CO - Shanann Watts (34), Celeste"Cece" (3) and Bella (4), Frederick, 13 Aug 2018 *Arrest* #15

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
There was an episode this summer on 48 Hours NCIS. It was about a murder on a fuel ship during the Vietnam war. The body had been placed in an oil tank. The theory was it was dissolved and washed out to sea. I thought it was interesting in relation to this case. Also, I wonder if CW watched and got ideas from this show. I'm really feeling that CW felt the bodies would dissolve and never be found. IMO, he chose the oil tanks for that purpose only. Why else choose your own workplace for the disposal? I think he hit a snag when it came to Shannon and hastily and temporarily buried her in a shallow grave. she was too heavy or too big for the hatch. Or the tanks too full.

Anyways, below is a link to the episode and transcript with a snip. Btw my husband was assigned to this ship two weeks after the murder.

NCIS agents vow to solve "unsolvable" cold case and restore a sailor's honor

Jim Grebas: So the investigation begins again. …We have to go back out to the USS Taluga. We have to go down into that tank, do a crime scene on it.

Pete Hughes: What was key to us is we gotta be able to demonstrate to anybody and everybody, if he dumps that body -- in the oil tanks, where'd the body go?

And NCIS' forensic team had the answer.

Jim Grebas: Experts were able to explain the oil is so caustic, seawater, microorganisms, it'd simply -- just eat into the clothing, flesh.

Megan Rose: ...The corrosive effect would've essentially disintegrated Muns' body and it would have been flushed out to sea.

Pete Hughes: It was evidence that there was no evidence. …That was key, because what they were gonna say is, " show us the body." …And, by George, we did it.
 
sillybilly said:
No screen shots unless from approved sites (i.e. MSM and LE or official Missing Person site). While you may link to the social media of victim or POI/suspect, screenshots from those pages is not allowed.

A cached version of a victim or POI/suspect social media page that is no longer available as a current page is equivalent to the page either being pulled or set to private, therefore treated the same as a closed social media group which we can't discuss. (Example, defence or LE may have pulled the page for legal reasons so we shouldn't be discussing it here after it has been removed).

ETA: Corrected to read "shouldn't be discussing" (not 'should'). Doh

And you were all gracious enough not to point it out.
Click to expand...
Thank you, Sillybilly. :)


(This is why I ask, lol.) :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Layla123 said:
Also new, the article mentions CW’s FB page that I haven’t seen anywhere before. For those who claim he hated that every aspect of his life was exploited by SW on FB, his FB page was just like SW’s. “While Chris’ profile is deactivated, Alfonso says it was similar to Shanann’s page, which is filled with glowing updates of her husband and children, as well as promotions with Thrive, a multi-level marketing venture. “Everything he usually posted on Facebook or social media was always about his family,” Alfonso said.”
Click to expand...

Sorry perhaps I missed something..playing catch up...who is Alfonso?
 
Bill Carson said:
Bear with me, please. (Sorry for the MEGO.) I want to try to explain, from my perspective only, why I think it is relevant and appropriate to discuss some things that some of you are interpreting as victim bashing.

So let's assume for the sake of this argument that SW was genuinely just as kind and sweet and good-hearted as she presents herself on SM, that she doesn't have a mean bone in her body, that she was the perfect wife and mother doing the best she could while suffering from a chronic health condition, and that she didn't have any sort of mental illness or anything like that. She is awesome, and there was no reason in the world for a rational person to dislike her, much less kill her or the children. In short, nothing that happened was her fault. Okay?

Every trial lawyer worth their salt will have a "Theory of the Case" for every case they try. A Theory of the Case is a short, concise statement explaining who did what and why. The shorter the better, the simpler the better. This statement, if true, helps the jurors interpret the individual facts and put them in a larger context.

Think of it like this: each piece of evidence is like a piece to a puzzle. We've got all these pieces, but what kind of picture are we trying to make? Is it a barn? A horse? A lion in the zoo? The Theory of the Case is like the picture on the box: when we put all these puzzle pieces together, you should end up with a picture that's on the box. The prosecution will say, we think these puzzle pieces will fit together to form the image of a cow. The defense will say that the puzzle pieces make a picture of a chicken. The jury has to decide which theory is more consistent with the evidence that they are presented through the witness stand. And once the jurors start to see a particular picture emerge ("Hey, it does sort of look like a cow"), then they will start to interpret facts (puzzle pieces) in a way that is consistent with that image ("Oh, this is not a chicken foot, it's a cow's tail!").

As I said, the Theory of the Case contains three parts: Who did What, and Why? "Who" is the defendant, "What" is the crime, and "Why" is motive. From a legal perspective, all that matters is the Who and the What. Motive is very rarely an element of a crime, and the prosecution is not required to prove why a crime was committed. But we all want to know motive because we want to make sense of why crimes happen. It is especially important in tragic cases such as this one, because most people (myself included) can't wrap their heads around Why a seemingly loving father would kill his perfect wife and beautiful children. So we badly want to try to understand some reason or motivation that explains the Why, and if we don't find that motivation, then we might start looking for other theories that would explain it better. ("It's not a cow, it's a unicorn! NOT GUILTY!")

So, the prosecution is going to need to come up with a Theory of the Case such as "He killed her because he was jealous that she was earning more money than he was." To break that down, "He (Who) killed her (What) because _____ (Why)."

To think about Why, we have to get inside the Defendant's mind and walk around. You and I know that the Wife was sincere and perfect. But Husband killed her. Why?

If the Why is that Husband was jealous because Wife was earning more than him, would that mean we were blaming Wife---("If she hadn't been so successful, he wouldn't have had to kill her. It's HER fault!"). No! That's absurd. Her being successful isn't her fault. His jealousy is his problem.

But when we try to suggest a reason why Husband hated Wife so bad and was so angry, it might sound on its face like we are blaming Wife. "He killed her because.....she wouldn't stop eating crackers in the bed!" A person might say, "Hey, you are blaming the victim here and that is against the TOS!" No, that's not what we are doing, we are providing the motive to complete the Theory of the Case.

I hope that makes sense. Sorry again for the length. I have a hard time getting my point across sometimes.

Click to expand...

I really enjoyed this explaination and found it very helpful, thank you!
 
I wonder if he put the babies in the oil tanks with the idea of blaming the person he was involved with (I can't remember the right acronym to use for that). If it IS a co-worker, that may have been his initial thought. Blame the co-worker, jilted lover who was angry over the new baby.

Are we 100% certain the babies were strangled? Could they have been drugged? To be honest, I hope this was the case. I hope they just drifted off the sleep. I also hope SW never saw her children dead. I do think they were gone before she ever got home.

He also said he strangled SW in one of the babies bedrooms. So I still wonder why the fitted sheet would have been the one he used to wrap her up. Not that it matters much in the grand scheme of things but hopefully the lack of physical evidence of a struggle in the babies room where he claimed to have strangled SW will shoot more holes in his ridiculous account of what happened. I do think she was strangled in her own bed.
 
cbs said:
Such a beautiful service.

I don't mean to sound morbid or insensitive but was wondering if the caskets are empty? I remember someone mentioned SW and the children will be cremated. Just wondering how the process usually works.
Click to expand...

Due to time difference I missed it....any links? RIP beautiful gals.
 
Do we know for sure that what CW confessed will be his actual defense? I don't know how that works. Can he rescind a confession? Maybe he confessed what he did to his Dad because he didn't want to admit to his Dad that he was having an affair. Especially if the affair was with a man. I could be way off base. I just feel he lies to cover up lies left and right. And will blame everybody else but himself. In a situation like this all anybody wants at this point is the damn truth. I suspect we will never get it.
 
CFlo said:
Response and IMPORTANT PSA:
I only can speak from my horrid personal experience of dealing with a stalker recently (it went on for 18 months and crossing fingers it’s done) and because I’m in technology myself:
Anyone can ask that the page be removed from these “cache sites”.
When you explain the urgency, most comply within 24 hours.
This however does NOT immediately remove from internet browser cache. Meaning if this was found, as an example, “Chris Watts instagram”. Under normal circumstances, google clears their cache every 30-60 days automatically (invalid links removed from search results). However, you can email google and ask that they be removed sooner.
I do still have a couple sites that I am proving I’m still alive on. Yes, in today’s world folks, ANY deranged lunatic can actually create internet obituaries on you. This also affects any employment background searches, security clearances, and can scare the yell out of family, friends. TMI, just wanted to share to people.... every so often, google yourself.
I’m ALMOST cleaned up from my own internet and fake SM accounts fiasco. It does take a long time, a lot of effort, and a lot of stress. Legally it can be costly.
P.S. CW cached IG site, I did take screenshots but it doesn’t show the pictures, only captions. I think SS of SM is against TOS, so don’t think I can share?
Click to expand...

When my engagement to a narc ended (due to his drinking, rages and general creepiness as time went on), he used some photos of me and created a dating ad. In this ad he posted lies about me, taking small things I had shared early on in the relationship and twisting them into horrific claims. He partially did this due to the fact that I posted the reasons why the wedding was called off, on a wedding site we had created (I outed his drunken rages). Yes, bad idea on my part, I know.

I removed the wedding site info. myself, and was able to get his ad removed, and the Google search results removed, but it took MONTHS and a lot of emails.
 
gitana1 said:
You know let's face it. Married family life can be hard. And monotonous. And everyone has to pretend they love it. But the reality is sometimes the days can blur into one another and sometimes even a normal person can think, "Is this it? Is this the rest of my life?"

And that's despite loving ones kids passionately and totally.

I don't think we are honest enough about the fact that those feelings can arise.

I will be honest- I remember on several occasions thinking - "The days keep going forward, bringing me closer to death."

Perhaps if we were more honest as a society about the difficulties of day-to-day life, creeps like this would find it easier to just leave rather than massacre everyone in order to try to save face.

The societal pressure to embrace family life as the be all end all, may leave some of these sociopathic types who are more concerned with appearances than they are with their loved ones, feeling trapped because if they leave, they look like the bad guys to all the friends and family and work associates they've fooled into thinking they're Golden Boys.
Click to expand...

Thank you for speaking this important truth! If you’re not or never have been married, you just don’t get it. Heck, even some married people don’t seem to get it, or they won’t let themselves at least, as listening to society seems to trump listening to their own hearts and minds. But it’s so true!! Just the other day a friend who I’ve known since kindergarten (so for 28 years!) posted something on Facebook that is the perfect example of this. Keep in mind she’s 33 and currently single but has been married before - a divorcee who was married for 2 years and got divorced several years ago. It was a photo of her parents on their wedding day, some 40 years ago, and her wishing them a happy anniversary and going on about how it’s so great they’re still together and have a great marriage and blah blah. At the end of the post, she said “they make marriage look easy - the way marriage is supposed to be!”
Wait, what? Marriage is supposed to be easy?! Says who? Well, for one, God doesn't, I know that. He explicitly says that it will often be hard and how to handle it. Do I always listen and do what He says to make it easier? Nope. No way. Wish I did! But I’m not perfect and struggle with the difficult, yet rewarding, things, such as marriage, just like everyone else. And yes, it’s true, EVERYONE else does too, regardless of what Facebook says. What you see is not what you get, so quit looking at that greener grass over there on the other side and start watering your own.

But watering can be hard. And doesn’t always make the grass green, not right away, at least.

If step one is recognizing and acknowledging that it is hard, which we all do whether out loud or just that nagging feeling that we keep inside and to ourselves, then step two needs to be ACCEPTING it. Believe it, baby. You don’t have to be religious to know that relationships of any kind are hard sometimes. Marriage, being the relationship of all relationships - the one that really takes the sheer definition of the word to the max, cannot possibly be the exception. Friendships are sometimes hard. Work relationships are sometimes hard. My relationships with each of my 3 children are sometimes hard, each of which are different and unique and separate from the others yet all hard sometimes! And then there’s marriage - throw love, sex, money, kids into the mix and expect it to be EASY?! Foolish.

We are humans. Humans are not designed to handle complex emotions easily.

Quick test: are you a human? Yes. Are you married to another human? Yes.
Results: life will be hard sometimes. The grass won’t always be green. It will be unfair sometimes.
Suggestions: keep watering - put in the work, educate yourself, manage your expectations and morals, change yourself not your spouse. Divorce, maybe. Murder, no, never.

Easy is not always good. Good is not always easy. Rough edges can become smooth after pressure/effort is applied.

Okay, done. #sorrynotsorry about the soapbox. It’s a hot topic in my life right now:)
 
margarita25 said:
What does this have to do with her being murdered? Her not seeming “real” in many ways...

Shanann WAS a “REAL” person. Who was “REALLY MURDERED”. Along with her precious little kids whom she obviously adooooored and cared for immensely.

Yes she was “REAL”. A real person like you and me.

None of us are perfect, and nothing justifies hers or her childrens’ deaths. So why the need to talk about such things because it has no legal value, imo. If anyone needs to be analyzed for “not being real” it’s this nutjob CW. What is the purpose of anyone talking negatively about Shanann? I’ve had it up to my ear balls and I’m done with it. How would you feel if you were the family reading here about she “wasn’t real”.

I understand victimology as related to a MP case, and even here to an extent. But this is out of hand, imo.
Click to expand...
I don't think they mean not real, as in phony. It's much more subtle than that.
When one is in an abusive relation the reality is so weighty, that ones only way to cope may be denial. The reasons are several prongs. But above all else one must never let it be revealed or even slightly hinted at or else.
2nd one must never question the abusers action, motives, beliefs etc.
3rd. The abuser is very adept at making their victims question everything. Their own intelligence,sanity,and beliefs.
4th. The brainwashing is very subtle. Think Stockholm Syndrome.
The dynamics are so difficult to explain.
Sometimes faking it is what can keep one from putting a bullit in their head. Because the abuser is so good at making the other person feel that low. So they must develope counter strategies, to survive. Although they don't even recognize,or realize it.
 
AgeofAquaruis said:
I don't think they mean not real, as in phony. It's much more subtle than that.
When one is in an abusive relation the reality is so weighty, that ones only way to cope may be denial. The reasons are several prongs. But above all else one must never let it be revealed or even slightly hinted at or else.
2nd one must never question the abusers action, motives, beliefs etc.
3rd. The abuser is very adept at making their victims question everything. Their own intelligence,sanity,and beliefs.
4th. The brainwashing is very subtle. Think Stockholm Syndrome.
The dynamics are so difficult to explain.
Sometimes faking it is what can keep one from putting a bullit in their head. Because the abuser is so good at making the other person feel that low. So they must develope counter strategies, to survive. Although they don't even recognize,or realize it.
Click to expand...

I certainly apologize if I misinterpreted anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 73 more.
Total: 227 (members: 74, guests: 153)

Online statistics

Members online
74
Guests online
153
Total visitors
227
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,831
Messages
18,246,164
Members
234,460
Latest member
Mysterymind
Back
Top