CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #11

[gitana1]

I may be wrong but I think part of the problem in Caylee’s case was people finding it hard to believe a woman and a “mother” could be capable of such a wicked crime. This case is very different. The news interview, his abnormal behaviour and I am sure the forensics will disprove his version of events entirely.

You know I really think the big issue there was they just wanted to go home. Seven weeks sequestered like prisoners. A finding of guilt would have led to a sentencing phase and who knows how many more weeks. So they didn't find her guilty of anything that would require a sentencing phase. Not even child neglect.

I remember one juror talking about how she just stood in the window resentfully looking down at the hotel pool they could not use. (Maybe because it would bring them into contact with other people).

They were treated like they were being punished. The only relief from the absolute monotony they had was half days on Saturdays when their families could come and spend time with them at a secure location.

Wth? 7 weeks of that.

Since that case judges are far less likely to sequester juries and when they do it is not with as onerous circumstances. For example, they can go home on the weekends.

And we have to also remember that in the thousands of cases we have watched on here since the OJ trial, how many murderers have been found not guilty when it seems clear they were?

Out of thousands of cases, we keep repeating two.

Nevertheless, I am worried for this case. I'm worried that the path to justice may be super horrific -as in maybe a hung jury at first. Maybe two.

And frankly, after thinking and talking with my family about the case, I think there are two big reasons for that possibility.

1. The more attractive a person is the harder it is to find them guilty. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.st...a2f47009-d1af-5ddc-9231-f9a33c21e1a3.amp.html

As much as many of us here find the man repellent, he is conventionally attractive and has a look that many straight women would like.

Coupled with videos and photos showing the gleaming facade he maintained of a loving father, a facade so good people have been shocked at what happened, and who he turned out to be, that may make certain jurors more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt as to the more serious charges.

2. There is a ton of hateful criticism of SW. I have seen it in MSM articles posts. I have seen hints of it here.

She was involved in a type of business that many abhor.

She was an attractive woman who seemed to have it all and even in death there are those who feel less than her and jealous.

She was a type- A, overachiever which again, bothers people who feel insecure. They may have an inherent dislike for her.

She posted incessantly positive and cheerful social media posts about her kids, her husband and her life. There have been studies as to how social media causes depression as people tend to post only the good stuff and others feel inadequate in the face of that and don't measure up. As a result, there has emerged a deep resentment of people who portray a "perfect" life on social media by people who know their's aren't. They feel anger toward those for making them feel bad about their lives and circumstances.

I have seen a lot of that in comments when it comes to SW. "She needed to work on her marriage and get off social media!"

"She spent too much time making sure everyone saw how great her life was instead of caring for her family!"

That kind of stuff.

In fact, one of her very own friends was commenting to the media that he "had to block her" because he was "jealous" of her life! What? You block someone for doing something wrong. Not for portraying a life that you covet. Just get off social media and put things in perspective - few post the struggles they deal with. They don't want to make anyone feel down.

In any event there seems to be simmering anger out there against people who portray a wonderful life.

I worry that the defense could capitalize on those two things in this case. All we need is one person on the jury with feelings of inadequacy and the inability to use basic logic.

This is not a complex case. But I fear that we are in for a horror show. And I don't think Shanann's poor family are going to be able to withstand it.

 

[SuperTmo]

I never said I hope they do.

You never said “I hope Shanann has her DNA under their nails so CW gets away with this,” but you have made your position quite clear.

Just like yesterday. You didn’t specifically call Shanann evil but you did make it painfully obvious that that is what you thought. We are a smart group here and pick up what you are implying. Calling her names, saying she has a crazy look in her eye so you know she killed them, calling her a liar, and implying she was on drugs and drugs made her do this... all while insisting he didn’t do it, sure does make your position clear. You don’t have to say specific words to make us aware of your feelings.

You spent a lot of time raging over NU having the audacity to show up looking in on her friend.... more angry at her “overstepping” and catching CW than anything. No passion that the children died. Not bothered that they were dumped in oil. The passion was directed at how dare NU sound the alarm when something was clearly wrong. So we can put 2+2 together and gather that you want Shanann’s DNA under those kids’ fingernails in hopes of CW getting off, because NU had no business calling the cops to begin with.

 

[DexterMorgan]

I certainly people don’t think that just because a juror is a mother that means must vote guilty.

To which charge?

 

[Tuliptiptoe]

Jonbenet was not dumped in an oil tank. She was given a proper burial.

 

[rigsby2]

I've read all of the threads on this heartbreaking case but have held off of commenting because by the time I have my thoughts in order someone else has stated those same thoughts and quite eloquently.

But I'm adding this here because I don't recall this being brought up:

"Causes of death have not been released for Shanann, Bella or Celeste. But filings from prosecutors and the defense suggest at least some of them were strangled and that a “weapon” — possibly a gun — was involved."

I don't recall this mentioned elsewhere though it's very possible I missed it....And my guess is the writer took liberties with 'possibly a gun'. I do wonder if it was the method of strangulation or if it was a weapon used on SW and her unborn child.

It's from the end of this article People from August 21st.

 

[margarita25]

I've read all of the threads on this heartbreaking case but have held off of commenting because by the time I have my thoughts in order someone else has stated those same thoughts and quite eloquently.

But I'm adding this here because I don't recall this being brought up:

"Causes of death have not been released for Shanann, Bella or Celeste. But filings from prosecutors and the defense suggest at least some of them were strangled and that a “weapon” — possibly a gun — was involved."

I don't recall this mentioned elsewhere though it's very possible I missed it....And my guess is the writer took liberties with 'possibly a gun'. I do wonder if it was the method of strangulation or if it was a weapon used on SW and her unborn child.

It's from the end of this article People from August 21st.

Hmmmm....

Bad reporting, or a leak??

I’m going to go with taking liberties, at this moment.

 

[gitana1]

Nothing about this crime is "reasonable" on any level.

The disposal of toddlers in oil tanks puts CW into a whole new realm of "depraved" INMO. Even people who are not parents, won't be able to wrap their heads around this. And I don't see any woman on a jury who is a Mother, to be able to forgive this.

Yes. I mean there is so much about his story that defies logic and renders any doubt at this stage, unreasonable, in my opinion.

 

[MerryB]

I've read all of the threads on this heartbreaking case but have held off of commenting because by the time I have my thoughts in order someone else has stated those same thoughts and quite eloquently.

But I'm adding this here because I don't recall this being brought up:

"Causes of death have not been released for Shanann, Bella or Celeste. But filings from prosecutors and the defense suggest at least some of them were strangled and that a “weapon” — possibly a gun — was involved."

I don't recall this mentioned elsewhere though it's very possible I missed it....And my guess is the writer took liberties with 'possibly a gun'. I do wonder if it was the method of strangulation or if it was a weapon used on SW and her unborn child.

It's from the end of this article People from August 21st.

Could be whatever he used to strangle SW & the girls (ex: rope, wire, etc) was found with the bodies...or there’s something we don’t know about yet.

 

[margarita25]

Could be whatever he used to strangle SW & the girls (ex: rope, wire, etc) was found with the bodies...or there’s something we don’t know about yet.

It is to be noted as I mentioned earlier that manual vs ligature strangulation has not been confirmed, etc. (If I’ve got this wrong please correct me)

Also, I haven’t had my coffee, I need to go back, was COD confirmed by ME/LE or are we referring to strangulation based on CW’s words? Tia. Sorry for brain fog this morning.

 

[Hazelnutty]

Pardon the interruption: Were there members here who supported Casey Anthony , Scott Peterson & Jody Arias during their trials ? I was not a member here then.

It mystifies me seeing People support CW. I just can't imagine.

 

[CapitalBat]

I must have someone on ignore because I’m only seeing replies now, but I’ve been reading along silently from the beginning and I just need to remind everyone: you do not have to be a mother (or a father) to understand and be devastated by the depravity of this case, from the murders to the method of disposal in crude oil. Please be kind when commenting and remember that many of us love children deeply even if we are unable to have our own, and don’t assume empathy is something you only acquire as a parent (“You’re obviously not a mother” or anything re: the capacity of jurors based on whether or not they have kids).

ETA: I am not new lol but I rarely comment myself

 

[Sleutherfly]

I re-watched TRUE STORY last night and was once again reminded of what a psychopath Christian Longo was. We may never know the "why" because there may never be one.

I think we will just never understand the why. I think there is one or multiple reasons why for him that make no sense to good people like us. What really gets me is how? It's unfathomable.

 

[RavenCC2020]

I don’t believe we have any evidence that CW killed the children. We also don’t have any evidence that SW killed them. But I believe the jury will be presented with a lot to bring reasonable doubt into question. IMO

I'm a fair minded person open to seeing things from both sides. No matter how horrific a crime is it is the duty of a jury to presume the innocence of the defendant therefore up to the prosecutor to convict by the evidence they present.

Unless the defense has some texts, letters, something tangible that prior to these murders SW herself (and can be authenticated) had threatened the lives of her children for ANY reason imo it is just his word against a woman who can no longer speak for herself. If he in fact has someone who can get on the stand under oath and swear they too heard SW make these threats against the kids that would possibly open the door to reasonable doubt. Surely if any such person exists they would certainly come forward by now to make this claim. If a person making such a claim is an immediate family member I think most people would consider the relationship factor and the position CW is now in and more then likely decide it is a family's desire to save their loved one. Also, if she did indeed make such a claim I would expect a report was made to child services as further proof this transpired. I would assume a family member would be MORE inclined to make such a report given the children are their flesh and blood and were be worried about their safety.

The other factors in this case that would not lead me to a reasonable doubt verdict is CW's actions in his confession.

**** Claiming he saw SW strangling her children and his first reaction to strangle HER. Does not even make the slightest lick of sense. I don't think anyone would buy this. A normal person would pull, shove, or lift SW away from the child she was allegedly strangling and immediately tend to the kids. Attempt CPR being the most logical step for a person even one not well versed in the procedure and or call 911 IMMEDIATELY. Neither actions were taken by him.

**** Let's give CW the benefit of the doubt, he reacted to what he witnessed and strangled his wife, did not call 911 and is now standing around with 3 dead bodies. Even AFTER they are all dead wouldn't he think to call 911 to report it. You know, for the record have the appropriate people on hand to investigate the crime scene in order to confirm HIS story. The crime scene would be fresh and more importantly, any evidence on the children that could prove his innocence would still be there. He did not do this either.

**** So we are to believe that CW having done all the above who "snapped" because his wife killed their children does a 180 and then begins to feel sorry for her, wants to get the bodies out of there to "save her reputation". He is so chiverlous to then disassemble a crime scene, move the bodies bury his wife then put his beloved daughters separately in two oil filled tanks to rot? Hmmmmmmm

**** OK, he has done all the above and is the knight in white armor here so unconcerned that his actions would lead to him being arrested, let's continue to force our common sense aside and further accept his version that he is a hero hell bent on saving his wife's reputation to spare her family and friends, AND risk him going to jail for it.

**** So Nicole unknowingly happens upon the scene because she is concerned about her friend. She states that she knew something was not right due to various factors, door locked in unusual way, car being there with kids seats now in them, no communication from her and her skipping her doctor's appointment. CW's first lie on record that they were at a friend's house. Dismissing her friends concern.

**** Goes on the air pleading for the return of his family KNOWING that can't possibly happen. Second lie on record. Why continue the act if in fact he is not guilty?? Why the continued charade. Is this not the proper time under the circumstance to fess up?

**** He confesses and now claims it was in fact SW who murdered the children she loved so dearly and he just snapped and killed her with a chain of actions outlined above.

Seriously??? ANY of this would lead an average person to find reasonable doubt? I think it is unreasonable for any average person to find ANY doubt under these circumstances.

If this charade is continued and he chooses to go to trial rather then fully confess to his actions, I do not know what the defense will put on for it's case. I am open to hearing it but again, unless there is something TANGIBLE linking SW to the murder of her children, this guy is going down for ALL the murders. Just my opinion based on what is logical to me.

 

[Jennifer17]

Yes. I mean there is so much about his story that defies logic and renders any doubt at this stage, unreasonable, in my opinion.

Yes, to put those clean, innocent little girls in dirty and dark oil is just unforgivable IMO.

 

[Deleted member 134862]

The Ramsey case. I think the son did it and look what the parents did to her to cover it up. IMO

That case is unsolved. It is your hypothetical that this happened.

 

[margarita25]

Pardon the interruption: Were there members here who supported Casey Anthony , Scott Peterson & Jody Arias during their trials ? I was not a member here then.

It mystifies me seeing People support CW. I just can't imagine.

Hahaha have you ever seen Van Der Sloot’s or Redwine’s fan club? I wasn’t here for the cases you mentioned above either but my gueeessss would be yes, moo.

It won’t be long before we hear about some bimbo proposing to CW in prison.

 

[FlossyMay]

Pardon the interruption: Were there members here who supported Casey Anthony , Scott Peterson & Jody Arias during their trials ? I was not a member here then.

It mystifies me seeing People support CW. I just can't imagine.

IDK about here, but I know there are people who still support SP. I read about it on another site.

 

[Sleutherfly]

I don' think he actually worked at the remote location. I could be wrong, but I recall seeing somewhere that LE spoke to CW's supervisor and that he advised CW was at work that day at 8:00 a.m..

This is correct, this was not a current work site for anyone, I think he used to work at this site before it was essentially abandoned, left to do whatever the function of those tanks was. Does anyone know what those tanks are used for? I'm not sure we got an answer of whether the oil was hot, I certainly hope not.

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Hahaha have you ever seen Van Der Sloot’s or Redwine’s fan club? I wasn’t here for the cases you mentioned above either but my gueeessss would be yes, moo.

It won’t be long before we hear about some bimbo proposing to CW in prison.

 

[Jennifer17]

I'm a fair minded person open to seeing things from both sides. No matter how horrific a crime is it is the duty of a jury to presume the innocence of the defendant therefore up to the prosecutor to convict by the evidence they present.

Unless the defense has some texts, letters, something tangible that prior to these murders SW herself (and can be authenticated) had threatened the lives of her children for ANY reason imo it is just his word against a woman who can no longer speak for herself. If he in fact has someone who can get on the stand under oath and swear they too heard SW make these threats against the kids that would possibly open the door to reasonable doubt. I do not believe that if any such person exists they would not have already come forward by now to make this claim. If a person making such a claim is an immediate family member I think most people would consider the relationship factor and the position CW is now in and more then likely decide it is a family's desire to save their loved one.

The other factors in this case that would not lead me to a reasonable doubt verdict is CW's actions in his confession.

**** Claiming he saw SW strangling her children and his first reaction to strangle him. Does not even make the slightest lick of sense. I don't think anyone would buy this. A normal person would pull, shove, or lift SW away from the child she was allegedly strangling and immediately tend to the kids. Attempt CPR being the most logical step for a person even one not well versed in the procedure and or call 911 IMMEDIATELY. Neither actions were taken by him.

**** Let's give CW the benefit of the doubt, he reacted to what he witnessed and strangled his wife, did not call 911 and is now standing around with 3 dead bodies. Even AFTER they are all dead wouldn't he think to call 911 to report it. You know, for the record have the appropriate people on hand to investigate the crime scene in order to confirm HIS story. The crime scene would be fresh and more importantly, any evidence on the children that could prove his innocence would still be there. He did not do this either.

**** So we are to believe that CW having done all the above who "snapped" because his wife killed their children does a 180 and then begins to feel sorry for her, wants to get the bodies out of there to "save her reputation". He is so chiverlous to then disassemble a crime scene, move the bodies bury his wife then put his beloved daughters separately in two oil filled tanks to rot? Hmmmmmmm

**** OK, he has done all the above and is the knight in white armor here so unconcerned that his actions would lead to him being arrested, let's continue to force our common sense aside and further accept his version that he is a hero hell bent on saving his wife's reputation to spare her family and friends, AND risk him going to jail for it.

**** So Nicole unknowingly happens upon the scene because she is concerned about her friend. She states that she knew something was not right due to various factors, door locked in unusual way, car being there with kids seats now in them, CW's first lie on record that they were at a friend's house. Dismissing her friends concern.

**** Goes on the air pleading for the return of his family KNOWING that can't possibly happen. Second lie on record. Why continue the act if in fact he is not guilty?? Why the continued charade. Is this not the proper time under the circumstance to fess up?

**** He confesses and now claims it was in fact SW who murdered the children she loved so dearly and he just snapped and killed her with a chain of actions outlined above.

Seriously??? ANY of this would lead an average person to find reasonable doubt? I think it is unreasonable for any average person to find ANY doubt under these circumstances.

If this charade is continued and he chooses to go to trial rather then fully confess to his actions, I do not know what the defense will put on for it's case. I am open to hearing it but again, unless there is something TANGIBLE linking SW to the murder of her children, this guy is going down for ALL the murders. Just my opinion based on what is logical to me.

And then it comes out, despite his lies to the contrary, that he is indeed involved in an extra marital affair.