Thetownend.com

As im sure you all know he's been charged with murder of young April. But i have a genuinely serious question, How can they charge someone with murder if they haven't found the body, hence do not know if she is dead of alive.
I don't mean to sound insensitive, but im genuinely interested in how they come to this conclusion?

The only explenation i could come up with is that he's admitted to it, but the police have yet to make a public statement to the press.

It's still a suspicion at this point.

reading several latest articles, there's no suspicion about it, i believe he was arrested with suspicion, but has been charge with THE murder

I thought it was strange as well, i.e. you can't have a murder without a body, so how can you charge some one with murder?

Charged so the old bill must have enough evidence to charge him otherwise the CPS would just throw it out. Even if he admitted it, the police must have evidence to charge.

You don't need a body. You just need to be certain beyond reasonable doubt.

How you do that without a body, I don't know.

id be interested to know what evidence they have, without the body.

They have done in the past.

I can remember over 10 years ago that Linda Razzell disappeared from Swindon. Despite no body, they charged her husband with her murder...and he was found guilty.

Still no body has ever been found...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-437783/Wicked-murderer-victim-monstrous-miscarriage-justice.html

But that's not true, here is a recent example

http://www.stalbansreview.co.uk/news/9953470.Man_convicted_of_Murray_Thompson_murder/


edit: beaten to it..

PS. Are we under sub judice yet?

Well obviously they can do it because they have done it. I just didn't think they could. It would have been something of a blunder on the Police's part if my supposition had been correct.

so in this case it was the amount of blood that was found gave them reason to believe he would not have survived, so this i can understand.
Im assuming it must be something similar in Aprils case, or possible her ilness, 5 days without he medication  etc.

:) - that is at OST, not the above post.

Who knows what they have with forensics, witness statements, tracing his movements, whatever he has said in interview and whatever else they aren't telling the press.

IF he did do it he should be burnt in public, along with all the other sick fuckers clogging up the prisons playing on x boxes :cunty:

When a five year old is seen getting into a van and then never seen again, surely that's evidence that something is very, very wrong. Perhaps they managed to find out who the van belonged to?

Kid enters van + kid is never seen again........ So where's the kid? Perhaps this freak not being able to produce the kid alive is reason enough to suspect she is dead, and that he killed her.

Probably a few things have happened. He could have failed lie detector tests asking specific questions if he took her, knew where she was?, knew if she ws dead or alive, is she dead?  is she alive? and he failed.. Or ultimately he could have admitted he killed her and said he dumped the body in or near the river (hence why all the searches near or in the river itself...), The old bill haven't said anything but seems to me as if he probably admitted it or gave a good clue as to where she was etc. and said the body was in X place... now if its floated down river etc is anyones guess but clearly there is enough evidence to say he did it without a body. They went straight in and no one else looks to have been questioned. He ditched his car in the garage by the sounds of it to get it off the road, probably no blood there as it wouldnt be cleaned up that quickly. Seems very bizarre but the police have been quite tight lipped. I reckon he has admitted to killing her and has said where the body is or for that matter said she is dead but refuses to say where the body is as he is a sicko!

Indeed, and a famous example

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_George_Haigh

There are no lie detector tests (polygraphs) in the uk - other than Jeremy Kyle - as the results are not admissible in English law.  They are very unreliable actually and easily cheated.

I doubt very much if he has admitted anything. But there is likely to be DNA evidence in his vehicle. As others have said, murder can be proven without a body.

I can only imagine the pain the family must be going through right now. So horrific that these things happen.

There was a local case in Calne where someone was tried for murder despite a body never being found... a couple of years ago, young South African chap went missing?

that was Chippenham,bloke got arrested and charged with murder,got off never found a body!!!

apparently worked on a pig farm

It is curious how someone can be deemed dead without trace though - surely death can NEVER be fully proved without a body

Blood is part of your body - if someone found 50% of my blood in a pile of my clothes I think it's safe to assume I would be dead. Likewise if someone found only my head in an alley way... It would be safe to assume I would be dead surely?

I just wish that in these circumstances with reasonable evidence to charge the cunt with Aprils murder or serious harm - police should be aloud to use whatever means possible to make him talk (torture ?!) especially given the circumstances of Aprils illness & need for medication.

If you want an analogy that fits this 'no body murder mystery' then think of it this way...

If I plant a bomb on a plane with one person on it and it blows up in the middle of the pacific. They don't find the body and yet they know I planted the bomb and they know the person got on the plane and was flying it when it blew up the evidence suggests that there is little hope that the person, even if they survived the bomb and the crash, they would have been able to swim to safety and so we have to assume, in all probability, that they are dead and have therefore been murdered.

Even if they are not dead what I have committed is attempted murder...

She was 5 with a mental disability last seen, we assume, getting into his car.  He (we assume) is giving no information as to her whereabouts and she would be unable to survive 5 days on her own without supervision.  We therefore haven't to assume she is dead and if he has wilfully neglected her it is potentially murder.

Technically we were at the point he was arrested but it's mostly ignored now. But certainly so since he was charged.

There's something they aren't telling us, as there has been little information released which connects him to the disappearance.  It's sickening that these cases invariably involve someone who knew the child.

Why dosn't this piece of scum tell the police where he put the poor girl. >:(

Also a more controversal point would be why is a five year old girl out playing in the dark around 7 in the evening :no:

Linda Razzel(Highworth i think)went missing on her way home from work a few years back now in Swindon.......police deemed they had enough evidence to charge her hubby who got life..........she has never been found and he still pleads his innocence.

I may be wrong but I'm assuming that he told them he dumped the body in the river, hence that's why they are not searching anywhere else now.

As for you second point, I know what you mean. There is no way our son would have been out that late on his own at 5 years old, in fact at that age he was either in bed or near to it at 7pm

It seems they are still searching various locations in and around the village which would indicate that Bridger hasn't told the police about the little girls whereabouts. The River I suppose would be the obvious place but with the recent rain fall it is making the river search so much more difficult. All the time he fails to admit killing April he won't reveal where the police need to look to find her and like previous cases he will probably cling to the thought of her never being found.