Good point.
Nicola Bulley
- Thread starter Notch7
- Start date
- Status
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 18,561
- Reaction score
- 2,809
- Country
I don't think you can blame him because they (all of them) didn't share info. Plus the media are looking to sensationalise the whole thing.
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2004
- Messages
- 7,917
- Reaction score
- 761
- Country
Theres no blame, he certainly likes the limelight though
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2004
- Messages
- 7,917
- Reaction score
- 761
- Country
Mwaaaah especially when one has a new book out, happy coincidence perhapsDon't we all, Daahling?
Why...he clearly forgot that there are three reasons for people going into the water...Crime, Accident or self harm.
At what point do the police wrap this up and just say they don't know what's happened to her?
It's not the police's fault she's vanished and if they're as satisfied as they can be that there was no foul play here, then it's time to put the case on hold until new evidence comes to light.
Horrible for the family I know, but it's not like every missing person in the country gets these kind of resources thrown at finding them.
It's not the police's fault she's vanished and if they're as satisfied as they can be that there was no foul play here, then it's time to put the case on hold until new evidence comes to light.
Horrible for the family I know, but it's not like every missing person in the country gets these kind of resources thrown at finding them.
Yeah they'll scale it back at some point, and possibly in the not too distant future if no new info/evidence comes to light. I suppose to some extent there are no hard and fast rules around that, especially when the case has attracted so much media attention.
eh?
excuse?
he was asked to check the river, he did
what excuse does he need to make?
by the way he has found bodies the police couldnt find and he has been involved in some high profile cases over the years
I dont know why people like you are having a go at him, the guy gave his time for free
He's been made to look stupid by the police who decided they couldn't give him the full picture because of data protection, even though he has been contracted to many forces for just this kind of work. Then they decide they can reveal the personal issues seemingly to protect the forces reputation. It hasn't progressed the investigation, and they are still withholding information such as why they needed to attend in January. Very difficult for the police but they are clearly under resourced and maybe under skilled.
Blup
Blup
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2004
- Messages
- 7,917
- Reaction score
- 761
- Country
Also has a new book out, and made a public excuse that the did not have full info, surely down to the family
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2004
- Messages
- 7,917
- Reaction score
- 761
- Country
Police revealed the info alongside the family to try and eliminate the scumbags who are trying to make money from "stories"
What excuse?
I don’t understand
what does he need to make an excuse for? He was tasked to search the river, he did, thus fulfilled his brief no excuse needed
I said at the outset of the thread i thought the police knew something they weren't letting on, or had cocked the investigation up. It looks like they have managed to do both.
Blup
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 5,887
- Reaction score
- 728
- Country
If you employ an expert you need to make sure you find out what info they need, and that they've got it.
If you ARE the expert then you need to make sure that the employer knows what you need to know.
So plod and the searcher appear to be at fault. If plod felt they couldn't tell him private info, they could have asked him what he was assuming, to cover it.
Maybe they flat lied to him of course, plod IS that arrogant.
If the info was that sensitive, then why the hell are they releasing it now?
There's much we don't know but yeah, cock up sounds about right.
Would anyone be surprised??
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk
If you ARE the expert then you need to make sure that the employer knows what you need to know.
So plod and the searcher appear to be at fault. If plod felt they couldn't tell him private info, they could have asked him what he was assuming, to cover it.
Maybe they flat lied to him of course, plod IS that arrogant.
If the info was that sensitive, then why the hell are they releasing it now?
There's much we don't know but yeah, cock up sounds about right.
Would anyone be surprised??
Specialist explains how he would have changed search for Nicola
Peter Faulding says he was kept in the dark by police about the missing mum's 'significant alcohol issues' and he'd have changed his strategy if he'd known - but also criticised police for making public her health struggles
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk
- Status
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
- Johnmelad502
- General Discussion
