Sam Mitchell arrested

[Andy008]

If Sam Mitchell was arrested for ABH and criminal damage, how can the police remand her for Den's murder? Surely she would have to be charged for them to do that and there is only circumstantial evidence. Plus why would a murderer dig up a body they had been trying to conceal? I have always believed that in English law for a person to be charged they must solidly be connected to that crime beyond all reasonable doubt. Chrissie planted Den's phone in Sam's flat, but could Sam not have simply told the police Chrissie had the key? And Pauline must surely have dropped Chrissie in it by telling the police the dog was scrubbed clean?

[spinchimp]

Blimey, I didn't know it was a documentary!

[hannahjo]

And have the police not thought that Chrissie might be a bit miffed as to why Sam would have dug a hole in the pub cellar and refilled it?! Surely it wouldn�t have gone unnoticed?!

[hopalong]

She was charged was she not?

[lissyl78]

Agree with you Andy. Although it is fiction, it's obvious that the reason for all your points is to make the storyline drag on longer. Eastenders are doing it a lot lately (Alfie and the Little Mo/Kat triangle) and it's so frustrating. Can see why people think it's going downhill.

[dothawkes]

And, though in a 'stunned into disbelief' moment, i may have missed this, why have fingerprints not been mentioned with regards to the mobile?  Sam didn't handle it, so either her fingerprints are on it or noones are, if noones are, I would defend her myself.  If i was a criminal barrister, and lived in london, and this was a real case.

[bernardo]

If Sam Mitchell was arrested for ABH and criminal damage, how can the police remand her for Den's murder?

While they were invstigating the assault, they uncovered evidence of the murder.  They can detain her in connection with anything that they find.

Surely she would have to be charged for them to do that and there is only circumstantial evidence.

They can hold people for up to 24 hours (extendable to 96 hours) before they have to charge or release someone.  "Circumstantial" evidence merely means the evidence of the circumstances of a crime.  All evidence is circumstantial.

Plus why would a murderer dig up a body they had been trying to conceal?

To frame someone else, and because she was desperate and drunk and not thinking straight.

I have always believed that in English law for a person to be charged they must solidly be connected to that crime beyond all reasonable doubt.

"Beyond reasonable doubt" is the requirement for a conviction, not for a charge.  A charge requires a prima-facie case and a reasonable chance of a conviction.

Chrissie planted Den's phone in Sam's flat, but could Sam not have simply told the police Chrissie had the key?

Don't know about that one.

And Pauline must surely have dropped Chrissie in it by telling the police the dog was scrubbed clean?

Pauline said (and the police know) only what Chrissie told Pauline, i.e. that the doorstop had been mislaid, and was found by Chrissie in the cupboard.  And that she cleaned it because it was dirty and covered in dust, not because it was covered in blood.

[Andy008]

Thanks.

[dothawkes]

Well u did ask Andy!  I can see the sage brush rolling past you and the stunned blank look on your face as i type