Nikki Allen

Status
Not open for further replies.
duff_man said:
If this person does know something significant which leads to a conviction I hope they are suitably vilified for their actions of silence which could or may have already had horrendous consequences
Click to expand...

Maybe they have kept quiet out of fear, waiting for someone to die before they were able to speak out for example. Hard to judge unless we know the facts.
 


MLE1 said:
that young girl was let down by her mother as well as everyone else - where has this babysitter been for the last 25 years?

7 year old left out in the dark whilst her mother is in the pub.......never going to end well

let the girl RIP
Click to expand...

Is this true? I was only 13 at the time, so probably didn't really read/watch much on it.
 
Ghandi Floss said:
Is this true? I was only 13 at the time, so probably didn't really read/watch much on it.
Click to expand...

After seeing her face on the side of a building in Sunniside I looked into this a bit, and never read that. All the articles said she was on her way from her grandparents home and that's it. There's not much depth from whats on the internet like.
 
MLE1 said:
that young girl was let down by her mother as well as everyone else - where has this babysitter been for the last 25 years?

7 year old left out in the dark whilst her mother is in the pub.......never going to end well

let the girl RIP
Click to expand...
I heard from someone recently about a story of a woman he knew who drank down the town in early 90's and left her daughter outside. Wondered if this was same woman/story so googled it, think its same person

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12585695.Murdered_girl_seen_begging_outside_pub_before_attack/
 
Its me said:
Maybe they have kept quiet out of fear, waiting for someone to die before they were able to speak out for example. Hard to judge unless we know the facts.
Click to expand...

There are things in place to protect vulnerable or intimidated witnesses. What if the person this witness points the finger at has gone on to commit other murders or serious offences that could have been avoided, would you still feel the same way?
 
duff_man said:
There are things in place to protect vulnerable or intimidated witnesses. What if the person this witness points the finger at has gone on to commit other murders or serious offences that could have been avoided, would you still feel the same way?
Click to expand...


I'm not disagreeing, just saying maybe they have their reasons for keeping quiet. Time will tell.
 
Marko said:
Is that the bloke who got off in caught because the police made a fuck up in procedures?

I've been in the Exchange before I knew of this story, think I'd feel a cold shiver going in there now.
Click to expand...
You're thinking of George Heron. He admitted the offence when he was interviewed by the police, but the interview was deemed inadmissible in his trial due to the overbearing attitude the police had towards him. Having heard parts of that interview it was more an exercise in persuasion rather than a free and frank admission.
 
Laeotaekhun said:
I'd no idea who Nikki Allan was so Googled and found this:

http://theukdatabase.com/cold-cases-missing-murdered-uk-kids-can-u-help/justice-for-nikki-allan/

It would appear that someone called George Heron was originally charged with her murder but the judge threw it out on a technicality.

However, the family later took Civil Action against him, which he did not contest, resulting in him having to pay damages.

Sorry, didn't see @Evil Jimmy Krankie's post before I made mine.
Click to expand...
The technicality being the law, the law that is there to protect us all.
None of us know what happened unless we were there when she was killed although we all have our suspicions.
The fact that he did not contest the civil action means nothing as his life was under threat if he showed his face. He was in a no win situation.
These threads crop up every year and every year some new Miss Marple crops up and points to these things as evidence of wrongdoing.
I hope the killer gets caught and punished but I'd prefer it to be based on evidence rather than the desperation to have a name to pin it to.
 
The fact the Mother often abandoned her kid while she was in the pub seems to have been subject to a rewrite of History as I heard her mention something in the press about only leaving her for 7 minutes.

As for any new evidence - would it surprise anyone if it is just some attention seeking knob who thinks they will get some fame/ publicity out of it?

I assume Northumbrias finest were not so hot at gathering DMA evidence back on those days either, as don't recall it being discussed much.
 
RestlessNatives said:
The technicality being the law, the law that is there to protect us all.
None of us know what happened unless we were there when she was killed although we all have our suspicions.
The fact that he did not contest the civil action means nothing as his life was under threat if he showed his face. He was in a no win situation.
These threads crop up every year and every year some new Miss Marple crops up and points to these things as evidence of wrongdoing.
I hope the killer gets caught and punished but I'd prefer it to be based on evidence rather than the desperation to have a name to pin it to.
Click to expand...

1) What other than a legal technicality would cause a judge to throw out a prosecution case?

2) Do you have a reliable source which justifies your stating the emboldened text in the manner of a fact, or is it just speculation on your part?
 
Laeotaekhun said:
1) What other than a legal technicality would cause a judge to throw out a prosecution case?

2) Do you have a reliable source which justifies your stating the emboldened text in the manner of a fact, or is it just speculation on your part?
Click to expand...

You're using the word technicality as if it is a bad thing. The whole system of law is 'technicality'. The bit that was thrown out was the confession. They had nothing else as evidence so the case fell down.

The second part was common knowledge at the time. Feelings are still running high now so back then I'm sure you can imagine what it was like. Irrespective of whether you believe it to be true, he had nothing to gain from coming back. 'Clearing his name' isn't possible as people have already made their minds up and a court of law isn't enough to convince them. Would you come back under those circumstances? I'm fairly sure that I wouldn't.

By your own admission you know nothing of the case other than an internet link you have just found. Good for you if you prefer internet speculation over a court of law but I prefer things to be a bit more concrete.

If you were accused of something, would you be comfortable with this forum being judge and jury?
 
RestlessNatives said:
You're using the word technicality as if it is a bad thing. The whole system of law is 'technicality'. The bit that was thrown out was the confession. They had nothing else as evidence so the case fell down.

The second part was common knowledge at the time. Feelings are still running high now so back then I'm sure you can imagine what it was like. Irrespective of whether you believe it to be true, he had nothing to gain from coming back. 'Clearing his name' isn't possible as people have already made their minds up and a court of law isn't enough to convince them. Would you come back under those circumstances? I'm fairly sure that I wouldn't.

By your own admission you know nothing of the case other than an internet link you have just found. Good for you if you prefer internet speculation over a court of law but I prefer things to be a bit more concrete.

If you were accused of something, would you be comfortable with this forum being judge and jury?
Click to expand...
Indeed. And a lot of us on here remember it well, and lived through it.
 
RestlessNatives said:
You're using the word technicality as if it is a bad thing. The whole system of law is 'technicality'. The bit that was thrown out was the confession. They had nothing else as evidence so the case fell down.

The second part was common knowledge at the time. Feelings are still running high now so back then I'm sure you can imagine what it was like. Irrespective of whether you believe it to be true, he had nothing to gain from coming back. 'Clearing his name' isn't possible as people have already made their minds up and a court of law isn't enough to convince them. Would you come back under those circumstances? I'm fairly sure that I wouldn't.

By your own admission you know nothing of the case other than an internet link you have just found. Good for you if you prefer internet speculation over a court of law but I prefer things to be a bit more concrete.

If you were accused of something, would you be comfortable with this forum being judge and jury?
Click to expand...
I think you're wasting your time trying to bring some sensibility to this. Wild speculations and slurs are what the SMB is all about. Regardless of how close to home it is.
 
RestlessNatives said:
You're using the word technicality as if it is a bad thing. The whole system of law is 'technicality'. The bit that was thrown out was the confession. They had nothing else as evidence so the case fell down.

The second part was common knowledge at the time. Feelings are still running high now so back then I'm sure you can imagine what it was like. Irrespective of whether you believe it to be true, he had nothing to gain from coming back. 'Clearing his name' isn't possible as people have already made their minds up and a court of law isn't enough to convince them. Would you come back under those circumstances? I'm fairly sure that I wouldn't.

By your own admission you know nothing of the case other than an internet link you have just found. Good for you if you prefer internet speculation over a court of law but I prefer things to be a bit more concrete.

If you were accused of something, would you be comfortable with this forum being judge and jury?
Click to expand...
Anyone who has heard the interview would realise the lad was a bit 'slow' and the coppers were putting words in his mouth, half the time i don't even think he knows what he is agreeing with, flimsy at best down right trumped up at worst.
 
RestlessNatives said:
By your own admission you know nothing of the case other than an internet link you have just found. Good for you if you prefer internet speculation over a court of law but I prefer things to be a bit more concrete.
Click to expand...

As do I, hence my link to a site about the case and questioning if your statement could be supported or was mere speculation on your part.

It would appear it was the latter!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top