Man 'had sex with victim's body'..now thats sick

el guapo · Post by **el guapo** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:05 am

Man 'had sex with victim's body'

Sally Anne Bowman was murdered yards from her home

A man accused of murdering teenage model Sally Anne Bowman confessed to having sex with her after she was killed, a court has been told.

Miss Bowman, 18, was repeatedly stabbed and bitten outside her home in Croydon, south London, in September 2005.

Chef Mark Dixie, 35, of no fixed address, denies murdering Miss Bowman.

Prosecutor Brian Altman said: "The defendant confesses that he had sex with Sally Anne and that he had sex with her after her death."

The court heard Mr Dixie had said he had been drinking, took drugs and had "taken advantage of the situation".

Mr Altman said: "That astonishingly is his defence. It is born out of desperation."

'Gruesome discovery'

Miss Bowman had been driven home after a night out in Croydon Town Centre by her boyfriend Lewis Sprotson at about 0400 BST, the court was told.

The couple began to argue as they sat in the car outside Miss Bowman's house with each accusing the other of seeing other people, Mr Altman added.

She had tried to stop Mr Sprotson driving off by sitting on the bonnet of the car, but as he left he had seen Sally Anne walking into her drive.

Mr Altman said Lewis believed someone had been watching them and at one stage had "looked angrily" into the car.

Neighbours heard screams at about 0420 BST but it was not until over two hours later that the "gruesome discovery" of the model's body was made.

The defendant's DNA was found on Miss Bowman's body, his bloody fingerprint on her shoe and his bite marks on her cheek, neck and breast, the jury was told.

Mr Altman said Mr Dixie, a father of three and a "recreational drug user", had a history of sexual violence.

The court was told that, at the age of 17, he indecently assaulted a female Jehovah's Witness in London, and a match to his DNA was found by police investigating the rape and stabbing of a student in Perth, Western Australia.

He had been celebrating his 35th birthday drinking and taking cocaine in a pub on the night Miss Bowman died, the court heard.

The party later retired to a flat in Avondale Road, two streets away from where Miss Bowman was killed.

The case continues.

from bbc news web page

Post by **spot** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:07 am

What makes you believe he did? The prosecution doesn't believe it.

el guapo · Post by **el guapo** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:08 am

spot;772164 wrote: What makes you believe he did? The prosecution doesn't believe it.

i dont but what a sick thing to say

Post by **spot** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:11 am

He's trying to avoid a murder conviction.

el guapo · Post by **el guapo** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:12 am

spot;772169 wrote: He's trying to avoid a murder conviction.

yea

Post by **spot** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:13 am

So "Man 'had sex with victim's body'" is somewhat misleading, really.

el guapo · Post by **el guapo** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:16 am

spot;772175 wrote: So "Man 'had sex with victim's body'" is somewhat misleading, really.

its what the headline says go tell the bbc

Post by **spot** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:17 am

My apologies, I hadn't seen any mention of the BBC until that point.

el guapo · Post by **el guapo** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:18 am

spot;772178 wrote: My apologies, I hadn't seen any mention of the BBC until that point.

so bbc say it its ok with you if i do ya try to pick me to peices

Post by **spot** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:35 am

No, I think it's a dreadful inaccuracy. Man claims he had sex with victim's body, that's different and accurate. He's accused of murder, not of opportunist necrophilia. The jury can't assume that evidence of sex is proof of murder given his claim. If he'd denied the sex then they'd have reasonable proof.

It's taken the crown prosecution 18 months to get the case from being charged to starting the trial. The police had to collate Australian evidence of crimes ten years ago in Western Australia as well as prior offences in the UK, he's not a nice chap at all is Mark Dixie.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:54 pm

The English are a dreadful bunch !

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 2:13 pm

Oh.. this is sick. It's bad enough girls can't go for a fun w/o some guy jumping them. :rolleyes:

:mad:

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 2:17 pm

well it has happened before.. serial killers killing first doing it after.. theyt are scared in case they hurt them or soemthing.. i dont know whats go in the mind of those men but honestly thats real discusting.. also dead people **** immedialty, dont they?

:(

women cant do it to men, will be like difficult.. hard enough for some with a impotent or half impotent husband, so i guess they dont need to go to the cimetary to found some like that... nor turn into serial killers.. they just got to get married and they got their necrolove after a few years..

:wah:

Post by **spot** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 2:37 pm

but nobody thinks the claim's true.

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:23 pm

Good ! Too much bad in the world as it is.

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:28 pm

read what i wrote baby,..

and beside killing the girl after beating her so much isnt much bettr than raping her post mortem.. rather its before or after, he did raped her this they know for sure they found his sperm in her.. and blood of him on him and blod of the girl on him too so he did killed and raped her, post or pre mortem dosnt change the fact that the guy is an arss hole.

that he tried say he rape her after and someoen else killed her, is just to avoid the electric chari or 20 years in jail.. as rape is like 3 months to 3 years..

Post by **spot** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:34 pm

Perhaps the law in England is different to yours. He's being tried in England for murder.

If the prosecution can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that she was alive when he was with her then, if the sex was their only evidence of his involvement, they have no evidence that he murdered her and he'll be found not guilty.

If he's found not guilty of murdering her, the prosecution can't reduce the charge to a lesser one and retry him for anything to do with that evening (unless major new evidence that can't have previously been available comes into their hands).

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:56 pm

Thats what i just said above. rape for not being trial for murder, but rape is wrong and raping her before or after she was dead doesnt change a thing that he rape her.. and if he didnt he killed her, or both.. in nay case he is a dangerous criminal and sadist.

Post by **spot** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:03 pm

All of which is undoubtedly true but has nothing to do with the reason he's said she was dead when he had sex with her body. The reason he's said she was dead already isn't that it's true, it's that he might in consequence avoid a guilty verdict in his trial. He wants to walk away a free man and to do that he needs to demonstrate that no reasonable doubt exists regarding the evidence that he killed her. We'll have to wait and see whether there is any convincing evidence.

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:10 pm

Alive or dead..shouldn't have done it. It is wrong either way.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:13 pm

Send the scum to Malaysia.

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:15 pm

My point exactly..

buddy, can oyu og look your pm..? 'been waiting..

Post by **spot** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:17 pm

Or - I know, Carla, let's have the US and UK adopt Shari'a forms of punishment, how's about that? Cut out the middle-man? Maybe we'd need to have Shari'a courts as well, to be able to impose the lashings and all the rest of it, but what matters is to make the scum suffer as badly as possible. Why not bring back burning at the stake while we're at it?

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:20 pm

Sound like a plan to me Spot. You see I have no sympathy for rapist of the living or the dead just that simple.

[QUOTE]Or - I know, Carla, let's have the US and UK adopt Shari'a forms of punishment, how's about that? Cut out the middle-man? Maybe we'd need to have Shari'a courts as well, to be able to impose the lashings and all the rest of it, but what matters is to make the scum suffer as badly as possible. Why not bring back burning at the stake while we're at it?[/QUOTE]

Post by **spot** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:23 pm

It's the double standard that leaves me speechless, the ability to say this on the one hand and then to criticize Middle Eastern courts for perceived barbarity on the other, and to be talking about exactly the same punishments in both cases.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:26 pm

What can I say if it get rid of the rapist problem solved. Yep it is a double standard and I can't believe dear Spot your are ever speechless sweetie..

[QUOTE]It's the double standard that leaves me speechless, the ability to say this on the one hand and then to criticize Middle Eastern courts for perceived barbarity on the other, and to be talking about exactly the same punishments in both cases.[/QUOTE]

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:38 pm

I'll tell it like it is..we need to get nasty talking people that talk about banging this person and that person, and what cup size a girl is ..etc. off our radio and tv. If you don't think this does something to some people.. you're sadly mistaken..it does. It's like brainwashing some people that really gets into it. Like saying someone is ugly long enough..they will start to believe it is true. People mess with other people mind set here and it is not good at all.

Post by **spot** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:42 pm

Good call Jerry, they don't put up with that sort of broadcasting in Saudi Arabia. They have a lot to teach the West when it comes to guiding the morals of the country.

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:48 pm

you are wrong they teach them to beat their wife as a must which isnt better, and to consider women as a thing which the same or worse.. and they do have internet connection and watch porno on it and movies and western songs so they got both, plus the law on their side to do it, so thats no help there spot..

if a woman is raped in saudi arabia it is her who is punished as its their system that she must have doen something first, like putting the devil eyes on the guy..

the reson why women must be all cover even their eyes is that a man if he is attracted to a woman and is mad he cant get her cause she is married, he can accuse her for ahving put the devil eye on him with her look, and get her stoned to death.. nice huh??!!!

same goes for rape, it is her who is raped ditto thats her fault..

sometimes the guy got soemthing too, butas a rule thats nothign compare as men rule there..

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:49 pm

Jerry;777751 wrote: I'll tell it like it is..we need to get nasty talking people that talk about banging this person and that person, and what cup size a girl is ..etc. off our radio and tv. If you don't think this does something to some people.. you're sadly mistaken..it does. It's like brainwashing some people that really gets into it. Like saying someone is ugly long enough..they will start to believe it is true. People mess with other people mind set here and it is not good at all.

I agree with that one

Post by **spot** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:52 pm

Geronimo;777763 wrote: you are wrong they teach them to beat their wife as a must which isnt better, and to consider women as a thing which the same or worse.. and they do have internet connection and watch porno on it and movies and western songs so they got both, plus the law on their side to do it, so thats no help there spot..

if a woman is raped in saudi arabia it is her who is punished as its their system that she must have doen something first, like putting the devil eyes on the guy..

the reson why women must be all cover even their eyes is that a man if he is attracted to a woman and is mad he cant get her cause she is married, he can accuse her for ahving put the devil eye on him with her look, and get her stoned to death.. nice huh??!!!

same goes for rape, it is her who is raped ditto thats her fault..

sometimes the guy got soemthing too, butas a rule thats nothign compare as men rule there..

Thank you Geronimo, but I thought Jerry was discussing radio and TV broadcasts. Saudi Arabia doesn't put up with the sort of broadcasting he described. Perhaps they could teach the West how to prohibit it.

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:51 pm

jerry lets go to ours now.. urgent shortly..

and look oyur pm now too..

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:52 pm

spot;777768 wrote: Thank you Geronimo, but I thought Jerry was discussing radio and TV broadcasts. Saudi Arabia doesn't put up with the sort of broadcasting he described. Perhaps they could teach the West how to prohibit it.

I wish someone would. :rolleyes:

Hun, I heard that one guy gets $500,000 a year for talking trash to people. Unreal, isn't it?

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:00 pm

spot;777768 wrote: Thank you Geronimo, but I thought Jerry was discussing radio and TV broadcasts. Saudi Arabia doesn't put up with the sort of broadcasting he described. Perhaps they could teach the West how to prohibit it.

NO NEED TO GO ALSO GOOD AT PROHIBITING ANYTHIGN AGAISNT PUTIN AND CHINA does a very good job too.. at extreeme prohibition..

but if you can get it on the internet and they only connet to the internet for that, then there si no differences.. and they have nightclub too with protitutes so thats the same.

and no need to broadcast movies of violence when they just go in the street and can see people getting executed in full day light and beign linched and beaten to death and hand cuts and head cut and foot cut.. and it is also broadcasted on tv.. together with tales about violence encouraging the Jihad.. so.. its even worse.

not only they are violent but believe its alright.

Post by **spot** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:05 pm

Jerry was discussing radio and TV broadcasts. Saudi Arabia doesn't put up with the sort of broadcasting he described. Perhaps they could teach the West how to prohibit it.

Or perhaps tolerating obscene and degrading radio and TV is preferable, that's an alternative which might be far less bad than trying to ban it. Except you agree with Jerry that we need to get these permissive people "off our radio and tv". I tend not to, myself. I tend to regard the consequences of censorship as far worse than the material being censored.

Post by **spot** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:48 pm

Damn, and I knew when I came out that I might need my whip tonight too.

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:51 pm

what is that about??

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:52 pm

Jerry;777807 wrote: I wish someone would. :rolleyes:

Hun, I heard that one guy gets $500,000 a year for talking trash to people. Unreal, isn't it?

sounds like a musician to me, or a rapist.. i mean one that sings rap.. what you call it? LOL

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:53 pm

what does he do? a talk show?

AHH! a politician maybe?

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:55 pm

spot;777814 wrote: Jerry was discussing radio and TV broadcasts. Saudi Arabia doesn't put up with the sort of broadcasting he described. Perhaps they could teach the West how to prohibit it.

Or perhaps tolerating obscene and degrading radio and TV is preferable, that's an alternative which might be far less bad than trying to ban it. Except you agree with Jerry that we need to get these permissive people "off our radio and tv". I tend not to, myself. I tend to regard the consequences of censorship as far worse than the material being censored.

You doing like hearing trash talk too, huh? I could never talk as nasty as some people do. I worked with a lady that would say the F word more that she said hi. No kidding. :rolleyes:

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:18 pm

LOL!

and she say that when doing what?

cause there si some who say it while making love so.. i mean unless oyu were watching.. but lets not assume the worse..LOL

or mayeb she never says hi.. like me i say bonjour instead thats more funny..

does i put me in the same groupe?

scuse my french then..

:P

only kidding sweetie..

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:19 pm

It was mostly when she past by me that I heard it. I got to thinking

.. are you trying to tell me to F off, or are you sayng you want some because you're not getting any? :-3:wah:;)

Geronimo · Post by **Geronimo** » Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:54 pm

Hmmm

thats weird.. I think she was trying to convey a message of the most degradating kind..

another way to say FY or call you DAzz..

looks like some oyur coworkers do not bare you in their heart, hun..:-2