Tina Satchwell News updates MOD NOTE POST ONE

fin12

I think the most logical explanation is she was killed somewhere after the car booth sale, she never made it back to youghal, their house is right on the street so it would be pretty hard to transport the body from the house to a car without been seen.

JeffKenna

fin12 wrote: »

I think the most logical explanation is she was killed somewhere after the car booth sale, she never made it back to youghal, their house is right on the street so it would be pretty hard to transport the body from the house to a car without been seen.

But that would mean her phone would have to have been left behind in the house? Would it not be more logical that he killed her in the house and moved her in the middle of the night un-noticed.

The street lighting on that street isn't great and its not like a lot of people walk it or would be in that area at night time.

retro:electro

I just can’t get past the fact that he waited three days to report her missing. It’s absoluely bizarre behaviour from someone who paints an image of Tina not usually being able to go as far as the bathroom without him.

I feel at this point we’ll never know. Hopefully I’m wrong on that front but I think this is just going to be another in a long line of unsolved missing Irish women cases.

Paddy Cow

retro:electro wrote: »

I just can’t get past the fact that he waited three days to report her missing. It’s absoluely bizarre behaviour from someone who paints an image of Tina not usually being able to go as far as the bathroom without him.

I feel at this point we’ll never know. Hopefully I’m wrong on that front but I think this is just going to be another in a long line of unsolved missing Irish women cases.

He waited four days and his explanation was that he thought she had gone to stay with her family. He made a load of bizarre interviews in the beginning and kept contradicting himself.

Boggles

retro:electro wrote: »

I just can’t get past the fact that he waited three days to report her missing.

Ever try to eat another human?

Takes at least 3 days TBF.

retro:electro

Boggles wrote: »

Ever try to eat another human?

Takes at least 3 days TBF.

Making light of a serious and potentially criminal situation.

It wouldn’t be like you.

Boggles

retro:electro wrote: »

Making light of a serious and potentially criminal situation.

It wouldn’t be like you.

Relax, he isn't even an official suspect.

Chances are she took the money and legged it, no one seems over ally worried about her, apart from a bunch of people widely speculation on the internet.

clfy39tzve8njq

Boggles wrote:

Chances are she took the money and legged it, no one seems over ally worried about her, apart from a bunch of people widely speculation on the internet.

You're earlier post was probably nearer the mark :-)

ToBeFrank123

Boggles wrote: »

Chances are she took the money and legged it, no one seems over ally worried about her, apart from a bunch of people widely speculation on the internet.

You keep peddling this line even though there is no evidence for it. She's made no contact with anyone and the gardai continue to look for her including conducting digs.

There is no evidence for the money either, just his word and anything he says can be taken with a bucket of salt at this stage given his habit of showing himself in the best possible light and her in the worst possible light.

If there was money, it could also be possible that he took it and tried to pin it on her.

Maybe its just me, but I am always suspicious of someone who portrays themselves positively and everyone else negatively.

Boggles

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

You keep peddling this line even though there is no evidence for it.

If you mean by "keep peddling this line", saying something once, I agree.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

the gardai continue to look for her including conducting digs.

Where are they digging?

tinpib

Boggles wrote: »

Where are they digging?

I think digs/digging is inaccurate, I assume the poster is referring to searches carried in the forests around this time last year.

Article also talks about underwater searches carried out.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/forest-searches-for-missing-tina-satchwell-were-rescheduled-because-of-heavy-snowfall-36669030.html

Beechwoodspark

I have one clear suspect in mind. However. Until proof the case goes on

ToBeFrank123

tinpib wrote: »

I think digs/digging is inaccurate, I assume the poster is referring to searches carried in the forests around this time last year.

Article also talks about underwater searches carried out.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/forest-searches-for-missing-tina-satchwell-were-rescheduled-because-of-heavy-snowfall-36669030.html

Searches/digging, same as in this case. The gardai committed significant resources to the search. They wouldn't do that if they knew she was safe and well and had made contact.

There is not one ounce of evidence this woman is alive.

benjy1000

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I have one clear suspect in mind. However. Until proof the case goes on

Her bloke ya??

Boggles

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

There is not one ounce of evidence this woman is alive.

She could well be dead, that doesn't mean she was murdered though.

Wasn't there a history of mental health issues in her family?

This is the McCann case all over again. People dead certain the husband is guilty despite zero evidence. "He waited 3 days" ... she had a history of disappearing and coming back again, so why would he immediately go to the gardai this time?

She took a ton of money with her .... it's far more likely he ran away with some other bloke she was secretly seeing that no one knew about and he killed her and took the money.

blade1

Deleted User wrote: »

This is the McCann case all over again. People dead certain the husband is guilty despite zero evidence. "He waited 3 days" ... she had a history of disappearing and coming back again, so why would he immediately go to the gardai this time?

She took a ton of money with her .... it's far more likely he ran away with some other bloke she was secretly seeing that no one knew about and he killed her and took the money.

Now there's a twist in the tale!!!:pac:

blade1

blade1 wrote: »

Now there's a twist in the tale!!!:pac:

LOL ....

loyatemu

Deleted User wrote: »

... she had a history of disappearing and coming back again

isn't that "according to Richard" though? As with the money.

ToBeFrank123

Deleted User wrote: »

This is the McCann case all over again. People dead certain the husband is guilty despite zero evidence. "He waited 3 days" ... she had a history of disappearing and coming back again, so why would he immediately go to the gardai this time?

She took a ton of money with her .... it's far more likely he ran away with some other bloke she was secretly seeing that no one knew about and he killed her and took the money.

No-one is dead certain of anything, but people inevitably have suspicions.

We only have his word for the "ton of money". It could be BS for all we know. There might have been money, there might not have been.

He's portrayed her in a pretty poor light though which seems to be a way of conditioning the general public to believe he is the good guy and she almost the villain who stole money, hit him and so on.

She was a very isolated and it appears vulnerable woman when alive. She seems to have been controlled, and her reputation also seems to be "controlled" in death too unfortunately. Access to her family and one supposed friend was controlled too.

ToBeFrank123

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

No-one is dead certain of anything, but people inevitably have suspicions.

We only have his word for the "ton of money". It could be BS for all we know. There might have been money, there might not have been.

He's portrayed her in a pretty poor light though which seems to be a way of conditioning the general public to believe he is the good guy and she almost the villain who stole money, hit him and so on.

She was a very isolated and it appears vulnerable woman when alive. She seems to have been controlled, and her reputation also seems to be "controlled" in death too unfortunately. Access to her family and one supposed friend was controlled too.

It's easy for the Gardai to check bank accounts etc to verify that story or otherwise. Unless they had piles of cash lying about the house or under the mattress.

Sometimes people isolate themselves due to depression, mental illness etc. I'm not saying that was the case here, but it is well possible. The controlling narrative is always the default go to if the victim is a woman. If Richard Satchwell is such a bumbling idiot as portrayed by the media he sure did a fine job of covering up a murder where he is the prime suspect. Maybe he did it.... but it looks pretty unlikely to me.

Paddy Cow

Deleted User wrote: »

This is the McCann case all over again. People dead certain the husband is guilty despite zero evidence. "He waited 3 days" ... she had a history of disappearing and coming back again, so why would he immediately go to the gardai this time?

She took a ton of money with her .... it's far more likely he ran away with some other bloke she was secretly seeing that no one knew about and he killed her and took the money.

That's the first time I've seen something like that said. Where did you get that impression?

blade1

Deleted User wrote: »

she had a history of disappearing and coming back again

Practice runs.

fin12

Deleted User wrote: »

It's easy for the Gardai to check bank accounts etc to verify that story or otherwise. Unless they had piles of cash lying about the house or under the mattress.

Sometimes people isolate themselves due to depression, mental illness etc. I'm not saying that was the case here, but it is well possible. The controlling narrative is always the default go to if the victim is a woman. If Richard Satchwell is such a bumbling idiot as portrayed by the media he sure did a fine job of covering up a murder where he is the prime suspect. Maybe he did it.... but it looks pretty unlikely to me.

Bank records wouldn’t confirm that money, it was cash stored at home from years ago. He said how he had got in trouble before with social welfare so they saved cash at home instead.

I don’t think he comes across as a bumbling idiot, I think strange is how most people would describe him. He certainly loves courting the press anyway.

Ann22

Deleted User wrote:

If Richard Satchwell is such a bumbling idiot as portrayed by the media he sure did a fine job of covering up a murder where he is the prime suspect. Maybe he did it.... but it looks pretty unlikely to me.

Hmmm..a fine job?.I'm not sure if it would require a huge amount of brains or skill...a big build of a man like that. He had time..and a car to transport her anywhere. An isolated spot to bury her was all he needed. Needle in a haystack.
Logically...what is the most likely scenario?
She didn't leave the country. Who would have reason and means to harm her?

Boggles

Ann22 wrote: »

She didn't leave the country

How do you know she didn't?

It's extremely easy to leave this country, no paper work required.

Ann22

Boggles wrote:

It's extremely easy to leave this country, no paper work required.

Boggles wrote:

How do you know she didn't?

Wasn't cctv checked at ports? Or did I dream that? Even if it wasn't.. how did she get to a port? No taxis picked her up. The there's the slim chance she had help from someone other than her family.
I listened to a podcast on missing persons and an experienced detective said people come up with all sorts of elaborate theories to explain where a person might have gone...changed their identities or abducted etc. He said it's almost always the most likely and simplest explanation. Last person with them who had an emotional connection.

Boggles

Ann22 wrote: »

Wasn't cctv checked at ports.

You don't need to get to a port to leave the country.

Ann22 wrote: »

I listened to a podcast on missing persons and an experienced detective said people come up with all sorts of elaborate theories to explain where a person might have gone...changed their identities or abducted etc. He said it's almost always the most likely and simplest explanation. Last person with them who had an emotional connection

So of all the people missing in this country the person who had saw them last that had an emotional connection is involved in their disappearance, almost always?

I don't actually think that is true is it?

Where was the detective from?

retro:electro

Ann22 wrote: »

I listened to a podcast on missing persons and an experienced detective said people come up with all sorts of elaborate theories to explain where a person might have gone...changed their identities or abducted etc. He said it's almost always the most likely and simplest explanation. Last person with them who had an emotional connection.

But in this case we don’t know who the last person with Tina was. We can speculate that it was Richard but we don’t know that.

Ann22

Boggles wrote:

So of all the people missing in this country the person who had saw them last that had an emotional connection is involved in their disappearance, almost always?

No it was the US. He said the most elaborate theories explaining disappearances are really rare.. and of women who are murdered the vast majority are killed by partners or ex partners.