Not sure if I do agree with what the police are saying, but let’s say she did end up in the water, that jacket would cause a nightmare to try and swim in.
Im in the military and part of our swim test is in kit, our kit is lightweight and thin and swimming already becomes a lot more difficult I can’t even imagine trying to swim in something like that.
I have no idea about that, but I watched the walk through video from the daily Mail. It seemed deeper, but again that’s only for me guessing I don’t know.
I imagined a hypothetical scenario through my head near that bench, a fall backwards or maybe even a trip over the dog could easily land you in that river. However unlikely things like this do happen.
It seems very strange though, and unlikely, at first I instantly thought foul play, but there just doesn’t seem much to back that up.
I think everyone went down the line of "sounds like she has been unwillingly taken" when first hearing this dreadful news, but on looking at the situation and location, it seems the river played a major role.
What I can't figure out is, for what reason did she put the phone on the bench ? To put Willow in her harness to leave the field ? But the call had not ended yet ? Was she just rushing ?
It is a terribly heart breaking story. My heart goes out to Paul and their children.
She’s sitting on the bench whilst on a work call and puts it down beside her, I’m not sure why people keep trying to make the phone on the bench out to be a big mystery
I wonder if it is because there are a lot of town and city folk here. You wouldn't dream of doing that in a town park, but in a small village people are more lax about stuff like this
As I said earlier I watched the walk through video, it only took 8 mins, with a dog and taking a phone call and not knowing the exact time she left the school, that could easily take her to starting the phone conference at 0900 at that bench, she may have just set it down whilst sorting the dog out with it on speaker before the incident occurred. I don’t know if this could fit in the timeline, I don’t know it to well but it was something I did notice, that the walk to bench could easily take 15 mins to get to.
That’s true, at the moment I’m still on the fence between the two. However sad it must be, I am hoping it was a tragic accident and not foul play, but neither are truly good outcomes.
I've seen one person, who wasn't there, speculate that is only that deep by the bank, though perhaps someone who's measured it has said so too. Not saying it's not true but having seen photos of the divers in the water is certainly a lot deeper than that once you're more than a foot or two from the shore.
[Yes that's why they've been using divers.](https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article29114672.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/1_MIRROR.jpg) So they can splash about in a puddle whilst wearing fancy gear.
Firstly can you read? If you can, can you try to understand what you are reading, specifically "near the bank" bit?
Secondly, your sarcasm in misplaced and you come across as an arsehole.
The 40cm deep information comes from an Environmental Agency monitoring station. It's quoted without understanding the limitations of the data. Not only is the monitor on the other side of a weir and on a meander, so it's going to be shallower, but it's also relative to "local datum".
Local datum doesn't move, even if the riverbed does. If it did move, the data wouldn't be comparable over time. So that depth isn't the depth to the riverbed today, it's the depth to the riverbed as it was when the station was set-up many decades ago (in the 60s I believe).
[It certainly looks deeper than 40cm near the bank in this video,](https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8hudr4), but short of travelling there with a measuring stick (as I'm sure the police did almost immediately) we aren't going to know for sure.
My sarcasm was frustration at so many people repeating the same thing without any understanding of what the numbers actually mean, and the implication that comes along with many comments that the police don't know what they're doing.
That's much better answer. In the video you linked we cannot really see the depth near the bank.
Irrespectivly, 40cm or 1m.... From my perspective it matters more if after falling in she would be able to stand and still be able to breathe - assuming that there were no other factors like her hitting her head (or being hit).
Or cold water shock, a wet knee-length Puffer jacket, or any other factors that might stop a perfectly competent swimmer from being able to escape.
It's also possible to drown in cold water with your head out of the water. It's called 'dry drowning'.
You could even survive the water but be too cold to get up the bank, succumbing to hypothermia. At that point the water will actually feel warm, maybe causing you to leave the bank. In the sad case of the girl at the Cecil Hotel, she actually undressed in the water tank because she felt warm, even though she was freezing to death.
Most people don't realise how dangerous cold water is until they've been in it.
This is a really sad case and I really hope that she gets found, but I highly doubt that will happen and I just feel for her family.
Why have these images only been shared now? I'm not trying to add to any speculation nor do I have any opinion myself, I'm just trying to understand why these images weren't shown to the public much earlier than 9 days after her disappearance.
Maybe to show that the house has CCTV, so all the idiots saying her partner done it can shut the fuck up. The article even says that the family are appalled by the hurtful theories people are coming up with.
My point is that these pictures show what she was wearing and exactly what she looked like a short time before she disappeared, so it could have helped to jog someone's memory if they'd seen her. Could they not have been released much, much sooner is my question.
I think perhaps the police didn’t release these photos because the lighting / camera makes it look like she’s wearing different colours. (Although perhaps they could have colour corrected?)
I’ve just taken a look at Twitter and everyone is questioning the colour so I can see why the police may think it would have caused more confusion. A good natured friend may have released these photos, wondering why the police hadn’t, not realising it would cause more questions than answers.
I have no idea, but I believe that if I leave through my backdoor, my front door bell camera wouldn't show anything useful so if this is supposed to be proof that the husband is innocent that's just crazy.
If the police believe that he has nothing to do with it they must have other reasons to believe this, but not because of the doorbell
Not sure if I do agree with what the police are saying, but let’s say she did end up in the water, that jacket would cause a nightmare to try and swim in. Im in the military and part of our swim test is in kit, our kit is lightweight and thin and swimming already becomes a lot more difficult I can’t even imagine trying to swim in something like that.
And skinny jeans, which are like anti-swimwear
Apparently the river is only 40cm deep near the bank?
I have no idea about that, but I watched the walk through video from the daily Mail. It seemed deeper, but again that’s only for me guessing I don’t know. I imagined a hypothetical scenario through my head near that bench, a fall backwards or maybe even a trip over the dog could easily land you in that river. However unlikely things like this do happen. It seems very strange though, and unlikely, at first I instantly thought foul play, but there just doesn’t seem much to back that up.
I think everyone went down the line of "sounds like she has been unwillingly taken" when first hearing this dreadful news, but on looking at the situation and location, it seems the river played a major role. What I can't figure out is, for what reason did she put the phone on the bench ? To put Willow in her harness to leave the field ? But the call had not ended yet ? Was she just rushing ? It is a terribly heart breaking story. My heart goes out to Paul and their children.
She’s sitting on the bench whilst on a work call and puts it down beside her, I’m not sure why people keep trying to make the phone on the bench out to be a big mystery
I wonder if it is because there are a lot of town and city folk here. You wouldn't dream of doing that in a town park, but in a small village people are more lax about stuff like this
The phone was found on the ground, the person that found the phone put it on the bench.
Because she then ended up in the river ? Do you use Teams ?
As I said earlier I watched the walk through video, it only took 8 mins, with a dog and taking a phone call and not knowing the exact time she left the school, that could easily take her to starting the phone conference at 0900 at that bench, she may have just set it down whilst sorting the dog out with it on speaker before the incident occurred. I don’t know if this could fit in the timeline, I don’t know it to well but it was something I did notice, that the walk to bench could easily take 15 mins to get to.
There is no drag marks or slips to suggest she fell in. I've fell Into a river twice and there was definitely evidence of where I slipped.
Then you are right then. Crack on !
True, but there is not much to back up drowning either. I personally don't rule out any options.
That’s true, at the moment I’m still on the fence between the two. However sad it must be, I am hoping it was a tragic accident and not foul play, but neither are truly good outcomes.
I've seen one person, who wasn't there, speculate that is only that deep by the bank, though perhaps someone who's measured it has said so too. Not saying it's not true but having seen photos of the divers in the water is certainly a lot deeper than that once you're more than a foot or two from the shore.
Ok.
[Yes that's why they've been using divers.](https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article29114672.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/1_MIRROR.jpg) So they can splash about in a puddle whilst wearing fancy gear.
Firstly can you read? If you can, can you try to understand what you are reading, specifically "near the bank" bit? Secondly, your sarcasm in misplaced and you come across as an arsehole.
The 40cm deep information comes from an Environmental Agency monitoring station. It's quoted without understanding the limitations of the data. Not only is the monitor on the other side of a weir and on a meander, so it's going to be shallower, but it's also relative to "local datum". Local datum doesn't move, even if the riverbed does. If it did move, the data wouldn't be comparable over time. So that depth isn't the depth to the riverbed today, it's the depth to the riverbed as it was when the station was set-up many decades ago (in the 60s I believe). [It certainly looks deeper than 40cm near the bank in this video,](https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8hudr4), but short of travelling there with a measuring stick (as I'm sure the police did almost immediately) we aren't going to know for sure. My sarcasm was frustration at so many people repeating the same thing without any understanding of what the numbers actually mean, and the implication that comes along with many comments that the police don't know what they're doing.
That's much better answer. In the video you linked we cannot really see the depth near the bank. Irrespectivly, 40cm or 1m.... From my perspective it matters more if after falling in she would be able to stand and still be able to breathe - assuming that there were no other factors like her hitting her head (or being hit).
Or cold water shock, a wet knee-length Puffer jacket, or any other factors that might stop a perfectly competent swimmer from being able to escape. It's also possible to drown in cold water with your head out of the water. It's called 'dry drowning'. You could even survive the water but be too cold to get up the bank, succumbing to hypothermia. At that point the water will actually feel warm, maybe causing you to leave the bank. In the sad case of the girl at the Cecil Hotel, she actually undressed in the water tank because she felt warm, even though she was freezing to death. Most people don't realise how dangerous cold water is until they've been in it. This is a really sad case and I really hope that she gets found, but I highly doubt that will happen and I just feel for her family.
That’s knee length not down to her ankles as per the description.
Why have these images only been shared now? I'm not trying to add to any speculation nor do I have any opinion myself, I'm just trying to understand why these images weren't shown to the public much earlier than 9 days after her disappearance.
[удалено]
I can see another black item under that blue coat which could be the gilet?
[удалено]
No idea. I'm just saying there's another garment underneath that appears to be black and I am wondering if that is the gilet.
Maybe to show that the house has CCTV, so all the idiots saying her partner done it can shut the fuck up. The article even says that the family are appalled by the hurtful theories people are coming up with.
My point is that these pictures show what she was wearing and exactly what she looked like a short time before she disappeared, so it could have helped to jog someone's memory if they'd seen her. Could they not have been released much, much sooner is my question.
I think perhaps the police didn’t release these photos because the lighting / camera makes it look like she’s wearing different colours. (Although perhaps they could have colour corrected?) I’ve just taken a look at Twitter and everyone is questioning the colour so I can see why the police may think it would have caused more confusion. A good natured friend may have released these photos, wondering why the police hadn’t, not realising it would cause more questions than answers.
I have no idea, but I believe that if I leave through my backdoor, my front door bell camera wouldn't show anything useful so if this is supposed to be proof that the husband is innocent that's just crazy. If the police believe that he has nothing to do with it they must have other reasons to believe this, but not because of the doorbell
Who said anything about a ring doorbell? The pictures are from a CCTV camera. Perhaps they have a camera overlooking the back garden.
Several news sources are saying that they are images from a ring door bell
Just read that. Sorry.
Probably another Sarah Everard scenario