her out of the house? Obviously that would be wrong and isn't really comparable with looking after someone's medication for them. My mother deals with my adult brother's medication so that he takes it correctly, but he's obviously allowed to leave the house.

Also if someone is not dealing with their addiction problem then getting them to reduce it by allowing them to have some hits of it at certain times probably seems like an improvement especially to someone who is ill equipped in helping someone with addiction issues.

The phone reminder just ties in with his other habits of organisation and recording information. Odd yes, but it doesn't mean he's a murderer.

The only truly odd thing that made me question it was when he pretended to be a Dr.

I realise he gave permission for the interviews with the crew but will the TV people have required permission for the police interview footage from him?

Did anyone notice his controlling behaviour towards his dog...very strange the dog looked like it hated him.

The dog look really frightened of him which was sad :(

He was very odd.
The talking about going running commando, the need to control (inc the dog), the doctor thing, ....
It was definitely an highly dysfunctional relationship between 2 very dysfunctional people.

I think the verdict of suicide is probably correct, considering the lack of forensic (especially in a scene as messy as this one) and the history of self harm.

What a fascinating episode.

And what a strange man he is. I initially thought he might be autistic, his strange demeanour and ritualistic behaviours, but apparently not. Just odd. And being odd isn’t illegal.

The psych nurse thought he was unnaturally contained, and he really lacked normal responses. Trying to be all matey with the officers, and turning the focus back on to him all the time. Imitating a doctor, and seeming to enjoy the “monitoring” of her meds and alcohol. I think “regulating” would have been a better word. I’m sure living with an addict is incredibly difficult, but it’s almost like he relished the control.

I wasn’t convinced he had killed her, the tragic way in which she died seemed at odds with his personality - too chaotic and messy. But such an unlikely way to commit suicide too. Poor woman.

This series just gets better and better, a real insight into criminals and the police system.

at the end of the day he was innocent and the footage of her showed that she was very mentally unstable and was capable of being abusive/violent etc

she was an adult and still trying to blame him is pretty poor,trying to blame him is unfair,why do men always get blamed on MN its as if women need to blame a male regardless

I am surprised everyone thought he did it. You must have missed the bit at the beginning when an eye witness said she saw the lady on her own in the field acting oddly - pointed to suicide straight away.

Interesting how people let prejudice get in the way of what is presented to them.

I thought they may have mentioned more about the witness seeing her hiding in the field.

he lied

about being a doctor

usually the suspects who lie are guilty

there was no evidence there that he was involved - that didn't mean he didn't do it

all very odd and very sad

The witness also said she looked like she was hiding from someone so it didn't naturally point to suicide.

He did lie about being a dr but he seemed to use the lie in order to get her more help, he told the ambulance person he thought she needed an ECG etc.

Whenever I’ve watched true crime, the perpetrators usually lie about being a dr etc in order to stop the person receiving treatment.

I feel sorry for him, just because he’s a bit odd compared to most doesn’t mean he’s a murderer.

I think she was just hiding from the world in general. Not like she'd ever get that privacy at home.

I do believe it was suicide. She did the same as she tried when hospitalised. Only she had access to something truly lethal.

His lack of concern when arrested was disturbing but clearly some form of compartmentalisation. His face looked 10 years older after 6 weeks of curfew, though and he looked genuinely broken when he heard the suggestion of suicide. I think he genuinely believed that he could use his own sense of order and discipline to save her from herself.

I thought it was weird the he knew the precise time that he sent a text to her on the Saturday, down to the minute, but couldn't remember if he'd called her on the Sunday or Monday (turned out to be Tuesday).

It's pretty shit in a way of channel 4 to present him as an odd ball and likely murderer in all of their advertising of the program and not mention the fact that she was an addict that had tried to commit suicide in the past.

Almost like they were using her tragic death and mental health problems coupled with his unawareness of social conventions and possible controlling personality as a way to get more viewers.

You'd think after Christopher Jefferies people would have realised that being a bit odd doesn't make you a killer. But no, it's guilty until proven innocent, and even when proven innocent he clearly must have driven her to it through his abusive behaviour.

There was zero evidence to show he was a murderer or that he was abusive. The spreadsheet thing was something he always did, including when on holiday with a male friend. Keeping bottles of pills away from a suicidal partner seems quite sensible to me. The police calls were from him, complaining of her being drunk and abusive (and you could see his bruises I think). She hadn't made any police complaints against him. He wasn't drugging her, despite accusations from the family. And surely a controlling man would have been constantly phoning and texting her whilst she was away? I think he sent her one text then nothing for two days, even though he was expecting her back.

I'm inclined to agree with his friend that he's basically a kind, if rather odd man, who would do his best to help people. Sharon was clearly not an easy person to live with. It's attitudes like this:
He absolutely did it
But he'll get away with it
that will have driven the poor man from his home.

I thought it was very odd that he controlled her alcohol intake completely, yet when arrested, had had 4 litres of cider in the last 24 hours, that is an amount conducive to also being an alcoholic.

When he called 999 she didn't seem to be in any kind of frenzy, or attacking him, rather, asking for more drink in a calm manner, or to go to the shop

I'm not saying that he killed her, but the relationship was obviously unhealthy, and he just seemed like a lying manipulative creep. The way he lied about being a Dr etc. The dog looked beleaguered at best (shudder).

Also, it wouldn't have exactly been hard to get away with that murder. Have a wee wash in the garden, bin/burn the clothes you were wearing away from your home. Bish bash bosh, done. It's never quite a Kay Scarlett's novel in terms of forensics irl.

Hmm you would have had to avoid CCTV routes also, so maybe not so likely. Poor woman, I'm miserable. But frigging hell how miserable would you have to be to cut your own throat open in a field I hope I never feel that level of desperation.

It's amazing how people can watch the same thing and form such varying opinions - I guess it's all about what cultural 'values' the viewer brings to the experience of watching TV.

I watch '24 Hours...' in the knowledge that the production crew want make a 'saleable' piece of TV that will enable them to get a contract to keep making TV, keep their jobs and keep earning oodles of cash!

To that end, their primary objective is to take someone's boring life/personal tragedy apart and put the pieces back together in a more interesting and exciting way - that will keep me watching and sell adverts in the breaks - which is what TV is all about really.

It's not about 'the truth'.

'24 Hours...' is not a documentary in 'real time' and it's not done in 24 hours either.

The Police take part because they think it's good PR and makes them look dynamic and engaged in solving the crimes we all care about, even if those crimes concern people that society largely doesn't care about enough when they're alive, or when they're accused of murder.

The police in this show seemed to be pushed by the 'victim's' family to lock up the 'weirdo' - and the police, plodding, fell for it and the scent of an 'easy' kill.

They had zero evidence when they went to the 'oddball's' house and arrested a man who presented no risk of attack or escape and forced him into the street - handcuffed! Why?

Has the accused got a solicitor present?

He's the kind of person who would think - 'my innocence is obvious and speaks for itself - I don't need a solicitor. The police are my friends - not trying to fit me up.'

They had to release him on bail - why?
Because they admitted they had no evidence! First moment of sense in the show.
You have no evidence.
Why have you arrested him?
Why didn't you interview him voluntarily?
Why did you handcuff him?
Why don't the police learn?

BIG HooHaa about the very senior officer attending in person to extend 'oddball's' custody - why? Does this happen normally?

Is it because 'oddball' has no solicitor and..
the police had worked out by now that this case will defintely be one featured by the TV show and...
the police know they ave no evidence...
and perhaps the suspect has no solictor and this looks very bad and manipulative on the part of the police and we better get some better PR included in the programme to cover our arses.

And let's get some friendly footage of the detectives talking to their families to make us look a litter bit softer and not the idiotic, jump to conclusions, stitch-up goons we actually appear to be.

'24 Hours...' is a show in which both the production company and the police need to cooperate to both get something out of. Even at the end the police knew they would look like they'd ignored the evidence and fitted the accused up - so I have no doubt they wanted the production company to broadcast the man and dog weird footage to continue to cast doubt on the accused's obvious innocence and make their false accusation appear reasonable or understandable.

The production company go along becasue they want continued access to police stations to continue to make more programmes and make more money.

The accused/victim of police and production company 'bungling' doesn't have the sense to 'veto' any of the footage and his mindset thinks it only shows the truth.

In any case, his motivation is solely to prove his innocence and stop the usual bunch of nutters from tormenting him and following him and making his life a misery because the police wrongly accused him of murder and rather than interview him voluntarily when they had the option they wanted to play the big 'I am' and dragged him out of his house in handcuffs in front of his local mob of neighbours/oddball haters.

The so-called psychologist at the beginning, called in to determine whether he was fit to be interviewed, was a waste of her fee. Just wanted to please the police so she'd continue to get more call-outs, more fees. Anyone who'd watched half a dozen episodes of Silent Witness could have given her essentially useless opinion.

I suspect the police insisted this was included after seeing the final edit and realising that it looked like they were stitching up the weirdo.

Did he have a solicitor? Usually they show one on camera - if present.

I suspect he would have been the very person who needs one most but would have turned it down. He wouldn't have been in 24 hours of police custody with a solicitor - because, as the police later grudgingly admitted, the had no evidence.

Detective mutters miserably - 'usually murder suspects don't get bail.'
Voice over says - 'they have no evidence.'

Muppets.

Still, it's funny how we all see things differently!

futuristic ramble, but interesting perspective! I agree with a lot of it. I thought it was very sad that the poor dead woman had her mental health records discussed openly on 'reality' TV. Her family were on Facebook last night saying how they had tried to stop the show and were incredibly upset, there also appeared to be some residual doubt from them about his innocence.