GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #1

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
jessie said:
From this I gather he didn't take any rubbish on 13/04/16 to the waste site? Just appeared to go for a check ? How odd, I'm not convinced by that and feel it proves nothing so surprised it was mentioned.
Click to expand...

It's unusual behaviour though. How would he explain it?
Oh, I know! He went to look for Helen's (non-existent) note that he'd thrown out!
 
jessie said:
From this I gather he didn't take any rubbish on 13/04/16 to the waste site? Just appeared to go for a check ? How odd, I'm not convinced by that and feel it proves nothing so surprised it was mentioned.
Click to expand...


The inference by the Pros ( last week ) was that IS went back on the 13th to check that the duvet had been disposed of...

IS will surely have to come up with a reason for going there, if he didnt have anything to drop off
 
Florrie said:
The more I read, the more bizarre all this sounds. By all accounts IS was/is not a violent man according to his son's (which is corroborated by other family members).
The evidence against him in this case seems overwhelming though so he is either a master of disguise in the past or has had an absolute sudden personality change. And then you come back to why. Why? They sound like they were happy as a couple, happy as a family and had no money worries (unless IS had money issues Helen and the boys were not aware of).
i wouldn't like to be on this jury.
Click to expand...

Exactly. As I said earlier, if I were on the jury right now I might be in the middle, 50/50.
 
The tesco footage is to link IS to the phone in the absence of a physical phone.
 
Alyce said:
WMSky ‏@wmarxsky 42s43 seconds ago

Jamie Stewart tells court he told police he couldn't see how her dad could have moved Helen Bailey's body, after operation weakened him



Yes, I thought that's what they were building up to ! to me, it just reinforces the method used, suffocation of a heavily drugged woman who gave no resistance - rather than stabbing or strangulation or a more active form of murder.

As to moving Helen - I think the vital need to do so would have got the adrenalin pumping.

Plus, there could have been some form of trolley available ( I have one in my shed for moving heavy stuff around ) ...or he could have used the car, as I've thought before.
Once there, the movement he has to make with Helen's body is downwards into the pit, so momentum would take over and help , rather than if he had to lift her body and put it in a higher elevation.
Click to expand...


Thinking about this. Helen told her mum she slept after breakfast one day.....so maybe she had fallen asleep on a sofa, IS suffocated her there, then could have used a wheelbarrow to transport her body.?

The police said they saw an arm (I think) when they opened that cess pit cover, which seems as if Helen was slid in feet first?
Means he held her arms/hands when disposing of her?

Apologies if that is too graphic.
 
jessie said:
Thinking about this. Helen told her mum she slept after breakfast one day.....so maybe she had fallen asleep on a sofa, IS suffocated her there, then could have used a wheelbarrow to transport her body.?

The police said they saw an arm (I think) when they opened that cess pit cover, which seems as if Helen was slid in feet first?
Means he held her arms/hands when disposing of her?

Apologies if that is too graphic.
Click to expand...

He could have rolled her in a sheet or duvet cover and dragged her. That could have something to do with the questions about drying bedlinen over the furniture,
 
jessie said:
Thinking about this. Helen told her mum she slept after breakfast one day.....so maybe she had fallen asleep on a sofa, IS suffocated her there, then could have used a wheelbarrow to transport her body.?

The police said they saw an arm (I think) when they opened that cess pit cover, which seems as if Helen was slid in feet first?
Means he held her arms/hands when disposing of her?

Apologies if that is too graphic.
Click to expand...

I think it was very likely Helen had fallen asleep on a sofa - IS could have brought down a duvet and pillow to make her more comfortable !

I have just been looking at those garage pics to see if there is anything obvious, such as a trolley or wheelbarrow, that could have been used, but it's such a mass of stuff, it's not easy to spot anything.

So I come back to my theory that he used his car - didn't he say something about, on that day, Helen had loaded up his car with items to take to the dump - that would explain away traces of her, if any found at a later date. I know there would have been traces of Helen in his car anyway, but in case they looked recent ?
 
Florrie said:
The more I read, the more bizarre all this sounds. By all accounts IS was/is not a violent man according to his son's (which is corroborated by other family members).
The evidence against him in this case seems overwhelming though so he is either a master of disguise in the past or has had an absolute sudden personality change. And then you come back to why. Why? They sound like they were happy as a couple, happy as a family and had no money worries (unless IS had money issues Helen and the boys were not aware of).
i wouldn't like to be on this jury.
Click to expand...

This wasn't a violent killing though. All the evidence points to suffocation while the victim was drowsy or asleep, which is one of the least violent methods of killing someone.

And "why" is obvious. He wanted her money and the big house, but he didn't want her. She seems to have kept control of the purse strings, but he wanted it all.


MillyM said:
Exactly. As I said earlier, if I were on the jury right now I might be in the middle, 50/50.
Click to expand...

What's your explanation, then, Milly? Do you believe in the mysterious Joe and Nick?
 
What I don't get is if IS was warning his son about the dreaded and dangerous Joe and Nick why wait until December to tell him?
 
Cherwell said:
He could have rolled her in a sheet or duvet cover and dragged her. That could have something to do with the questions about drying bedlinen over the furniture,
Click to expand...

I think the duvet was most certainly used...it was too big to stuff into the cess pit, would have caused problems, so had to be taken to the tip.
 
MillyM said:
Exactly. As I said earlier, if I were on the jury right now I might be in the middle, 50/50.
Click to expand...

If I were on the jury, I'd be thinking he's guilty as sin. In law, in the absence of any other reasonable conclusion you have to go with the one being offered. We've not heard his version yet but from what we can glean from the sons evidence it appears he's belatedly clutched at a straw so thin and flimsy it will break under the tiniest bit of scrutiny.

To a normal person, his actions make little sense. But if you view his actions through the prism of a person with an APD everything fits. I have no doubt of his guilt and I suspect by the end of the trial most people will be aghast at how a seemingly, passive, affable, guy could fool so many for so long. The truth is prisons and psychiatric hospitals are full of such people.

Some have a litany of offences and conduct disorder from a young age and nobody is surprised when the end up incarcerated. Other highly functioning, highly intelligent, persons with psychopathy manage to hide their condition all their lives. Somewhere in the middle of these two extremes lay the Ian Stewart's of this world.

What makes such predators so dangerous is because they can detect a victim just by watching the way a stranger walks whereas their prey and others like their prey cannot begin to comprehend or rationalise such evil because it is, and always will be, alien to them. Those with anti social personality disorders use this to their advantage.
 
@ Alyce - There is a sack trolley on the left of the garage pics. Difficult though, wheelbarrow would be easier and less lifting I think.
 
Cherwell said:
This wasn't a violent killing though. All the evidence points to suffocation while the victim was drowsy or asleep, which is one of the least violent methods of killing someone.

And "why" is obvious. He wanted her money and the big house, but he didn't want her. She seems to have kept control of the purse strings, but he wanted it all.
Click to expand...


That's it for me in a nutshell.
I dont think the evidence of him not being very strong does work in his favour, because he chose ( allegedly ) an easy/passive way to kill which required minimum strain on him.
Plus his visit to the tip, solicitors, doctors, hairdressers ( possibly ) bowls event, takeaway -shows that he was ok to drive around for a good part of the day and evening, carrying out visits that were - apart from the doctors - not really necessary, if he was so lacking in strength. I know driving is not that strenuous, but it does take some level of muscle movement. Wonder if he drives an auto.
 
TheRisenBishop said:
If I were on the jury, I'd be thinking he's guilty as sin. In law, in the absence of any other reasonable conclusion you have to go with the one being offered. We've not heard his version yet but from what we can glean from the sons evidence it appears he's belatedly clutched at a straw so thin and flimsy it will break under the tiniest bit of scrutiny.

To a normal person, his actions make little sense. But if you view his actions through the prism of a person with an APD everything fits. I have no doubt of his guilt and I suspect by the end of the trial most people will be aghast at how a seemingly, passive, affable, guy could fool so many for so long. The truth is prisons and psychiatric hospitals are full of such people.

Some have a litany of offences and conduct disorder from a young age and nobody is surprised when the end up incarcerated. Other highly functioning, highly intelligent, persons with psychopathy manage to hide their condition all their lives. Somewhere in the middle of these two extremes lay the Ian Stewart's of this world.

What makes such predators so dangerous is because they can detect a victim just by watching the way a stranger walks whereas their prey and others like their prey cannot begin to comprehend or rationalise such evil because it is, and always will be, alien to them. Those with anti social personality disorders use this to their advantage.
Click to expand...



Apologies for quoting the whole post. I read Martha Stout's book - The Sociopath Next Door (The Ruthless and the Rest of Us). Very informative imo. The type of person everyone gets on with, but very controlling and considering/feeling for noone but themselves

.Difficult to spot because of their pleasantness easy type character, and the manipulativeness is just so unnoticeable. That is their niche everyone likes them. !

Worth a read if you have time.
 
Alyce said:
I think it was very likely Helen had fallen asleep on a sofa - IS could have brought down a duvet and pillow to make her more comfortable !

I have just been looking at those garage pics to see if there is anything obvious, such as a trolley or wheelbarrow, that could have been used, but it's such a mass of stuff, it's not easy to spot anything.

So I come back to my theory that he used his car - didn't he say something about, on that day, Helen had loaded up his car with items to take to the dump - that would explain away traces of her, if any found at a later date. I know there would have been traces of Helen in his car anyway, but in case they looked recent ?
Click to expand...

I think it was in one of the early tweets that the prosecution's case is that he probably dragged her in the duvet to the garage.

Thanks for all the updates Alyce.
 
Tortoise said:
I think it was in one of the early tweets that the prosecution's case is that he probably dragged her in the duvet to the garage.

Thanks for all the updates Alyce.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that.....

where's a nosey neighbour when you need one !
 
Tortoise said:
Oh I've just re-read this and it sounds like I'm comparing you to Pistorius. I hope you know I meant IS and not you, I'm sure you do but just in case. :D.
Click to expand...

Lol Tortoise I know you weren`t comparing me. For starters...wrong sex...wrong colour...oh...and wrong age!!
 
MillyM said:
Exactly. As I said earlier, if I were on the jury right now I might be in the middle, 50/50.
Click to expand...

Wow - that`s worrying! On what basis?

I agree that both his relationships seemed very good, with no raised voices/disagreements etc certainly in the case of his relationship with Helen. But bear in mind, that people have very different ways of behaving and dealing with emotions. Sometimes the types that seem very placid..very calm...can actually be building up an inner rage or anger which can simmer and simmer and simmer, until it explodes (think mass shootings at schools carried out by seemingly quiet,reserved students). Some people are unable to deal with confrontation or even mild assertiveness and so it goes inwards and can build up until it overwhelms them. I`m not saying that IS is this type - I don`t think he is, but there are so many different complex personalities. People can have many, many different sides to their character.
Michelle
 
TheRisenBishop said:
If I were on the jury, I'd be thinking he's guilty as sin. In law, in the absence of any other reasonable conclusion you have to go with the one being offered. We've not heard his version yet but from what we can glean from the sons evidence it appears he's belatedly clutched at a straw so thin and flimsy it will break under the tiniest bit of scrutiny.

To a normal person, his actions make little sense. But if you view his actions through the prism of a person with an APD everything fits. I have no doubt of his guilt and I suspect by the end of the trial most people will be aghast at how a seemingly, passive, affable, guy could fool so many for so long. The truth is prisons and psychiatric hospitals are full of such people.

Some have a litany of offences and conduct disorder from a young age and nobody is surprised when the end up incarcerated. Other highly functioning, highly intelligent, persons with psychopathy manage to hide their condition all their lives. Somewhere in the middle of these two extremes lay the Ian Stewart's of this world.

What makes such predators so dangerous is because they can detect a victim just by watching the way a stranger walks whereas their prey and others like their prey cannot begin to comprehend or rationalise such evil because it is, and always will be, alien to them. Those with anti social personality disorders use this to their advantage.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with your post The RisenBishop.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 111 more.
Total: 2,974 (members: 112, guests: 2,862)

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
2,862
Total visitors
2,974
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,725
Messages
18,145,897
Members
231,503
Latest member
PKBB
Back
Top