I think it might be more that she's painting a picture of 'don't ask, don't tell'. That she wouldn't have questioned him when the loo was out of action, for example.
I wonder if NM testimony yesterday would've played out differently had SH taken the stand before him ;) ... who decides these things anyway? Is it their legal teams?
Hmm I doubt its so rosy behind closed doors ;) you definitely got the better deal. Very brave of you, having the strength to do that for your girls! I'd like to think I would be able to do the same.
There aren't always witnesses to domestic violence. In fact, its more usual that there aren't. It's one of the ways the abuser makes their victim think it isn't as bad, that they deserved it etc. The abuser is usually very careful to make sure they aren't violent towards their spouse around...
I don't really understand how anyone can think SH masterminded this whole thing. Could she have known more than she is letting on? Yes. Was she fully involved in a plot to kidnap and kill a young girl?! That is quite a stretch. MOO, as always.
I'm inclined to believe her about NM being...
Great post - but just responding to the bolded part - or she sustained a level of injuries iconsistent with the concept that this was all unplanned and accidental. Admitting to a sustained and violent attack against Becky makes it a lot harder to claim that he didn't wish to harm her at all.
Possibly relevant that NM (and poss SH?) have been described as socially awkward and find social situations / talking to people extremely difficult. It might not be that unusual for them to make excuses not to see people - I can imagine a situation where they have lots of randoms barging into...
To be honest I'm not sure as he avoids telling me (unless he's drunk / angry / stressed and I'm there and he can't do it in secret!) because I have a go at him any time he smokes :laughing:!
Sorry to mention the boyf again, but he smokes rollies and he definitely says 'I'm going for a cigarette' and will then roll it outside. I'm sure this will be clarified in any case (I hope!) tomorrow
I've been wondering if this is a possibility too, that they had already talked about it - and could well be that NM encouraged SH to set this reunion into motion when he realised it would be convenient for them both to be out of the house. Nathan could have mentioned it to Shauna on the day he...
I definitely see where you're coming from don't get me wrong. But the point I'm ('obviously' badly, lol) trying to make is that Nathan IS clearly opportunistic. Having been with Shauna for 7+ years he would know her little habits, how likely she'd be to wake in the middle of the night, how long...
Yes, this is a shame - why is she allowed to hear his answers?! I really don't understand this. Surely they should be kept separate for this? But then again it will look suspicious if she changes her original story so ... :-/
You could argue the same about taking her to the house when he was planning to 'kidnap' (or kill) Becky in the first place. Why take SH when there is a huge risk she will interrupt or see something?! I think if we can believe that then I can definitely believe he took the risk of Shauna waking...
My boyfriend is an extremely heavy sleeper - I can literally shout at him right next to his face and he won't wake up, so it is possible she slept through if the door to their bedroom was closed.
Really looking forward to SH giving evidence tomorrow. I am glad she is - IMO this strengthens her case, and I feel it is what an innocent person WOULD do. I don't think many expected her to.
EDITED TO SAY: I know this is an unpopular opinion but I someone has to say it or there is only one...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.