As it's rare that anyone on an internet forum admits they are wrong, I will tentatively eat my words as promised, the law society journal says there was no direct evidence.
I'd still like to know what the circumstantial evidence was that led to his being held on remand, but in the meantime I have moved to 'sitting on the fence' on this one.
Etape Caledonia vandalised
-
thirdcrank
- Posts: 36778
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Etape Caledonia vandalised
I can't speak for Scotland, but in E & W the basis for any arrest without warrant not witnessed by the arresting officer is often "reasonable suspicion." The subsequent detention is to allow the gathering and preservation of evidence.
There may be a whole range of reasons why a suspect is not charged ranging from things such as his death through to being completely eliminated from an inquiry. In between there are a lot of other possibilities. Ever since George Oldfield "knew" that the so-called Yorkshire Ripper had a geordie accent and Detective Inspector O'Boyle was disbelieved when he announced that he had evidence that Peter Sutcliffe was the serial killer, investigating officers have been careful to keep an open mind, or at least say that they are doing so.
Of course, it's always possible that a suspect did "do it" but that there are still sound reasons for there being no prosecution. IMO, it's best to be apprised of the facts before jumping to conclusions.
If civil proceedings are instituted, that might be a way of the facts being put in the public domain.
There may be a whole range of reasons why a suspect is not charged ranging from things such as his death through to being completely eliminated from an inquiry. In between there are a lot of other possibilities. Ever since George Oldfield "knew" that the so-called Yorkshire Ripper had a geordie accent and Detective Inspector O'Boyle was disbelieved when he announced that he had evidence that Peter Sutcliffe was the serial killer, investigating officers have been careful to keep an open mind, or at least say that they are doing so.
Of course, it's always possible that a suspect did "do it" but that there are still sound reasons for there being no prosecution. IMO, it's best to be apprised of the facts before jumping to conclusions.
If civil proceedings are instituted, that might be a way of the facts being put in the public domain.