Serving Met Officer Arrested Over Sarah Everard's Disappearance

a reply to: Freeborn

The Mail also carried a lot of details of Him and his wife (the woman arrested for assisting) have had their pictures (he's the bald guy), adress and detailed job role in most of the press but I don't think I've seen his name anywhere.

At present it's legal to do so, the 'innocent until proven guilty' part starts if/when the case is first filed in court. Between arrest and charge these things are more like guidelines - apart from key stuff like keeping any info that could reveal the identity of witnesses secret and not explicitly saying he's guilty.

It does appear as if they failed to take the indecent exposure/assault claims seriously or follow up on them properly from the limited info available at the moment.

If reports are correct Police knew/had very strong suspicions he was responsible a couple of days before his arrest as they actively let him guard the US embassy as an armed officer so they wouldn't arouse his suspicions in the run-up to his arrest.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

They named him.
They had two photo's of him by himself, one with his wife, one with his parents and older brother - who is also a copper apparently - and a photo of his wife.
They told how he had served his apprenticeship in his Dad's garage and worked there for a number of years before if I recall correctly working at Sheerness Power Station in some sort of policing/security capacity where he received armed training.
Then he transferred to his current position.
It said he found adapting to life in London difficult so he commuted from Deal.
He liked motorbikes and enjoyed fixing them and helping others with there's.
His wife was Ukrainian - I think. She gained a degree in the Ukraine and works as a scientist.

There were numerous other little bits about him and his family etc.

Quite a level of detail considering.

Quite extraordinary and if this man does get released without charge I think the damage both financially and professionally could be very severe.

a reply to: bastion

I find it quite alarming that our press could release such a level of detail prior to any official charging or statement surrounding his actual identity.

I could tell you his name now but I'm not entirely sure of the legality....or the morality.

As for not acting on the allegations of his apparent indecent exposure; if they'd acted sooner then......

Not something I'd want on my conscience.

ETA
Maybe you or carpy - I know its not his area of practice or expertise - could give us more of a legal insight into this?

a reply to: Freeborn

This is a weird case if ever there was one.

I don't think this sob is going to be found innocent, but i take your point on the four page spread.

As to where the Sun got the info, same place they get the rest, they scrape the bottom of the barrel.

His name is Wayne Couzens (which strikes me as oddly familiar).
ETA: His wife, Elena is pictured with him above.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out.

My heart goes out to the poor boyfriend, family and friends of Sarah Everard

a reply to: Freeborn

Did you watch the documentary on Channel 5 about the murder of Jodi Jones about a week or so back?

They did the same to similar thing to the main suspect Luke Mitchell in that murder.

Plastered his name, face and families details, all over the tabloids, before the case went to court and that was near enough a few decades back.

So it's not unheard of for the press do such a thing i suppose.

Don't seem right to me all the same if indeed it possibly influences the decision of the public, one way or the other, or of any future jury trial down to what people have seen nor read.

I mean i know the are supposed to disregard and refrain from viewing such information but they don't.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: bastion

I find it quite alarming that our press could release such a level of detail prior to any official charging or statement surrounding his actual identity.

I could tell you his name now but I'm not entirely sure of the legality....or the morality.

As for not acting on the allegations of his apparent indecent exposure; if they'd acted sooner then......

Not something I'd want on my conscience.

It's rare to get this much publicly released info, especially as the identity of the victim/body found not being officially released yet. They're usually known a couple of hours after arrest but the press wait for official announcements as the respect to the victims family outweighs the public interest. The family statement seem to confirm it's her though.

Details like this usually spread through courts and police to the press very quickly, local Court staff (Preston Crown Court) used to reveal the identities of Jamie Bulger's killers whenever one of them was awaiting trial in the pub across the road from the Court; Police tend to do the same in greasy spoons. There's been a lot of cases of police agreeing to plant recording devices in prison or custody cells on behalf of tabloids.

The red tops have caused a lot of trials to collapse or nearly collapse by directly stating the person was guilry or using prejudicial terms like 'evil', such as Maxine Carr in the Soham murders while they were under arrest; she now has lifetime anonymity due to the Sun naming her and calling her an 'evil monster'. Broadsheets tend to avoid it due to moral/ehical codes and the risk of using language that could be seen as prejudicial or risk of libel if the person is found innocent/released without charge.

The case is currently 'active' meaning such details can be released under 'qualified privellege' where the public interest is high and there's no malice in the language used. It gets into very shaky ground if they start digging through his past and release information that later would come under a court reporting restriction set by the judge. If his details aren't released if/when charged then the press would be in contempt of Court but I imagine they know the reason police haven't released it yet.

If the victim or offender was a child then there would be automatic restrictions on both Press and Police revealing identities, adress, occupation etc until the case was concluded.


EDIT: Things like printing pictures of relatives would usually be highly illegal but with the Step Mother of the arrested having given statements to the Press it can be argued they've waivered right to anonymity.

Until the Chief Officer decides to release their identity it's strongly advised not to broadcast or print ay personally indentifying info to rule out any potential contempt of court charges and it provides legal defence against libel/damages claims.

The Leveson 2012 ‘Report on the Culture Practices and Ethics of the Press’ and Official Police ‘Guidance on Relationships with the Media' say these details should not be released to the press or public until charged unless there's highly exceptional public interest and confidence circumstances - this case appears to be an exception under the 'immediate risk to the public' clause as he was a firearms officer who are meant to be some of the closest vetted.

Leveson Report

a reply to: andy06shake

I didn't watch the documentary but I sort of recall them doing it before.

Someone close to the accused must have supplied the information and photos.
One of the photos was with his parents and older brother.

Its impossible not to be influenced by MSM coverage of cases like this and even the most impartial among us must have some sort of preconceived opinion and perspective.

Will there come a point where a judge rules that it would be impossible for an accused to get a fair trial due to the level and intensity of media coverage?

Of course there's a public interest angle and in an ideal world nothing would be concealed from the general public....but we don't live in an ideal world.

Nothing should surprise me when it comes to our media or when it comes to the depravity and brutality and callousness of human beings at times....but it does.
Maybe that shows that I haven't allowed cynicism to completely obscure my take on things?

a reply to: Freeborn

The disturbing thing is media ethics in reporting such things have only recently started to improve. The press had caused the police to mistakingly believe Milly Dowler was alive and inform her parents about the possibility after they hacked her phone and listened to her voicemails.

There is the possibility of having 'Trial by Judge' in the UK when there's a very high risk of prejudice. It was one of the options available during the Soham Murder trials as there was extensive coverage saying they were guilty and used highly inflamatory language for months leading up to the trial.

Non-Jury trial

Indecent Exposure would carry a fine, a criminal record and public exposure (as in named and shamed in the local Press). It wouldn't lead to jail time, unless there are other extraordinary circumstances to take into account. I am therefore unsure as to why the IOPC are including that in the investigation? In essence, even if charged, he would still have been free to take Ms Everard.

a reply to: Flavian

Indecent Exposure might not carry gaol time but it may very well end the career of a Police and make them look a tad naughty, hence they may have been inclined to overlook one of there own committing such an act.

Kidnap and Murder on the other hand, Police and computer say "no" on that score even where one of there own are concerned.

Human remains have been confirmed as Sarah.

RIP.

www.bbc.co.uk...

a reply to: andy06shake

As an aside, i think for his name to be out there before charges (and given that he tried to top himself in his cell), it is pretty clear that he is actually guilty. Maybe a reason they are being so free with details?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Flavian

Indecent Exposure might not carry gaol time but it may very well end the career of a Police and make them look a tad naughty, hence they may have been inclined to overlook one of there own committing such an act.

Kidnap and Murder on the other hand, Police and computer say "no" on that score even where one of there own are concerned.

In this case there's a few key details that strongly indicate he should have been suspended prior to or certainly would have been after the indecents exposure incident reached higher command, there's a high risk of prejudicing the trial if they're published though and may potentially see him deemed unfit to face trial if/when he is charged.

There were at least two seperate incidents of indecent exposure he was accused of on that day though and other events in recent months that led to police considering him a suspect in this case.

It turns out the indecent exposure incident was the officer exposing himself to the victim a day or so earlier. If this is true then his action was premeditated and not accidental.

Wayne Couzens has been charged with the kidnap and murder of Sarah Everard.
news.sky.com...

a reply to: gortex

Looks like his Mrs who was previously arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender has been released on bail.

Hopefully she was not part of what ever horrible stuff transpired, seems so if the gave her Police bail anyroad.

originally posted by: crayzeed
It turns out the indecent exposure incident was the officer exposing himself to the victim a day or so earlier. If this is true then his action was premeditated and not accidental.

It was two McDonald's staff in seperate incidents/reports: link

I wonder what caused the few hours delay between revealing the identity of the body and the identity/charges being officially released?

Am I reading it right that he's been hospitalised twice after two seperate attempts to off himself (another self inflicted head inhury in the last couple of hours).

EDIT: Video footage of the Abulance/police escort taking him to hospital today looks more like mid afternoon/early evening.

a reply to: bastion

He knows what's coming, hence the reason he's trying to end it.

There is no place in the nation nor HMP in existence where that Mans life will ever be anything other than a living hell and walking nightmare for the remainder of his days in existence.

Even his own kind will wish to see him privately roasted on a spit for his antics.

He's an acting Police Officer who abducted and killed a young girl, who also likes to practice indecent exposure in McDonalds.

Probably never going to get food again without the addition of someone's special sauce. LoL

Good luck with his hot apple pie just deserts because they are about to come in spades repeatedly, again, and again.

a reply to: andy06shake

No doubt we'll get told that he had a stress related mental illness due to the nature of his job and he's deserving of sympathy and compassion.
They'll spend millions on 'rehabilitation' and very little on support for the victim's family etc.

He'll be put on the nonce wing well away from general prison population.

I hope he is tortured every single day for the rest of the piece of #s life.