Man arrested over Georgina Edmonds murder.

Detectives from Hampshire Constabulary’s Major Crime Department have made an arrest in connection with the murder of Georgina Edmonds.

A 31-year-old man from Eastleigh was arrested on suspicion of murder and is currently in custody helping police with their enquiries.

The arrest was made around 5am on Wednesday, June 30.

  4 comments for “Man arrested over Georgina Edmonds murder.

  1. peter stewart
    July 1, 2010 at 10:30 am

    A man is INNOCENT until proven guilty! Let us remember that! Unlike our Continental neighbours, we have the protection of our ancient English civil rights: (a) Habeas Corpus (no detention without evidence), (b) Trial by an independent jury of the defendant’s peers (who have sovereignty over the verdict), (c) no double jeopardy (an acquittal cannot be appealed), and other rights and safeguards. These are all unknown in Europe.

    In Europe a suspect is often arrested and imprisoned as soon as an investigation starts. This can and often does occur before the State has collected any serious evidence to justify the detention. Such detention without evidence or any public hearing can last for years. In Britain such detention can only last for 24 hours (72 in serious allegations such as rape or murder and up to 28 days for alleged terrorist offences). However in Britain, after these maximum limits a defendant must be charged in a public hearing, where he may demand that prima facie evidence against him be exhibited, or he be released. This rule ensures that British detectives collect most of their essential evidence against a suspect before arresting and charging him, whereas on the continent they all too often do it afterwards.

    Certainly let us hope the killer of Georgina Edmunds is caught.

  2. mm
    Eastleigh Xpress
    July 1, 2010 at 12:34 pm

    A man is INNOCENT until proven guilty!Let us remember that!

    Have you speaking to Matthew?

    Double Jeopardy was scrapped by Jack Straw a few years ago we can now also have trial without jury and detention without charge of up to 28 days.

  3. Matthew Myatt
    July 1, 2010 at 4:27 pm

    Peter is quite correct when he states that a person IS innocent until proven guilty. That is ‘Beyond a reasonable doubt’ is English law.

    On the rights of people detained by the police, we are lucky that we in this country have rights and are protected under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE), and there are strict rules as to the length of time a person can be detained for questioning and investigation. In most cases this is limited to 24 hours. However this can be extended to 36 hours at the discretion of an officer of the rank of Inspector or above. The police can further apply to a Magistrate Court to detain a person for a maximum of 72 hours after which time the police MUST either charge, release the suspect on bail or release the suspect with ‘No Further Action’ (NFA).

    Once charged the suspect will either be bailed to appear at a court hearing or remanded in custody until a court hearing at which point an application for bail can be heard or a request from the CPS to have the suspect held on remand can be decided upon by a bench or District Judge.

    The only time a person can be held for longer than 72 hours is under the ‘Prevention of Terrorism Act’, which does allow for up to 28 days detention. However this period of detention must be reviewed constantly and is not a blanket rule to hold people at the police’s whim.

    However, the removable of a person’s liberty is at times at odds with Article 8 of the ‘Human Rights Act’ for which we have the EU Parliament to be grateful for.

    So not all things from Europe are a bad thing Pete.

    The bottom line.. People who have not been found guilty of a crime by a court sould always be assumed to be INNOCENT and as such should not be named until such time.

  4. peter stewart
    July 3, 2010 at 9:50 am

    Matthew. I am a PRO-EUROPEAN. Because I love the diversity in Europe, I therefore hate the EU!

    As for human rights, we need NO LESSONS FROM the EU or its satellite states.

    People should not be confused by the misnomer “Human Rights Act” (HRA). The name suggests that before Europe, we had no human rights.

    The first great human rights principle which sets Britain miles above Europe is that our State is built on the basis that human rights are inborn and RECOGNIZED by the State, not granted by the State (as they are in Europe).

    As for the so-called Human Rights Act, the only reason we have this is because under EU law, we are obliged to incorporate the INFERIOR provisions of the European Convention of Human Rights into our own law. But the so-called Human Rights Act (despite its name) can only ever be a serious EROSION of our human rights. Here’s why!

    The European Convention of Human Rights is (of necessity) a watered down version of the human rights we have enjoyed for centuries. Sadly these ancient rights are being eroded by the back-door imposition of EU law (“Corpus Juris”) BEHIND THE SMOKESCREEN of the “Human Rights Act”.

    The European Convention of Human Rights had to be watered down because otherwise many of the signatory states could never have signed up to it with such appalling human rights (as we understand them in relation to our own ancient rights).

    For instance Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights was watered down to say that a prisoner has a right to a public hearing before an impartial tribunal within a “REASONABLE” time. But nowhere dare it define “reasonable”. We Brits take “reasonable” to mean 24 hours (or sometimes 48 or 72 hours) or even (maybe) 28 days for allegations of “terrorism”. Notice how this period of detention is being gradually increased! But the word “reasonable” in Turkey routinely means 6 months detention or more and the situation is just as bad in many other EU satellite states.

    In Spain for example, Chris Lees (a British estate agent working on the Costa del Sol) was held in prison for a YEAR WITH NO PUBLIC HEARING, merely on SUSPICION of drug-trafficking (drugs had been found in a property on his books). When he finally appeared in court the case was dismissed through lack of evidence! He got no apology or compensation. His career, health and family life were ruined.

    Spain is by no means unique! These EU satellite states get away with this appalling record of human rights precisely BECAUSE they are fully signed up to the European Convention of Human Rights! This cannot be over emphasized!

    This proves how useless the European Convention of Human Rights is in protecting REAL human rights. By the way, Chris Lees was a LibDem at the time and had been a local councillor. Since his appalling experience of so-called “justice” in “EUrope” he has joined UKIP!
    As for Article 8 of the so-called Human Rights Act which you suggest in some way benefits us, I cannot see one single point which increases the rights we have already enjoyed for centuries.

    If (perhaps) you are referring to the right to “privacy”, what exactly does that mean in PRACTICE? Does it mean the right of corrupt politicians to hide away from the Media? There are swings and roundabouts in all things.

    This so-called Human Rights Act! Are we REALLY to believe that its foundation stone, the equally misnamed European Convention of Human Rights, framed merely a few decades ago, somehow supplants the ancient rights first recognized almost 800 years ago on the misty meadows of Runnimede and built on ever since? I think NOT!

    In summary, the British people will wake up in 20 years time to discover the ancient rights they once had, have been replaced by something very sinister indeed, all courtesy of that smokescreen the so-called “Human Rights Act”. By that time we will find ourselves in an EU police state.

Comments are closed.