Bible John

[Nemo]

Robert Black was recently convicted of the murder of 9 year old Jennifer Cardy in 1981 in Northern Ireland (Some complaints have been made about flying him by private plane to attend the trial and also the overal cost of the trial - £5,500 to fly, £350,000+ legal aid for Black)

He can be placed in the vicinity of where Gennette Tate disappeared at the time and is not only a prime suspect, but is guilty IMO

However, there appears to be insufficient evidence to charge him

Gennette's body has never been found but I did consider that we might now know Black's route while working as a delivery driver which, together with a study of how his other crimes were committed (ie how long after the abductions the bodies were dumped and where), could narrow down the search area a bit

[Karen Sweet]

It is my understanding that Robert Black was not in the area at the time of Genette's disappearance and the most likely suspect is convicted killer Ian Bealey.
There at least seems to be a feeling that something was rotten in the village of Aylesbeare at the time Genette was abducted and there are many questions to answer, not least by the police.
The investigation certainly seems to be very flawed.

The prime suspect for the disappearance of Suzy is John Cannan and on the evidence, I personally feel he is the likely perpetrator.

If only the bodies of these girls could be found. I feel as desperate about this as I do about the body of poor Keith Bennett being found.

[Stan Reid]

I can't figure out why DNA hasn't been more determining.

[Nemo]

Hi Karen,

I haven't seen the testimony but I believe an eye witness placed him at or near Exeter airport, not far from location where she disappeared

[Karen Sweet]

Nemo

There is only one person claiming to have seen a red transit van at Exeter airport on the day of Genette's disappearance. Not one witness saw it in Aylesbeare at the time of her disappearance even though there were several witnesses that saw only a maroon triumph in that lane at the relevant time.

Black was ruled out early in the investigation as there was no evidence to show he was in the area at the time, but more recently it appears that petrol receipts have turned up to show he was in the area. Yet the police still say there is not enough evidence to convict him.

At the very least there is a lot of doubt about Robert Black and much more evidence to suggest Ian Bealey abducted her and probably killed and buried her.

[Stan Reid]

Originally Posted by Stan Reid

I can't figure out why DNA hasn't been more determining.

I mean in the John case. Obviously there's no DNA regarding Tate.

[Karen Sweet]

In what way could dna be used in Suzy's case, Stan?

[Stan Reid]

Lamplugh is the same as Tate. I just selected Tate as the distinction from the John Case where we have remains.

[Nemo]

Hi Karen

Do you know what the damning evidence is against Bealey?

I've been reading about him and find that there is a suggestion of a sort of paedophile ring in the village involving John Tate and Ian Bealey as well as others

Bealey appears to have commented on the disappearance of Genette before it became common knowledge

He was in the area at the time and is a convicted rapist and murderer of a student hitchhiker

There is a possibility he was driving a maroon vehicle at the time which may have been seen near the location of the disappearance

I noted a complaint by him to the press commission that reads as follows...

The View from Here: The Paper Girl
Westcountry Television, 14 August 1998

The Broadcasting Standards Commission has upheld in
part a complaint of unfairness and unwarranted
infringement of privacy by Mr Ian Bealey about The
View From Here: The Paper Girl, broadcast by
Westcountry Television on 14 August 1998.

Mr Bealey complained that the programme had unfairly
implicated him in the presumed abduction and murder in
1978 of a 13 year-old girl, Genette Tate.

The Commission found no unfairness in the presentation
of the circumstantial evidence against Mr Bealey and
considered that the programme-makers gave him an
adequate opportunity to respond. It also found that his
privacy was not infringed.

However, the Commission found unfairness in the
programme’s failure to include important police
statements that clearly pointed to significant weaknesses
in the evidence against Mr Bealey.

Accordingly, the complaint was upheld in part.
Upheld in part

Do you know to what the bold paragraph refers to?

Regards

Nemo

[Karen Sweet]

http://genetteinvestigation.wordpress.com/

I don't know if you've seen this website, Nemo, but if you are intereted in the case, it is well worth a look.
It seems to me, that it was more a case of an unwillingness to prosecute than lack of evidence.