19/07/07
Vanished Without A Trace
"The police took away her computer to see if it held any clues. They discovered she'd been talking to people in the West Country, and soon all kinds of scenarios began playing over and over in my mind.
She didn't seem to have run away so we had to suppose she'd gone to meet someone - probably one of her internet friends. But that brings its own nightmares and soon we feared she was being held against her will."
6/11/07
Why won't My Little Girl Come Home?
Thames Valley Police, 26/4/07
Thames Valley Police
" It is believed that Samantha may be in the Bristol area, but she has been known to travel to Milton Keynes on occasion.
Samantha has asthma and family are worried whether she has appropriate medication, such as an inhaler, and any chemists who may have been approached by her are asked to please contact the police. Her family also do not believe she has access to money.
Detective Inspector Vince Grey from Thames Valley Police, who is leading the investigation, said: “We’ve exhausted our enquiries with her friends and contacts in Buckinghamshire and we are now extending our enquiries to other areas where she is known to have contacts – top of this list is Bristol.”
So, to the person who has posted comments, threatening to sue me for breach of copyright, whose copyright have I breached? Thames Valley Police? Or do you think the police have also breached someone's copyright?
So, as can be seen above, the Thames Valley police discovered that Samantha had been communicating with people in the West Country area, via the internet, and subsequently they made Bristol top of their list as a possible place that Samantha had gone to. So, my saying that Samantha was thought to have met someone on the internet and that she was believed to be in the Bristol area, is there a breach of copyright there? If so, whose?
Will someone please indicate where, in my initial post about Samantha Osborn, I referred to her boyfriend?
Someone thinking of threatening Thames Valley Police for breach of copyright? That should be very interesting. Perhaps they think that Thames Valley Police are, "low life," too for publishing these details?
Please note: I will remove the photo of Samantha Osborn when I have received a request from Samantha herself. To date, the email address I have requested has not been provided. So, I have no way of knowing if the person claiming to be Sammy Osborn is in fact Sammy.
I will not remove any text from this blog which is in the public domain, especially that which has been published by Thames Valley Police, unless requested to do so by the police.
4 comments:
Dear Anna
I thought that I would update you with regards the posted article on your Blog, the investigation into the Daily Mirror has been UPHELD due to Mrs Gillian Osborn`s story being lies and false information supplied to the press and therefore it has been removed :
http://www.mirror.co.uk/showbiz/yourlife/kidsandfamily/2007/11/06/why-won-t-my-little-girl-come-home-89520-20068450/
With affect as of 4th of November 2007.
This includeds all forum content on the Mirror`s website.
Failing to remove this content from your blog within the next 14 Days legal action maybe taken and a claim made against you.
There will be no further contact with you regards this matter.
Roxcy
The daily Mirror complaint was never upheld.They removed the story from their website as a goodwill gesture.the family of Samantha Osborn can back up their story with plenty of evidence.
I wonder why Samantha is not allowed contact with social workers,very strange if this man has nothing to hide!
Post a Comment